Discussion: Removing the Gate of Prontera and expanding the Emp's radius where you can build weapons

Also your test plan is lacking many elements, this is what is going to happen and it really doesn't relate to this discussion you might as well cut it off.

 

1) Prontera is free for all, guilds will go there ? or not?

2) Your guild will take all of Morroc forts/castle.

3) Your guild will defend Morroc for that WoE.

 

But while half of the people, even smaller guilds, could be going to the buffet at Prontera, you can't test the "hard to defend MF and subject to many attacks" part.  Because in the days when a lot of action going on in Morroc the Prontera main gate is closed (as we seen last WoE the Prontera main gate was opened Morroc WoE immediately took a turn for the boring one).  

 

I shall call this a controlled experiment, not the usual way of action.  It will favor your desirable result to "show" that you can defend MF but the fact is there will not be as many attack as when the Prontera main gate is closed.  The result, whatever it is, will be deemed as invalid..

 

Then when it comes to the next WoE:

 

4) Your guild will try to take back all of Prontera.

 

Yes, but you can't control the result of the previous WoE.  If a few rival guilds got different forts and castle in Prontera, they will definitely not work together as one guild/alliance to defend the main gate and the orb at south fort.  In fact, they will want to pour boiling oil into each other such as opening the gate at the start to shift the load to the inner forts and castle.  

 

In 2 WoE, not a single point can be proven.  Don't think your plan will work at all, don't think too big or important of yourself neither.  Only the devs have the power.

Hello, 

Thank you for your kind highlighting, it appears that you have finally understood my point and I appreciate that, except for how is this a controlled experiment when we certainly does not control anybody's movement.

Can a guild control whole PF? It's all depended on their force. Result of a WoE was never meant to be and can never be controlled by anyone in any mean, to begin with.

I'll allow myself to reply to that question. The incentive is to either capture South or break the main gate, to allow more possibilities in the final 5 minutes of WoE of retaking a fort in Prontera or Morroc. If an attacking guild can get South, next WoE main gate won't be a problem anymore. If the main gate breaks and an attacking guild gets an upper fort, they'll have a fair chance of fighting for the castle while other attacking guilds can focus if they want on breaking the main gate or taking South if it still belongs to Prontera castle owner.

I, personally, don't go in each WoE with the hopes of conquering Prontera castle by the end of the hour when it's guarded by an experienced, well-geared guild with high attendance numbers. However, I expect to get a chance of fighting for South or an upper fort each WoE, in preparation for the next one to aim for the pot of gold. 

If the main gate is removed, a whole defense line is gone and South loses its importance in Prontera map, not to mention upper forts also lose value for the fight. They become basically pretty much other useless forts giving free honey like those in Morroc.

Worthless in the sense of not contributing much to the fight anymore, and I'm not speaking of buffs/poring drops. If you remove that gate, South orb opens what?

Edited by 5318130516144610857, 23 December 2015 - 07:57 AM.

Thank you for your kind highlighting, it appears that you have finally understood my point and I appreciate that, except for how is this a controlled experiment when we certainly does not control anybody's movement.

 

I put it there already.  You controlled the initial setting of Prontera being free for all and gate being open.  This is not the setting we have at the start of a normal WoE session, at least not for the last few months.  It is stated multiple times by different people, that Morroc get a lot more attack by different guilds when the Prontera main gate is closed and that both the gate and orb/south is heavily defended.

How are you going to prove something by doing something completely different is beyond anyone's understanding.

I'll allow myself to reply to that question. The incentive is to either capture South or break the main gate, to allow more possibilities in the final 5 minutes of WoE of retaking a fort in Prontera or Morroc. If an attacking guild can get South, next WoE main gate won't be a problem anymore. If the main gate breaks and an attacking guild gets an upper fort, they'll have a fair chance of fighting for the castle while other attacking guilds can focus if they want on breaking the main gate or taking South if it still belongs to Prontera castle owner.

That is the problem.  Why should an attack on Prontera castle take 2 WoEs to execute (just the plan, might not success) when taking Morroc castle can be done in 1 WoE.  

I am not saying it must take (at least) 2 WoEs to take Prontera castle.  But since that is what you expect if a guild is to attempt Prontera, what is your reason for a guild to take the harder route?  Under what circumstance would a guild choose to perform this 2 step process over going to Morroc and call victory in 1 WoE?  Keep in mind that a guild's WoE attendance can be unpredictable, executing a plan for 1 WoE is already difficult to get it perfect.  The 2 step process contain double the risk and unknown variables than a plan for just 1 WoE.

If you believe that "people want more of a challenge so they choose Prontera".  Well, I don't see people choose to grind Lizards in Jawaii or Dragon Tails in Forgotten Payon when it comes to leveling up their characters.  They want it fast and efficient, so that should reflect the majority of people's mindset.  Even the recent Eremes Solo Dungeon nerf make people cry for a fix, honestly did anybody enjoy the challenge of using that nerfed Eremes?  Thankfully it did get fixed.  Why shouldn't we fix Prontera WoE by removing the main gate and give it a new life, the game keep changing and calling for change is just the normal process of development.

Edited by Cartian, 23 December 2015 - 09:18 AM.

In order to clear the stupid argument about how our defense will be split. Lets go back before SEA merged. My guild with 20 people held off a whole alliance of 3 guilds at the gates of prontera. It was opened by said alliance and we held them off with only 20 people. Its not hard to defend a choke point and in my guild we called those days the "hot gates". So please stop trying to say that it will be hard for a 80+ guild to defend when a guild of 20-25 UNDERGEARED players can do it. 

Some other points u should guys consider while making a statement.

1 ) Since recall CD is fixed, a guild gets only 1 shot to destroy it. Considering guilds wont run there from gates since defender guild will rush there, they must waste a recall on either south or the gate

2 ) A guild failing his recall attack most likely wont attack again until next recall . Considering the attacker guild will be scattered, defender will get chance to cover the area and set up mass amount of sieges. 

Edited by DietSodaa, 23 December 2015 - 09:49 AM.

But since that is what you expect if a guild is to attempt Prontera, what is your reason for a guild to take the harder route?

 

Hold on a sec, you folks are being pragmatic about WoE and so was I. In the current WoE situation, and I agree with you all that it's not an easy one for the attacking guilds, taking Prontera castle can most likely only be done in 2 WoEs and with a lot of tactics/strategies/coordination envolved. I'm totally fine and I actually enjoy this type of challenge and game play, but most of you who reply here seem to not want this to happen not even hypothetically. There lies the rub in our disagreement of how we see the WoE maps.

I agree that, pragmatically speaking, removing the main Prontera gate would probably bring more players and guilds into the war because of easier access to all forts, and WoE really needs to be more active at this point of the game.

However, I dislike very much the idea of losing a whole line of defense in Prt, defacing Prontera WoE map and how it was first envisioned to make it a lot more similar to Morroc in terms of attacking and defending possibilities, in the name of "fairness" between the two maps. What WoE lacks currently is numbers or the willingness of the leaderships of attacking guilds to make this work and temporarly ally to bring the main gate down, either by focusing South or breaking the gate. That is, to me, a problem and it's not so much related to how the maps are designed.

But, before my opinion or even myself gets bashed, I want to make it clear for everybody that I agree the game and the playerbase evolve, and I'll be here to play WoE with or without the damn gate.

Well, I don't see people choose to grind Lizards in Jawaii or Dragon Tails in Forgotten Payon when it comes to leveling up their characters. 

 

I wouldn't bring up PvE into this discussion and that was just a bad example. Also, I'm perfectly fine with people choosing one over the other (Morroc over Prontera), that is their choice for their own reasons. A game content that brings more possibilities for players to experience PvP is much richer than one that gives twice the same or similar experience.

In order to clear the stupid argument about how our defense will be split. Lets go back before SEA merged. My guild with 20 people held off a whole alliance of 3 guilds at the gates of prontera. It was opened by said alliance and we held them off with only 20 people. Its not hard to defend a choke point and in my guild we called those days the "hot gates".

 

First off, I'm not sure what you meant with "stupid argument about how our (?) defense will be split". The same type of gameplay remains with the gates being there, they just add another layer of defense, and a pretty strong and interesting one that would be shameful to lose.

1 ) Since recall CD is fixed, a guild gets only 1 shot to destroy it. Considering guilds wont run there from gates since defender guild will rush there, they must waste a recall on either south or the gate

 

2 ) A guild failing his recall attack most likely wont attack again until next recall . Considering the attacker guild will be scattered, defender will get chance to cover the area and set up mass amount of sieges. 

 

Those are both valid points and they are part of the difficulty of opening/breaking the main gate. These points are too technical and detailed to belong to this thread in my opinion, I won't go into that kind of technical/strategic/tactical discussion in here but, of course, feel free to reply to them those of you who wish to.

I believe arguments on both sides are being repeated and have been described along this thread, please read carefully my posts and extensively what has been said before adding something to it because I won't reply if it's to repeat myself. I just want to finish by saying I'm aware that I'm probably in minority here and most of RO2 WOErs wish for the removal of the gate.

I wouldn't bring up PvE into this discussion and that was just a bad example.

Cartian's example is not bad and I think it hits the nail on the head.  I myself like a challenge to acquire something too, but what's the point if the end result is the same as the easier route?  Unless Prontera castle/fort buff is better than Morroc's why would anybody choose to go to Prontera for it?  That's why majority of guilds go to Morroc instead of Pront, just like the majority farms mobs that gives faster experience when grinding. 

 

First off, I'm not sure what you meant with "stupid argument about how our (?) defense will be split". The same type of gameplay remains with the gates being there, they just add another layer of defense, and a pretty strong and interesting one that would be shameful to lose.

 

 

 

 

Basically there should be no argument on how a 80+ guild can somehow not have enough defenders for both the south base and gates. if i can do it with 20-25 people you can pretty much do it with your numbers.

You are expressing interest in the "Server vs Prontera" scenario of old, which was a great deal of fun absolutely.   The problem is, it's not just Prontera anymore, we have Morroc to deal with as well.  What are you proposing happens?  Lets just say the 3 guilds not in possession of anything in Prontera did agree to attack Prontera in a unified attack.  What happens to the Castle and Forts in Morroc?  Do they get abandoned?  Do they leave skeleton crews there for "defense" (I use that lightly cause a skeleton crew would not suffice in any attack)?  What if we are successful in Prontera, what's to stop that guild from just moving to Morroc and holding up there?  Do we simply chase this one guild around each and every WoE?

 

If you want to talk about that kind of technical/anticipation gameplay, what's wrong with defending guild going into Morroc? If the attacking guilds can remove the Prontera Castle ownership and split the forts among them, it shows the gate is not an insurmontable obstacle and adds spice into the game. If they even consider allying against said big defending guild, the scenario reverses itself and the argument that defending guild can attack Morroc at the last 20 minutes of WoE turns into their favour. What's wrong with that? Why do you want to change that particular aspect of the game ?

I agree WoE lacks attendance to avoid stall situations like we currently have in Prontera for some time now, it's the third time I say it. I also said there is a way to bring the gate down, there isn't just the willingness of the leaderships to do it.

I also said I agree with the fact the game and playerbase evolves and being pragmatic at this point of the game can be beneficial to revive WoE by removing the gate.

I also said there are no right or wrong opinions about this matter. I see how the maps should work and I embrace the differences between them. I really wonder if this topic would come up if the three attackings guilds were holding Prontera map for a long period of time like the current defending guild is, and the answer to that question to me is pretty obvious.

I'm a stubborn person. Peace out bros!

I forgot to precise, the main gate has fallen several times since Freyja merge (excluding last WoE where the gate was opened by some sort of hack rumours say) and at least one of the current attacking guilds have gotten upper forts in Prontera.

In order to clear the stupid argument about how our defense will be split. Lets go back before SEA merged. My guild with 20 people held off a whole alliance of 3 guilds at the gates of prontera. It was opened by said alliance and we held them off with only 20 people. Its not hard to defend a choke point and in my guild we called those days the "hot gates". So please stop trying to say that it will be hard for a 80+ guild to defend when a guild of 20-25 UNDERGEARED players can do it. 

if i remember correctly, you guys were only killing stragglers who missed recall or died attacking and had to run up. you only survived so long due to no one taking you seriously and actually bringing more than 10+ people to fight you. l 0 l.

stay at b o a  XD

if i remember correctly, you guys were only killing stragglers who missed recall or died attacking and had to run up. you only survived so long due to no one taking you seriously and actually bringing more than 10+ people to fight you. l 0 l.

 

stay at b o a  XD

i guess the last big push a certain guild did to us to wipe us must have really gotten mad about us killing their stragglers l o l :^)

You are just trading map ownership from one to the other, and nothing changes at all in that situation.  So in that instance there is no reason at all for anyone to bother leaving Morroc map in the first place.  There shouldn't have to BE an alliance created to take down the Prontera main gate.  The incentive to enter the map should be there of it's own design.  With Morroc being a big empty open plate ready for the taking, why would anyone leave when they have something secured there?  If no one leaves, whats to keep someone in Prontera from just going there as well?  Do you see the situation that is our current dilemma?  It's not lack of leadership, or coordination or the fact that there are no alliances.  It's lack of incentive to go there.

Well yeah, WoE has always been like that since Grav introduced this new more dynamic gameplay, forts and castles constantly change ownership, specially forts. I do get the point of your message about incentive (or the lack of it), however. I even already replied to it.

It seems to me that most of you who wish to remove the gate do so because you belong to the lower tier of guilds and the scenario isn't being beneficial to you. It takes a lot more of teamwork and effort to achieve the same as the current dominating guild, hence the argument of lack of incentive. 

And if there are so many forts and castles available to so few attending guilds, how come most of the forts and castles belong to 1 single guild ? You blame the main gate in first place, I blame the lack of willingness to overcome this difficulty in first place. Am I saying this wrong ?

Lack of willingness of the attacking guilds to ally and reverse the situation. Your sarcastic and humorous comments made me grin, gg to you sir!

Yes, why is one guild able to defend 3 forts without having to place a single body inside of it? Hmmm...I wonder if we will ever figure that one out. On another note, how come no one seems to attack Prontera map? Guess that is just another mystery for Scooby and the gang to figure out!

I'm gonna be clear on this matter. Instead of Suggesting to remove Prontera Gates or put more fortresses or buff BoA, BoS, BoP(WoE 1.0). Focus on nerfing Battle tactics and Power 40% off Shield. This game would be much more entertaining if it wasn't just  Knights vs Knights GvG where the guild with more Knights win WoE. I have seen the argument: "Your guild lacks of organization" back on 2013, 2014 and 2015. But, how many people have pointed out how imbalanced WoE 1.0 was? How many people have pointed out how imbalanced is the Knight class right now? Instead, people rather asking to ; nerf CLS, nerf gates, nerf Sieges and not focusing on the real problem RO2 has. And no, this game is not about organization anymore, the guilds left on RO2 already know how to use Siege weapons, (Ghost palanquins, Protection stone and such) so bringing up the troll argument that " you need more organization" won't get my attention.

Lastly, i'm not going to tell my guild to re-roll to Knights just to have more chances on Prontera WoE. I rather to have no Fortress, than staying on Morroc defending for 1 entire hour.

Cya in WoE.

Saying stuff like defending Orb and Gate is a "VERY EASY TASK", is something very vague.

The difficulty of defending depends on:

1. Who you are defending it against?

2. Who is defending it?

I believe defending South Fortress is the same as defending any other fortress, or rather slightly harder as compared to MF fortress due to the fact that South Fortress has multiple entrance to siege in not to mention also you can get back stabbed by range class from behind. While Morroc Fortress, has nothing behind it, and everything has to go through one choke point. If it is really as easy as said, I would really like to see how a guild could defend a fortress merely by doing what is mentioned by donchan.

In the previous war before reset, we have also successfully launched an attack on South Fortress against hostile guild holding ownership of South Fortress when our first recall failed, but regrouping and relaunch another attack is possible without placing too much reliance on recall. Hence I believe it comes down to the ability of a guild to regroup and also their will to schedule another attack, or not because it is too much of a hassle and hard to coordinate.

As today's WoE concluded, people do not go to PF at the start despite there is a reset of ownership, simply because they just didn't want to do it and they want to attack somewhere else. It has nothing to do with a gate or a defender guild.

I believe defending South Fortress is the same as defending any other fortress, or rather slightly harder as compared to MF fortress due to the fact that South Fortress has multiple entrance to siege in not to mention also you can get back stabbed by range class from behind. While Morroc Fortress, has nothing behind it, and everything has to go through one choke point. If it is really as easy as said, I would really like to see how a guild could defend a fortress merely by doing what is mentioned by donchan.

You keep failing to mention the main gate make a difference when defending south under the situation that Prontera is owned by the same guild/alliance.  I will say this again like a broken record, defenders that are supposed to defend the left castle gates + right castle gates + east fort + west fort in Prontera can be put into defending the main gate + south fort. Plus the original amount of defender that should be defending a fort.  

If it take 1 unit to defend each of those points, that would be 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 5 units in total (left gate + right gate + east fort + west fort + south fort), divided into 2 defend points (main gate + south) = 2.5 unit can be put into defending south fort when the main gate blocks access to the other 4 points leaving them unnecessary to defend.

While it take 1 unit to defend a fort, south fort can have 2.5 times the defenders compare to the defense of any other fort under the situation I mentioned.

I will change your sentence to:

I believe defending South Fortress is the same as defending any other fortress if the main gate is not there.

 As today's WoE concluded, people do not go to PF at the start despite there is a reset of ownership, simply because they just didn't want to do it and they want to attack somewhere else. It has nothing to do with a gate or a defender guild.

Your view definitely cannot conclude that people do not go to PF at the start.  I was there, my guildmates were there:

http://i.imgur.com/NvuQXC7.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/bdAMt4P.jpg (castle wall didn't load)

However, I can conclude another interesting yet unfair fact from today's WoE reset.

At the start of WoE in Prontera when there is no fort/castle ownership.  Whoever rush to take the castle before east and west fort are taken, will get east and west fort as a gift.  Simply because after the castle is taken, the map resets and the main gate is closed again.  That gives the castle holding guild the opportunity to take the unowned east and west fort effortlessly while every other guilds are blocked by the main gate.  

As you can tell from the second screenshot above, a guild that want to own all of Prontera only need to take south fort and the castle.  The other two forts are irrelevant during the whole process, east and west forts were simply handed to them on a silver plate.  How is this design fair by any measure?  Going back to my first post, this adds to the fact that -- The main gate must have designed to protect the castle (back in the Server vs Castle Owner days, no fort) and was never meant to protect the forts that were added later.

Now let me bring up what happened to Morroc today.  As with any previous WoE, it was under attack up to the very last minutes because it is easier.

Two forts were taken just minutes away from the end of WoE.  This once again shows people go to Morroc for the easier fort taking as oppose to going Prontera because the amount of concentrated defenders as a result of the main gate being there.

Edited by Cartian, 24 December 2015 - 01:06 AM.

You keep failing to mention the main gate make a difference when defending south under the situation that Prontera is owned by the same guild/alliance.  I will say this again like a broken record, defenders that are supposed to defend the left castle gates + right castle gates + east fort + west fort in Prontera can be put into defending the main gate + south fort. Plus the original amount of defender that should be defending a fort.

 

That is part of the WoE mechanic of Prontera and is a pretty obvious thing to say, why do you want to destroy it by removing the gate ? You've answered to that question many times, and so did I and others who do not want to remove the gate. Lowing the HP could be a solution combined with maybe lowering the sieges CD of mortars for example. The claim removing the gate must be done in the name of fairness between maps is a very subjective argument.

The idea defended here isnt solely removing the maingate. As I understand, he just puts an argument upon making the 2 maps equally balanced.

Things he didnt mention at all.

- Remove gate so south fort can be useless .

- Make prontera map open for everyone by removing it, and completely ignore the fact that defender guild earned it on his own.

- Grant easy access to east/west forts.

Things are actually suggested .

- Making BoP and BoS reliable again with adding extra buffs etc.

- Making BoA useful somehow. ( Please dont tell me its good to siege gate lol )

- Repositioning east / west .

- Change entire map.

- Balance the unfairness between classes to make woe more enjoyable.

Edited by DietSodaa, 24 December 2015 - 04:50 AM.

I know he didn't mention the removal of the gate makes south fort useless (all forts are useful for their buffs and poring drops) but I pointed out a consequence would be South would lose its strategic importance and would become only another fort to take, killing a WoE mechanism and gameplay that I find very interesting and wish to preserve. Or do we not agree on this point? This is a factual argument, not a subjective one.

Then what happen to the strategic importance of Prontera East fort, West fort, Base of Protection and Base of Strength.  When the main gate is closed, those two forts and two bases are as good as non-existence.  Those 4 forts/bases are only reachable by other guilds when the main gate is down.  

In other words, by making south just another fort, we gain 4 other strategic importance forts/bases for both the attacking and defending sides.  The upper forts are geographically important in the way that taking those forts allow a guild to respawn closer to the castle gate in order to attack/defend the castle.  The bases allow fly to the cliff in front of the castle gates to support the ground team with air strike from seige weapons.  We are not just killing a WoE mechanism, we are making existing WoE mechanism more available/accessible which will allow more variation in strategy in Prontera.  As oppose to having to either DPS the main gate, DPS south fort or sit whole WoE eat/spam seige weapons at chok points.

Look at Morroc, two orbs in two forts that open gates directly lead to the castle emp.  Some people think nothing need to change obviously are keeping a blind eyes on the difficulties between the two maps.  Prontera can have two orbs in the upper forts to open the two castle gates too if we actually want Prontera to be as easy as Morroc.  But because this is too easy, instead we are suggesting to remove the orbs in Morroc since Morroc castle don't have the advantage of that main gate as their first line of defense.

Edited by Cartian, 24 December 2015 - 06:46 AM.

Saying stuff like defending Orb and Gate is a "VERY EASY TASK", is something very vague.

 

The difficulty of defending depends on:

1. Who you are defending it against?

2. Who is defending it?

 

I believe defending South Fortress is the same as defending any other fortress, or rather slightly harder as compared to MF fortress due to the fact that South Fortress has multiple entrance to siege in not to mention also you can get back stabbed by range class from behind. While Morroc Fortress, has nothing behind it, and everything has to go through one choke point. If it is really as easy as said, I would really like to see how a guild could defend a fortress merely by doing what is mentioned by donchan.

 

In the previous war before reset, we have also successfully launched an attack on South Fortress against hostile guild holding ownership of South Fortress when our first recall failed, but regrouping and relaunch another attack is possible without placing too much reliance on recall. Hence I believe it comes down to the ability of a guild to regroup and also their will to schedule another attack, or not because it is too much of a hassle and hard to coordinate.

 

As today's WoE concluded, people do not go to PF at the start despite there is a reset of ownership, simply because they just didn't want to do it and they want to attack somewhere else. It has nothing to do with a gate or a defender guild.

Well I guess you'll just have to take our words for it as much as we have to take yours when you don't want to back up your arguments because it will "disclose intel".  I have personally been in 2 guilds who have accomplished this, Leila has already taken to the discussion pointing out his guild also accomplished this miracle task with only 20 players.  I guess it's up to the leaders of a guild whether or not they can organize their guild well enough to accomplish such an outstanding feat.

As for you last comment, are you even serious?  You do realize there is an entirely different map that got reset as well right?

That is part of the WoE mechanic of Prontera and is a pretty obvious thing to say, why do you want to destroy it by removing the gate ? You've answered to that question many times, and so did I and others who do not want to remove the gate. Lowing the HP could be a solution combined with maybe lowering the sieges CD of mortars for example. The claim removing the gate must be done in the name of fairness between maps is a very subjective argument.

 

 

 

The main topic is about the removal of the gate. I totally agree with some of the things suggested (buffs to BoP, BoS, make BoA useful, balance between classes and end the 1shot fest) and not so much with repositioning forts or changing the entire map.

 

I know he didn't mention the removal of the gate makes south fort useless (all forts are useful for their buffs and poring drops) but I pointed out a consequence would be South would lose its strategic importance and would become only another fort to take, killing a WoE mechanism and gameplay that I find very interesting and wish to preserve. Or do we not agree on this point? This is a factual argument, not a subjective one.

 

So you are not ok with changing one mechanic, but ok with adding many new mechanics in place.  That seems a bit hypocritical.  Also, do I have to get out a map to show you one of the strategic importance of south is the fact it's closer to the castle and also a safer spot to spawn in than say one of the entrances where many of your enemies can also spawn in beside you?  Not to mention as I explained above, spawning in at south means you can set up a line of defense at the main gate.  Whether the main gate is there or not, does not change the fact it is a choke point, one of many in Prontera that can be defended.

I don't know why I bother to reply, we've thoroughly debunked both your comments repeatedly.

So you are not ok with changing one mechanic, but ok with adding many new mechanics in place.  That seems a bit hypocritical.  Also, do I have to get out a map to show you one of the strategic importance of south is the fact it's closer to the castle and also a safer spot to spawn in than say one of the entrances where many of your enemies can also spawn in beside you?  Not to mention as I explained above, spawning in at south means you can set up a line of defense at the main gate.  Whether the main gate is there or not, does not change the fact it is a choke point, one of many in Prontera that can be defended.

 

I don't know why I bother to reply, we've thoroughly debunked both your comments repeatedly.

 

Correct, I disagree with the removal of one important mechanic and I don't mind adding extra possibilities to attacking of defending guilds such as base buffs in a manner that makes WoE more interesting. No hypocrisy there, I assume and admit it up straight. The importance of South you're mentioning remains whether there is a gate or not. I don't see how this favours the "pros" side of removing the gate.

I also debunked many of your arguments, mainly the one that claims we all want Morroc and Prontera to be as much equal as possible in terms of attacking and defending possibilities and the removal of the gate should be done in the name of that fairness between maps. I would honestly prefer the "pro" speech to be based on what the current situation is, which is, Prontera map is owned entirely by one guild and the attacking guilds aren't able to get those forts. Hence, the pro side wants to remove the gate in order to make WoE more vivid and surpass that first line of defense which seemingly is impenetrable. 

And this is where the "cons" side enters and says, by removing the gate the Prontera WoE map is being defaced and loses one important critical and interesting aspect of Prontera map mechanic. Also, I add that attacking guilds not being able by any means to break down the main gate is arguable and it can be done as it as been some WoEs before with no cheats involved. I blame the unwillingness of the 3 main attacking guilds in allying in some way or another to get that first part done.

And the discussion is not about debunking what one side or another says and thinking it's either one or the other that is entirely right or wrong, it's more about understanding and weighting the pros and cons of removing prontera gate and their consequences. If you read what I said in my previous posts, I agreed with the removal of the gate (read the reasons why) although I would prefer not to. You should be old enough by now to understand this.

http://www.deepinradio.com/ some good deep house streaming to chill a bit.