Towers Wars: Placing 60 SAMs on a site.

In a recent tower war clan was attempting to take a 250 towersite. On the site, out of the 60 placeable towers, 60 of them were SAM's Batteries. SAM's, as FC may or may not be aware, can only be destroyed using mechanized vehicles and a site of all ql250 SAM's cannot be cleared within the time frame of a tower battle, both due to defenders and server population constraints. The result is that omni would simply replace and the site would not be taken that way. The alternative is to attack the CT directly, in which case you recieve over 3000 damage shield damage from every hit and perk against the CT. This leaves few profs capable of attacking the CT and a high demand on several healers in every team on the raid force, and after 20minutes of direct attacks on the CT, it only lost 20% of its max health. This is a very PVM style of PVP.

This is a brilliant tactic for holding a site, and whether or not it is fair is not in question, because it is quite fair in the given restraints of AO's mechanics. The issue is enjoyability. This is a game, and a situation where PVP should be fun, and our tower wars are the best pvp we have, it is not fun for anyone dealing with a tower war in this manner.

The organization that plants SAMs is recieving no other beneficial towers and is merely holding a site that gives a small side %boost and a contract for a small stat boost. The attacking orgs are taking more damage from damage shields than actual conflict, and no one wants to spend 5 hours meched clearing out SAM's and being involved in Mech vs Mech pvp, or even worse Mech vs Rocket Launcher pvp.

Both sides have used this tactic, and no one can say they enjoy it. Tower sites are temporary at best, they are meant to be won and lost, not make people regret attending due to an odd decision by a defending organisation. A higher server population would not even make this less of an issue, currently this is simply an unenjoyable manner in which tower wars are treated.

I am unsure what should be done about this issue, only that it is an issue of playing a game for enjoyment and this works to limit that. No different than using any other fair, viable, or legitimate tactic that ultimately makes players unhappy, this should be treated in the same manner.