Siege Revisions

[Zxavier Augistine.7312]

Siege is becoming a huge problem with defense, even with the siege disabling bombs people learn new areas to place an arrow cart that is out of range of the tools given to us. i believe siege should either be limited in its placement, or a hard cap of how much siege can be placed in 1 area. dropping 15 arrow carts and 5 shield gens in a small tower should not be a valid defense.

 

placing 10 catapults in front of a wall should not be a valid offense either, the amount of siege in WvW in its current state make the game a chore to play. if roamers would like to easily take a tower, then it should be possible, however a siege cap should be in place for how many pieces of siege can be placed in a given area. if possible i would like to see an increase in ram and catapult damage but a health reduction, however arrow carts should not be able to damage items such as catapults or trebs.

 

its maddening that a group devotes 20 minutes to trying to get into a tower only for arrow carts to destroy an entire server wide effort, there are servers who only stay in towers and refuse to fight anyone for any reason. Fights should reward more points by default and fights in a tower or keep should reward the defending team a bigger amount for a successful defense, relying on 15 arrow carts to destroy an enemy team should never be a valid defense.

[Blue.1207]

Implement a system that makes siege more than just a spam fest. I have limited time, but my proposition would be giving siege an "ammo" type system. Make using siege cost resources.

[Klipso.8653]

Make the build cost equal to a % of allied players nearby instead of a static number if you want to avoid blobing (not golems)

[Hesacon.8735]

Eliminate the difference between regular and superior siege for damage. Increase regular siege to be 25% stronger and reduce superior to the same, but make it either cost less to build or have more HP, but do this lower damage. Do something similar with guild siege as superior siege.

[Kunzaito.8169]

1. Shields need to be reworked. I think there is a positive place for a siege item like this in the play/counterplay tactical meta, but as it stands right now they (like most siege) confer too much power onto large zergs. A big zerg can place 3 shield gens and have 100% invuln uptime on their offensive rams or catas. Conversely it's not really possible to place enough defensive shields in safe places where they have LoS to the area they need to cover; they'll get bombed down immediately. Plus defensive siege has to be constantly refreshed and maintained, the offense can instabuild whatever they need. Big advantage offense. (That's not to say there aren't situations where defensive shields are unduly annoying for the offense, but generally its less of a problem)

 

2. The alternate cata shot (Skill 4, gravel) is beyond useless. It's actually a hindrance because the only thing it does is waste time if you accidentally hit it when trying to bubble (Skill 5). Should be reworked or removed.

 

3. Something should be done about AFK trebbing. Too easy right now to set up a treb on 3F SMC and just wedge down a key and get participation + break all your opponents' outer towers with 0 effort. Same holds true to a smaller extent the other direction from the outer towers and Overlook Keep. And since 1.) you can fire trebs faster than shield cooldowns, and 2.) you have to actively use a shield vs. AFK on treb, the trebber will always win.

 

4. Aiming and firing trebs and mortars in general should be better. Right now it's a finicky niche skill that is irritating to learn and can only be learned by trial and error when time is of the essence (so its better for the server if you let someone who already knows do it). I thought there were a lot of good reasons to try something like the Battle of Khylo mechanism in WvW as well.

 

5. After reading some other posts I was reminded of the issues with the Burning Oil pots. They're only minorly useful against a small uncoordinated attack; anything more and you will be downed before you get a skill off. The pour takes FOREVER. About all you can do is pop skill 3 to troll a bit. I like the suggestion below of changing the 2 skill from cripple to chill - it doesn't help to cripple people who are standing still on rams. Also, even though the range was increased because of the Ogrewatch changes, it still doesn't reach the ground around most of the gate on that objective. There are similar issues with mortars - many of them are placed in useless spots (their main shot goes over any place a zerg would put siege and the 5 skill doesn't reach), and useful ones get bombed down immediately; they're a death trap to try to use.

[elitegamerz.4965]

A couple of suggestions.

 

-think certain sieges need some health or armor buffs. Rams specifically die extremely fast from player damage. 99% of the time people go straight to the wall and start catapulting because of this.

 

-supply availability. With everyone constantly running around with 25 supply nowadays its not an issue at all to siege spam. Supply should be a valuable commodity, not some endless resource. Servers should need to defend camps and yaks if they want to keep a surplus of supply.

 

-repairing. Its extremely disheartening to have something almost down and having 1 or 2 people stall for time for several minutes until a zerg can show up by repair spamming.

 

 

Overall I just thing everything in WvW is "too fast". Spvp is where quick decaps and fast outplays are meant to thrive. WvW is suppose to be a week long three way war. Grand strategy and planning should reign king here. There should be a constant weighing of risk/reward. You want to build an army of golems to rush smc? Alright, but it should take a large amount of precious supply. If you succeed you gain a huge tactical advantage, but if you fail your keeps and towers are left starved of supply and

vulnerable to attack. As of right now there isn't any risk for building anything really.

[xAtri.9378]

**General:**

 

* Make the rotation speed faster so you can turn and fire siege faster, Catapults, Trebuchet, Mortors etc.

* Make Mortors, Trebuchets use PvP system with birds eye view so that it becomes more friendly to use.

 

* There are situations where you are a bit laggy and you tap F to move away from the siege you're controlling but since it's not responsive you tap again causing you to get back on the siege. Converting siege to 'mount' system so there's dismount button instead of just F.

 

* Allow the use of utility skills such as stunbreaks and teleports to dismount you on use so that you aren't stuck when using the siege.

 

* Reduce cooldowns on some of the skills so they are more proactively used instead of being not used at all.

 

**Flame Rams:**

 

* Mostly fine but addition of barrier being reapplied everytime the player uses the fire vent skill (barrier is removed if the user disengages from the ram) would be a nice counter measure for people ramming under heavy AC fire.

 

**Arrow Carts:**

 

This is a tough one as it comes in super handy when defending structures when you are outnumbered however it just becomes plain annoying when trying to take an enemy structure with even numbers as stacking arrow carts coupled with the 50 player cap per Arrow Cart makes the damage dealt every second to the zerg extremely high.

 

Either reduce the number of targets a single arrow cart can hit or make it so that a person can only be hit by 1 arrow cart at any given time, but increase the damage they do.

 

Give skills 2-4 a purpose.

 

2-> Cripple, make it chill and maximum duration 2s.

3-> Make it apply weakness.

4-> Reveal, Poison that drains supply since it's on a fairly long cooldown.

 

**Catapults:**

 

* Add an expanding circle or line to help the player using the catapult to know if the shot will hit a given target.

* Add an AoE ring (similar to pvp treb) to help players know that there's an incoming catapult shot and it's splash range.

* Reduce the maximum range a catapult can hit as it defeats the purpose of watch tower completely if people can just build and fire catapults from outside the range on almost every single tower. Increase the damage on the catapults to compensate for loss of range. If people want to siege from outside watch tower range they should be forced to use Trebuchets.

* Make Gravelshot useful by making it deal additional damage to players and siege and minimal but not insignificant damage to the wall.

 

**Trebuchets:**

 

* Convert the treb into pvp style treb giving players a bird's eye view and an AoE circle to use trebuchet in an alternative mode (replace the throw oasis skill). This change is to mostly address people / bots afking on trebs and punching holes in various outer towers from 3rd floor of SMC or punching holes in SMC from red keep by just putting something heavy phyiscally on keyboard 2 and letting max range do all the work.

* Add condition cleanse every second to Oasis and heal for every condition removed on top of an initial heal and it being a water field, Convert it to an AoE skill instead of a charge.

* Add an AoE ring (similar to pvp treb) to help players know that there's an incoming trebuchet shot and it's splash range.

 

**Shield Generators:**

 

* Add a debuff so that a shield generator cannot be protected by its own shield as it's extremely frustrating to counter 2 shield generators and 5 rams placed in close proximity where they can shield themselves indefinetly.

* Increase cooldown on skill #1 and allow for targetting on top of walls and increase it's arc height so that it can be used to knock people off siege.

* As someone defending 2 shield generators is all it takes to indefinitely protect a zerg of 25+ from any number of arrow cart fire, making it impossible to defend.

* As someone defending the splash damage on the catapults and trebuchets makes very hard to protect a wall from being hit by catapults as it's impossible to block the proectiles as they are hitting the ground far away from the wall or under the ground. Completely defeats the purpose of shield generators with no drawback for the attackers.

 

**Siege Golems:**

 

* Both Alpha and Omega golems are clunky and out of date, most of the animations lock you in animation and prevent you from moving.

* Remove fall damage while piloting a golem so that they can be moved more effectively.

* Slightly increase base movement speed.

 

*Alpha Golem*

 

* Skill 1 is fine the way it is

* Skill 2 should be similar to the omega golem, it should spin you in place without burning, allow the golem to freely move while it's being casted.

* Skill 3 create a bubble that lasts for 8 seconds and moves with the golem.

* Skill 4 vacuum pull 10 nearby foes in a 600 radius towards you

* Skill 5 self destruct: eject the pilot and destroy the golem dealing large damage to nearby enemies, structures and siege. Damage dealt depends on the health of the golem.

 

*Omega Golem*

 

* Skill 1 fire rockets, but remove the action cam + fire over walls and siege destruction part of it.

* Skill 2 is fine the way it is, allow the golem to freely move while it's being casted.

* Skill 3 create a bubble that lasts for 10 seconds and moves with the golem.

* Skill 4 fire rockets that find and deal heavy damage to 5 enemy siege in 1000 radius around the golem and deal splash damage, knocking down nearby foes.

* Skill 5 self destruct: eject the pilot and destroy the golem, dealing large damage to nearby enemies, structures and siege. Damage dealt depends on the health of the golem.

 

 

**Structural Siege:**

 

* Cannon, Burning Oil and Mortor should give 90% damage reduction and permanent stability while using it to the person using it, make people use siege disablers to get people off them instead of scourge spam. This makes them useful instead of it being a noob bait that results in repeated deaths.

* Convert the Mortor to ground targeted AoE similar to PvP Trebuchet, the various skills on it are fine.

* Burning Oil, the skills on it is fine but replace the cripple from the Pour Tar with chill so that the rammers have longer skill recharges.

* Cannon, Skill 2 should add bleed poison torment 3 stacks each, increase cooldown.

 

 

[obastable.5231]

Without reading 6 pages of other peoples posts I have no idea if any of this has come up yet but here are my thoughts on siege:

 

1 - reduce the amount of siege that can be placed in an area, perhaps by implementing 2 alone

2 - when a structure upgrades to include siege (cannons/mortars/oils) the amount of auxiliary siege that can be placed should again reduce - if an area is already siege capped an equal amount of siege within range should be despawned (whatever costs the least amount of supply or something)

3 - siege should do more damage to other pieces of siege

4 - siege should have a few seconds of invuln after placement so there's opportunity to place/build counter siege, unless the only counter siege you want to see is trebs from the other side of the map

5 - siege should do considerably less damage to players (no using it to spawn camp and reduce lower population servers participation in maps)

6 - siege shouldn't inflict damage over time conditions (burning, bleeding, poison, etc)

7 - siege should inflict more movement inhibiting conditions ( cripple, chill, slow, knockdown, knock back, daze, stun, etc)

 

siege should serve the purpose of allowing fewer players to temporarily defend a structure against a greater number of players //to hold off a big group until support can arrive .... IF it arrives. it shoudn't serve the purpose of allowing a handful of players to permanently hold a structure against significantly larger groups.

 

[Israel.7056]

> @"Swagger.1459" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said:

> > > I consider that as a balance issue than a siege issue. The question is are both server stacked server or only one of them is stacked? This can result in skill differences due to stacking. For starters, compare the two blob average wvw levels. If skill differences too great to overcome, it is natural they go for extreme measure. So what is the real solution here? Stop stacking servers so you can fight people of your own skills.

> >

> > It's a siege issue. Siege gives people an easy out if they can't win a fight legit. Take away the siege and they will have to try the fight.

>

> Unfortunately for you, siege isn’t going anywhere. Your only option is to learn how to play this mode with siege in it.

>

> You’re not going to impose the “fight club” mentality on the devs to remove siege weapons or warfare, so you have to adopt new levels of tactical gameplay for gaining objectives and winning fights... However, the devs created a mode for players such as yourself, and that’s called Structured PvP... There you can find more like-minded players and the “honorable warrior” fights that you’re looking for.

>

> Also, being able to use an array of “tools” and tactics is the beauty of sandbox gameplay. Makes wvw unpredictable, and tests critical thinking and decision making skills.

>

> GL

 

What if I told you that WvW is for pvp too and that there are plenty of like minded people playing WvW already? Mind blown I know.

 

What if I told you that fighting other players requires more critical thinking and decision making skills than building arrow carts to try to win fights? Mind blown again I'm sure.

 

We shall see what happens with siege, you don't know what they're open to. It's possible that they're seriously considering toning siege down. I am clearly not the only person who thinks it's a change that needs to be made.

[Celsith.2753]

> @"elitegamerz.4965" said:

 

> Overall I just thing everything in WvW is "too fast". Spvp is where quick decaps and fast outplays are meant to thrive. WvW is suppose to be a week long three way war. Grand strategy and planning should reign king here. There should be a constant weighing of risk/reward. You want to build an army of golems to rush smc? Alright, but it should take a large amount of precious supply. If you succeed you gain a huge tactical advantage, but if you fail your keeps and towers are left starved of supply and

> vulnerable to attack. As of right now there isn't any risk for building anything really.

 

Uhmm. It takes literally HOURS to take a defended t3 keep. And building an army of golems drains your keep, smc, or both. How long do you think the siege portion of a fight should take? And how much supply?

[GDchiaScrub.3241]

> @"Shining One.1635" said:

> > @"GDchiaScrub.3241" said:

> > That would substantially skew the fights in favor of defense. All balance should be done under balanced situations. Furthermore, it has already been suggested that players on defensive siege be given stab/defiance bar, which is a far more fair change.

> >

> > In a 25v25 situation, would we really want one group to stay on a wall all day for easy stab? There are skills that provide such a boon already so the tools are there already. It is imperative balance not be driven too much by 5v25, or else we risk ruining many more engagements. Even the stab/defiance bar on defensive siege can be over come by enough numbers, and coordination of CC. Should we punish a group for actually organizing multiple pulls at the same time? I would think not.

> I'm trying to give defenders a reason to stand on walls and fight instead of sitting on top of the stairs in a "safe" spot on an arrow cart. This would give both defenders and attackers something to do during a siege. You do bring up a valid point on even-numbered situations though. Perhaps each wall segment can have a cap on how many players receive the pulsing stability.

>

> What suggestions do you have to increase player involvement during sieges?

>

 

While I did add my "Obligatory Wall of Text" back on Page 2, I don't really believe in that goal directly. Currently (and evident by the OP) **I believe WvW needs clarity, and/or focus.** As far as siege goes, their purpose needs to be defined on ANET's end if they wish to have any resemblance of consistency when it comes to this update and future ones. Things like door trebs aren't intuitive (in large part due to game dynamics created by players). So I don't realistically expect ANET to teach emergent behavior. **BUT**(Ts). If ANET focused the role of Trebs as offensive artillery, then we should see less door trebs. Thus...reducing the burden of teaching any new players a treb's use (we all want/need new players).

 

As per your specific situation. Assuming its a balanced situation, and not suicidal yolo push. _Siege revisions won't make walls safer._ That is the current reality as I see it. Unfortunately some of this issue is in the Balance Team's ball park. Redesigning walls could help, but that'd be even more resource intensive. If we say, make them thicker whereby it made things safer it would then in turn cause the dreaded AC to be safer. So instead, you can utilize Tricks and Traps (like disables on the wall) when coupled with stealth or stability. I believe my Wall of text discussed Stealth Traps marking the enemy. This preemptive warning may be what is needed, or even the usage of supply traps. Any these of options aren't intuitively registered to most new players (they're in a completely different vendor even!). Which comes back to the issue of clarity in design.

 

Long story short. Being on the wall isn't the path to increasing player involvement. So I have no suggestions involving siege outside of defiance bars/stability for defensive siege users (oil/cannons/mortar).

[Israel.7056]

> @"Celsith.2753" said:

> > @"elitegamerz.4965" said:

>

> > Overall I just thing everything in WvW is "too fast". Spvp is where quick decaps and fast outplays are meant to thrive. WvW is suppose to be a week long three way war. Grand strategy and planning should reign king here. There should be a constant weighing of risk/reward. You want to build an army of golems to rush smc? Alright, but it should take a large amount of precious supply. If you succeed you gain a huge tactical advantage, but if you fail your keeps and towers are left starved of supply and

> > vulnerable to attack. As of right now there isn't any risk for building anything really.

>

> Uhmm. It takes literally HOURS to take a defended t3 keep. And building an army of golems drains your keep, smc, or both. How long do you think the siege portion of a fight should take? And how much supply?

 

Make it super realistic and make one wall take days to bring down.

[Boris Losdindawoods.3098]

> Change how siege is placed. ACs and trebs should only be placed on walls. Make shield generators have decreased effective range. Ballistas should only damage siege weapons (if you are on the cata, ballistas should hurt you as well). Increase cata damage based on how much it charges (while decreasing the base damage). Decrease the range of cannons, while increasing its scaling HP based on nearby enemies.

>

> Delete mortars. It doesn't play any role in defense or offense.

>

> Flame rams should take down gates at the same rate as catas take down walls. Increase burning oil damage on players, but give flame ram users some resistance against it (increase condition damage that can be mitigated with flame ram mastery?)

>

> Either increase the number of supply/stealth traps you can place, or decrease the required supply to deploy those traps.

> Using traps should put a revealed buff on the player, so no more stealth -> siege disabler. Tankier builds can deploy siege disablers, but at the cost of dying.

 

That's amazing. I disagree with everything you suggested.

[Swagger.1459]

> @"Israel.7056" said:

> > @"Swagger.1459" said:

> > > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said:

> > > > I consider that as a balance issue than a siege issue. The question is are both server stacked server or only one of them is stacked? This can result in skill differences due to stacking. For starters, compare the two blob average wvw levels. If skill differences too great to overcome, it is natural they go for extreme measure. So what is the real solution here? Stop stacking servers so you can fight people of your own skills.

> > >

> > > It's a siege issue. Siege gives people an easy out if they can't win a fight legit. Take away the siege and they will have to try the fight.

> >

> > Unfortunately for you, siege isn’t going anywhere. Your only option is to learn how to play this mode with siege in it.

> >

> > You’re not going to impose the “fight club” mentality on the devs to remove siege weapons or warfare, so you have to adopt new levels of tactical gameplay for gaining objectives and winning fights... However, the devs created a mode for players such as yourself, and that’s called Structured PvP... There you can find more like-minded players and the “honorable warrior” fights that you’re looking for.

> >

> > Also, being able to use an array of “tools” and tactics is the beauty of sandbox gameplay. Makes wvw unpredictable, and tests critical thinking and decision making skills.

> >

> > GL

>

> What if I told you that WvW is for pvp too and that there are plenty of like minded people playing WvW already? Mind blown I know.

>

> What if I told you that fighting other players requires more critical thinking and decision making skills than building arrow carts to try to win fights? Mind blown again I'm sure.

>

> We shall see what happens with siege, you don't know what they're open to. It's possible that they're seriously considering toning siege down. I am clearly not the only person who thinks it's a change that needs to be made.

 

Umm... I’m a roamer, so let’s stop with the assumptions.

 

If anyone is having this much trouble with siege then they need to make some personal improvements and changes.

 

Also, expand your mind so you understand there are multiple ways to play wvw, and that’s the way this Realm vs Realm mode was designed... Complete with siege, structures, fights, tactics... with an objective to score points in the board for your team. There is no right or wrong way to play wvw, there is only what we are limited to by design and intent... You don’t like players sieging up then fine, but there is more to wvw than just “come out and fight”, and don’t expect players to play the way you want them to play... This is a sand box mode, where players can choose what they want to do while in wvw and that’s how it goes... Wrap some thoughts around all that before you make any more assumptions and reply.

[hunkamania.7561]

Here's more pictures from siege today. We're outmanned and they still use siege and bunker up keeps.

 

OPEN Field Siege

https://gyazo.com/f5f6bf70bc22dba1b47d0d0e48fcc84b

 

Siege bunkering and outnumbering us

https://i.gyazo.com/8e516560595b95e46b0afee220bfa5a2.png

 

NERF IT ALL

[TheBravery.9615]

* Regulars, Superior, and Guild siege: Please make these all do the same attacks/damage and have same supply cost, but make them have variable health pools and decay timers. (means alpha/guild golems now use omega skills)

* Regular - 10 minute decay, easy to destroy, disables affect this for a long time

* Superior - 1 hour decay, normal health pool, normal disable time

* Guild - 2 hour decay, high health pool, reduced disable time

 

* Arrow Carts: Would be nicer if these covered a smaller area

* Catapult damage should be determined by the travel distance of the boulder, not by how much it's charged.

* Catapult 4- Fire Gravel has too much spread / is too inaccurate. Change it to something similar like Mortar's concussion barrage

* Balista bolts travel too slow for it to hit moving targets, remove the requirement to have something targeted to use it and have it fire at the direction the camera is facing.

* Trebuchet 5 - Healing oasis is just useless, replace it with something like mortar's incendiary shot

 

 

* Stealth removal trap should be combined with supply removal trap

 

[Israel.7056]

> @"Swagger.1459" said:

> Umm... I’m a roamer, so let’s stop with the assumptions.

>

> If anyone is having this much trouble with siege then they need to make some personal improvements and changes.

>

> Also, expand your mind so you understand there are multiple ways to play wvw, and that’s the way this Realm vs Realm mode was designed... Complete with siege, structures, fights, tactics... with an objective to score points in the board for your team. There is no right or wrong way to play wvw, there is only what we are limited to by design and intent... You don’t like players sieging up then fine, but there is more to wvw than just “come out and fight”, and don’t expect players to play the way you want them to play... This is a sand box mode, where players can choose what they want to do while in wvw and that’s how it goes... Wrap some thoughts around all that before you make any more assumptions and reply.

 

If you really are a roamer then no one has any real reason to take you seriously when you talk about siege. You don't deal with siege, you have no place commenting on it. You're just pontificating about a hypothetical that you don't actually have any experience with.

 

It'd be like me trying to talk about PvE raids even though I've never done one.

 

If you claim to accept the premise that all ways of playing are equally valid and desirable then I can see where your radical nonjudgmental attitude comes from but again there's no reason for me to take you seriously. It's a terrible attitude and it's obviously not good for the game.

 

I accept that there are multiple ways to play this game mode but clearly the most popular way to structure any game is around fighting other players. All of the most popular games in the world right now; Fortnite, PUBG, Overwatch etc are pvp focused. So if Anet wants to try to stay in line with current market trends they need to seriously reconsider how siege gets in the way of fights. Tone down the siege and all the defensive nonsense, make the game mode more fast paced and pvp oriented and maybe WvW will stop losing players to other games that give them what they actually want.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"hunkamania.7561" said:

> Here's more pictures from siege today. We're outmanned and they still use siege and bunker up keeps.

>

> OPEN Field Siege

> https://gyazo.com/f5f6bf70bc22dba1b47d0d0e48fcc84b

>

> Siege bunkering and outnumbering us

> https://i.gyazo.com/8e516560595b95e46b0afee220bfa5a2.png

>

> NERF IT ALL

 

I see an organized guild going up against random pugs and those two arrowcarts arent even built yet. You won, right?

 

Either way this would still be fixed if we *finally* applied the universal cata/mortar/treb logic to arrowcarts. Saying nerf it all is very undefined and doesnt really fix anything, we need to **fix the base mechanics**. The way arrowcarts work is just plain dumb. Imagine if a catapult worked like that. Oh is that enemies behind us? No problemo cata flips 180 degrees at the speed of sound, instantly shoot solid stone and while that is in the air it also shoots gravel and before the first stone has hit the ground it shoots another stone.

[katniss.6735]

I strongly feel major nerfs to siege are needed in this game.

 

* I'd like to see siege blocked for everywhere outside of a tower or keep, except in the case of building a _golem_ at a camp.

 

* **Arrowcart** range needs to be halved, and their damage to players decreased by at least 25% to players with points in protection verses them.

* **Catapults** shouldn't be used to knock people off rams from behind a gate.

* Spreadshot should be put back on **ballistas**, and that new skill that replaced it should be removed completely.

* **Supply traps** shouldn't trigger off of people who do not have any supply.

* Please remove the tactic _improved siege_ that makes killing cannons and mortars obnoxiously difficult.

* Make the walls facing stonemyst in red keep indestructable. Red keep is the only keep that can be hit from stonemyst.

[SkyShroud.2865]

> @"Israel.7056" said:

> > @"SkyShroud.2865" said:

> > I consider that as a balance issue than a siege issue. The question is are both server stacked server or only one of them is stacked? This can result in skill differences due to stacking. For starters, compare the two blob average wvw levels. If skill differences too great to overcome, it is natural they go for extreme measure. So what is the real solution here? Stop stacking servers so you can fight people of your own skills.

>

> It's a siege issue. Siege gives people an easy out if they can't win a fight legit. Take away the siege and they will have to try the fight.

 

Did you not read? It is because they already tried to fight and couldn't win. Or are you in denial that stacking is not primary cause for a lot of issues? Is it because you are one of the stackers?

[Sithis.3564]

I don't think the siege is the biggest problem. I would rather have some of the towers removed. EB should have SM, one keep and a tower for each Borderland. Replace those other locations with lightly fortified structures (e.g. centaur camp style). Now that it's done make sure we can't treb from Keep to SM or any other high wall fortification to another. Make this changes in every other map.

 

Done.

[Avalanche.4173]

I would like to have a new option for guilds to 'adopt' objectives. My idea is to have a tactic which allows guild siege placed in the objective to decay at a lower rate or even not at all.

 

Further I'd like to see catapults to have a reduced splash size. Personally I find it weird if catapults shoot at a slope in the landscape to hit a wall (e.g. North-East outer Bay). Even if this destroys my favorite catapult spot to hit both walls in the lake tower from the hill next to the camp.

[Mrs Q.4081]

Remove shield gens.

[MesmerizedNYC.2479]

Suggestion: Make renewing siege reward a little WXP to encourage more people to keep it from timing out. This also rewards those hard working guilds and players that actively maintain keeps and towers.

[BANNED.9527]

I think the main thing that would improve siege gameplay is allowing us, as players, to attack while in mid-air, particularly after a jump.