Siege Revisions

[viquing.8254]

Remove BLOB efficiency in siege :

The more siege weapon in 1200 radius, the less effective they are.

Remove blobs invulnerable attack and defense with shield generator.

 

Upgrade efficiency of anti-blobs weapon :

* Arrow cart damage : the more ennemi it hit, the more dammage it does = very efficient against blob, managable for small scale.

[Brother.1504]

In vanilla gw2 the wvw guilds in t1 used to fight for the obsidian jp to farm the chest at the top for superior siege. Used to be a daily thing at reset.

 

Siege especially superior siege is too cheap and disposable. What ever the siege changes are, please increase the cost of superior siege to make them a thoughtful deliberate investment rather then a token disposable asset.

[XenesisII.1540]

> @"PH Law.4063" said:

> Seige isnt even the main problem in WvW i dont understand why they are trying to address that....

 

> @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> That's why they want to change it :astonished: :astonished: :astonished: :astonished: :astonished:

> Work with siege to try to hide the things they cant fix/change. KEK!

>

> Joking asside siege needs to better mechanics issue is that Anet want to add dumb and worse mechanics, like AOE target ground and power and turn will be automatically done, and that for start of changes it is a issue cause take the difficulty from using siege wich is fine how it works.

> Structures and map's design are more a issue in bad design then siege is.... wich i doubt Anet understand it why...

>

> gw2 2018-2019.. do everything with a 1click.. soooon.

 

Ok... please explain? pointing fingers to something else but don't explain the something else doesn't really help.

 

[Aeolus.3615]

> @"XenesisII.1540" said:

> > @"PH Law.4063" said:

> > Seige isnt even the main problem in WvW i dont understand why they are trying to address that....

>

> > @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> > That's why they want to change it :astonished: :astonished: :astonished: :astonished: :astonished:

> > Work with siege to try to hide the things they cant fix/change. KEK!

> >

> > Joking asside siege needs to better mechanics issue is that Anet want to add dumb and worse mechanics, like AOE target ground and power and turn will be automatically done, and that for start of changes it is a issue cause take the difficulty from using siege wich is fine how it works.

> > Structures and map's design are more a issue in bad design then siege is.... wich i doubt Anet understand it why...

> >

> > gw2 2018-2019.. do everything with a 1click.. soooon.

>

> Ok... please explain? pointing fingers to something else but don't explain the something else doesn't really help.

>

 

I explained, maybe should actually be more clear :\

 

I dont see siege having that many issues atm to be in need of changes while there are other aspects of the game that require much more atention and iteration, and i was criticizing the idea to make siege work like the treb work on pvp map, u cast the clircle on the ground the the treb will hit that place automatically, wich is somethign they want to port to to WvW, wich some players totally disagree.

 

Cast a treb shot like cast a metor shower..... w/o actually need to manage treb rotation and power..... is not a good change, im pointing finger a that change.

 

IF siege is in need of revisions, maybe catapult need to do damage from the distance of the boulder rather than being able to use catapults on proxy on places that ac's cant hit nor players, in favour of the zerg and way to exploit any possibke cunter due how structures and LoS are designed, theres to much gimmick based gameplay, rather than search the better tactics for current situation.

[XenesisII.1540]

Doesn't seem like there was much support for the treb changes, those changes are fine in pvp because much smaller map, trebs serve different purposes in wvw and needs to be kept as it is.

 

I'm asking more about this sentence.

 

> @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> Structures and map's design are more a issue in bad design then siege is.... wich i doubt Anet understand it why...

 

Hard to understand why if you don't explain your view on it.

[SkyShroud.2865]

> @"XenesisII.1540" said:

> You say they haven't been buffed since 2013 and yet they did with stats boost you also pointed out, from HoT in presence of the keep, and guild auras, and bloodlust. Stat boosts which have highly benefited AC's since they use player stats to boost their power. I don't believe any siege should be using player stats but rather fixed stats like golems have, especially the ones that server the main purpose of knocking down walls/gates/counter siege.

 

Erm? Does it? I don't remember ac scaling with user's stats. I also play around the personal stats while manning an ac, the tooltip show no change.

 

My point of stats boost to defending players is that defending players already has home ground advantage with internally placed defenses. The stats boost give the defenders even greater advantage. That kind of advantage is unfair since attackers cannot replicate those stats boost unlike sieges which are accessible from either sides.

[XenesisII.1540]

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Arrow_Cart

 

> Power, Condition Damage and Condition Duration affect the damage and conditions from the arrow cart's skills.

 

I remember the change being made, not going to dig up the patch notes for it.

[SkyShroud.2865]

> @"XenesisII.1540" said:

> https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Arrow_Cart

>

> > Power, Condition Damage and Condition Duration affect the damage and conditions from the arrow cart's skills.

>

> I remember the change being made, not going to dig up the patch notes for it.

 

Ermm but tooltip show no changes in damage with or without gears. According to edit history, that line is added on 10-Feb-2014‎. I have looked up patch notes archive since 2012 before I made a post for the reply, no such mention from the patch note. Is that part actually legit?

[Aeolus.3615]

> @"XenesisII.1540" said:

> Doesn't seem like there was much support for the treb changes, those changes are fine in pvp because much smaller map, trebs serve different purposes in wvw and needs to be kept as it is.

>

> I'm asking more about this sentence.

>

> > @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> > Structures and map's design are more a issue in bad design then siege is.... wich i doubt Anet understand it why...

>

> Hard to understand why if you don't explain your view on it.

 

It is not a siege issue, well... mostly.

I think that's already more than spoken at least for me, and for many of the players that do WvW, the way the game works forces players to have lame behavior, being on searching places to hide or drop siege or tryign to glitch the siege in some known place, and that becomes to gimmick but in a bad way, even i am forced to have this behavior cause the other side is using some placement that was left that way intentional or badly iterated or viewed from the dev's.

The only siege that needs some revision is the catapult.

 

Walls simply dont work for players.....were they ever ment to be designed to be usefefull for players?

The issue is not the siege once again, but the structure and LoS of skills on the strucutres, that forces siege humping and and on the offensive side, AOE's can reach half place of stairs, walls are traps to farm players, mesmer and necros pulls the same as aoes u can pull players due how LoS work on this skills players that are on half way of the stairs(rare to happen but only due not many know how to make it "super efficient", when see some one repairing wall getting pushed from a mesmer and necro outside... not shure if game bad validations or cheats...), basicly walls dont work, and IMO this needs to be looked in first place rather than try to do some revision on siege, **walls need to work for defend team w/o punishing to much the offensive team** but atm is way to much punishive for any player above half stairs... wich cant do much if anything.....Maybe a work arround this is make walls larger, and make trebs hit harder on both walls,siege on walls and players.

 

It is not requesting to tune up the game for myself has many acuse me off...lol... it is about of priorities and fix stuff to giv better gameplay for every one.

[XenesisII.1540]

Maybe those players should play smarter instead of just standing in one spot on the wall. If you're not aware of what could happen when a zerg is sitting directly under a wall, I don't know what to tell you other than don't leave spawn and you'll be safe. Very obvious that marks, meteors, aoes, pulls, are coming if you show yourself.

 

Never got pushed by a mesmer or necro while repairing a closed wall, only happens on gates, unless you're near on top of the wall and getting hit with a cata or treb.

 

Walls are for delaying attackers until your team responds, not a complete safe spot for you to drive away attackers every time. There has to be some access to killing players or siege on a wall, otherwise no one would bother with close quarter sieging anymore.

 

> the way the game works forces players to have lame behavior, being on searching places to hide or drop siege or tryign to glitch the siege in some known place, and that becomes to gimmick but in a bad way, even i am forced to have this behavior cause the other side is using some placement that was left that way intentional or badly iterated or viewed from the dev's.

 

There are some funky spots to cata walls, but that's mainly because of the splash damage range, like the bottom of the north hill of bravost or quentin lake, or under the bridge at veloka. I don't think it's a bad thing when players find creative places to place siege to avoid getting countered, that's part of the fun to me seeing that happen and then finding ways to counter it from the other side, my only problem is when there isn't a legit counter available like siege at spawn areas, and that should looked at.

 

Now what places forces this lame behavior as you call it? what glitched places? can't fix things that isn't widely known and probably why anet hasn't fixed it yet.

Again can't expect a fix if you don't say what it is, you're still being cryptic about this while expecting anet to be mind readers to fix all the problems of things they may not be aware of.

 

[Aeolus.3615]

@XenesisII.1540

Some places Anet already fixed i was used to drop siege into inside OW mountain wall since mass blobs tend to aoe the wall and have tons of siege from oggre, and them wai for them to enter.

That place IMO needs more tweaks than any siege lol, can even be trebbed from SMC, while only siege from OW walls can counter oggres where is instantly wiped by aoe casters even before players know that structure is under atack.

 

 

 

 

[XenesisII.1540]

That's a new area revamped with the tower movement, bound to have some glitches around it.

You could treb old OW from smc, because... you can treb all outer towers from smc and they can all hit smc as well.

The new cataing from in ogres area to OW does seem like a disadvantage especially when shield gens go up, and maybe they should raise the walls of the ogre's area to prevent cataing in there, but trebs can still hit from back there too. This is just one of the towers that really benefits from having shield gens to protect it.

 

 

[Aeolus.3615]

> @"XenesisII.1540" said:

> That's a new area revamped with the tower movement, bound to have some glitches around it.

> You could treb old OW from smc, because... you can treb all outer towers from smc and they can all hit smc as well.

> The new cataing from in ogres area to OW does seem like a disadvantage especially when shield gens go up, and maybe they should raise the walls of the ogre's area to prevent cataing in there, but trebs can still hit from back there too. This is just one of the towers that really benefits from having shield gens to protect it.

>

>

 

Yeah but that kidna leads to ton siege humping (cause due how bad strucutres are designed, wich makes players complain about siege, and possibly makes Anet think theres a issue with siege and needs some revision), shield gens on inner to protec shield on stairs and some other siege, to actually defend and delay for alot of time u need like 3-4 shield gens on inner, lots of siege on inner to make target blob think otherwise to enter on the created choke point on wall, siege humping :\.

 

[XenesisII.1540]

They could have made a flat land with 20 ft high tower walls and that would have been boring as hell. Geography plays a part how you siege every structure and counter play it, in fact all the towers have a hill area that can cata the tower and clear the siege from the walls. Do you want them to put up 20 ft high walls on the tower and border to ogres? Then everyone will have to resort to using trebs instead?

 

OW could be cata'd from ogres before it was moved, so it's not like anything has changed with that. Shield gens actually make it harder to counter the siege in ogres and requires most times for you to send a force to deal with it, especially with the choke involved. I don't have a problem with the way the old school towers and keeps are designed, they're simple, there's multiple ways to attack and defend them from different ranges, most of it is counterable from siege within those structures.

 

[aspirine.5839]

> @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> > @"XenesisII.1540" said:

> > That's a new area revamped with the tower movement, bound to have some glitches around it.

> > You could treb old OW from smc, because... you can treb all outer towers from smc and they can all hit smc as well.

> > The new cataing from in ogres area to OW does seem like a disadvantage especially when shield gens go up, and maybe they should raise the walls of the ogre's area to prevent cataing in there, but trebs can still hit from back there too. This is just one of the towers that really benefits from having shield gens to protect it.

> >

> >

>

> Yeah but that kidna leads to ton siege humping (cause due how bad strucutres are designed, wich makes players complain about siege, and possibly makes Anet think theres a issue with siege and needs some revision), shield gens on inner to protec shield on stairs and some other siege, to actually defend and delay for alot of time u need like 3-4 shield gens on inner, lots of siege on inner to make target blob think otherwise to enter on the created choke point on wall, siege humping :\.

>

 

The need to create High points for Siege placement, like the vista in the Blue keep. Nice spot and the Ele's and Necro's cannot reach it. But that is just one example of how they need to have some higher ground for us defenders that do not want to share their towers and keeps with a blob..

[SkyShroud.2865]

While clearing my inventories for all my toons, I noted the zero superior shield generator on my wvw toons. Nobody mentioned this in the thread either.

 

What is the point of having superior shield generator? The superior generator give you 50% more range but how often does anybody make use of that range? Normal shield generator for most part does the job. So, I think there is a a need to make superior generator worth well.

 

Since currently 3 normal shield generators can rotate a perfect protection, I think we should make it such that only superior shield generator should able to do that. Thus reduce the normal version duration to 6s while have the superior version duration at 9s.

[Garrus.7403]

As long as some server rely to 90% on acs to win their fights something is completly wrong. I dont get it how ppl enjoy it to sit in their keep/tower hugging their ac spamming it outside on enemy zerg and port away from any openfield fights because they get stomped in 5 secs. Ofc they will get stomped ez by a half decent zerg if they never fight without siege.

[Aeolus.3615]

> @"Garrus.7403" said:

> As long as some server rely to 90% on acs to win their fights something is completly wrong. I dont get it how ppl enjoy it to sit in their keep/tower hugging their ac spamming it outside on enemy zerg and port away from any openfield fights because they get stomped in 5 secs. Ofc they will get stomped ez by a half decent zerg if they never fight without siege.

 

I think that is not a siege issue, ic it more like what i was talking, as map design "flaw", reason why many players didnt liked DBL, since u need to engage more in open field to take strucutres and is harder to runback and hide back in another capped structure, wich by the other hand players love EBG, since they have for sure a close tower to hide and treb structure to structure w/o any fight need as well.

Like i said siege humping is not a simptom of siege itself but strucutres and map design.

 

@XenesisII.1540XenesisII.1540

I dont see any issue with that, players actually would have more tactics to choose from and would promote more open fights rather than stack on a choke point spamming aoe so your catas and trebs can do all the work, maybe siege would have the need to actually get improved, some classes could still AOE top of wall, but they would need to get close wich would be a high risk reward thing if they manage to be sucessefull, wich by how the game works when u go on to aoe wall from outside u know u will wipe everything pull players 100% of the time.

Gw2 map design geography is made to search for very "lame ways" to take structures, who in earth would build a structure in a valey, or that could be cated 20feet above, This is the low skill design and making strucutres more easy to capture most time with very low effort, i must say one thing that i like on DBL is that players need to commit on open field to actually take something, and cant run to nearby structure....it is a commit or die for situation wich game should have more than hide zerg or ktrain some empty bl while there 8 trebs i another map doing the work and cutting effort.

 

(edit)

Just remmembered something what if siege and guilds had their own tech tree based on several races, instead of adding more mastery points for players, guilds could change the siege skills based the tech line they spended points into, has in asuran tech, hyleck, charr, human, silvary etc... each tech would make siege act diferent and each guild could choose 1 tech tree for what they wanted to have for their gameplay.

 

[MarkBecks.6453]

One of the points I would like to raise is that with new builds, it is possible for players to do damage even when siege is far back as the game possibly allows, making the player and the siege vulnerable. I realise this is part of gameplay, but if you are outnumbered and only a few people trying to defend blobs, it makes the use of siege pointless and frustrating. I really would like to see defensive siege a little less vulnerable, including mortars which allow you to splash when the enemy are using shield generators, and that way people would have to use a bit more skill in placement of their offensive siege. I would also like to see the amount of supply needed to build basic siege upped a bit.

[GDchiaScrub.3241]

> @"SkyShroud.2865" said:

> While clearing my inventories for all my toons, I noted the zero superior shield generator on my wvw toons. Nobody mentioned this in the thread either.

>

> What is the point of having superior shield generator? The superior generator give you 50% more range but how often does anybody make use of that range? Normal shield generator for most part does the job. So, I think there is a a need to make superior generator worth well.

>

> Since currently 3 normal shield generators can rotate a perfect protection, I think we should make it such that only superior shield generator should able to do that. Thus reduce the normal version duration to 6s while have the superior version duration at 9s.

 

Superior shield gen and Normal shield gen don't share cooldowns (obviously not intended). So one person can flip between both of them, and completely block treb fire onto a tower. Also, mastery of shield gens doesn't share cooldown, so a non-mastery person + a mastered person can utilize 1 shield gen to block shots as well. P.S. I don't like mastery anyway since adding power progression in a pvp is a bad idea (Battlefront 2). Of course mastery adds stuff like this too.

 

Are we having fun yet?

 

D:

[SkyShroud.2865]

> @"GDchiaScrub.3241" said:

> > @"SkyShroud.2865" said:

> > While clearing my inventories for all my toons, I noted the zero superior shield generator on my wvw toons. Nobody mentioned this in the thread either.

> >

> > What is the point of having superior shield generator? The superior generator give you 50% more range but how often does anybody make use of that range? Normal shield generator for most part does the job. So, I think there is a a need to make superior generator worth well.

> >

> > Since currently 3 normal shield generators can rotate a perfect protection, I think we should make it such that only superior shield generator should able to do that. Thus reduce the normal version duration to 6s while have the superior version duration at 9s.

>

> Superior shield gen and Normal shield gen don't share cooldowns (obviously not intended). So one person can flip between both of them, and completely block treb fire onto a tower. Also, mastery of shield gens doesn't share cooldown, so a non-mastery person + a mastered person can utilize 1 shield gen to block shots as well. P.S. I don't like mastery anyway since adding power progression in a pvp is a bad idea (Battlefront 2). Of course mastery adds stuff like this too.

>

> Are we having fun yet?

>

> D:

 

Right. Those too, they need to fix it.

[XenesisII.1540]

If you think map and structures are the issue and at fault here instead of siege, you might as well not be playing wvw because those won't be changed.

 

This isn't real life, real life common sense for the most part doesn't need to play a part in making a unique map experiences, red will build a tower down in a valley if they damn well please! Even if it did we would have green side in ebg blocked off with walls and gates only access to dredge, smc, and frogs, Anz would be built on the entrance of dredge not on the side of it, the same with every outer tower in ebg.

 

Siege dictates how you attack a structure. The whole reason people use cata's on OW is because the gate most times is suicide with siege from inside OW and from the keep raining down in that area, like seriously 3-5 trebs and mortars in that area from the keep alone. Adding 20 ft walls isn't going to change anything, people will just resort to using trebs or map queues(hey guess what they're doing now to take t3 stuff) or not even bothering at all, and the game should not get to the point of players not trying for structures, which is happening in some cases.

 

The whole point of wvw is to take and defend stuff but not to the point where you don't want to bother doing that, which upgrading to t3 and dropping a boatload of siege to defend something will do. Notice how many won't bother with t3 smc or ebg keeps loaded with siege until they either have a map queue or a double team or wait until off hour coverage? Siege escalates the need for greater numbers to attack something, regardless of structure designs, even with a keep built on a hill with 20ft high walls players will still stuff it to hell with siege.

 

The problem here is too many people think siege is suppose to be 100% safe, that defenders are suppose to be 100% safe to keep attackers away all the time. For everything in this game there needs to be counters, there's a balance that needs to be maintained between attacking and defending, you also have to make sure objectives continue to be the center of conflicts, conflicts that should be resolved in a reasonable amount of time. If you tip the game too heavy to offense it becomes a ktrain, if you tip the game too heavy to defense and nothing flipping then defenders will be left sitting on siege twiddling thumps, and attackers will just resort to finding an easy paper structure with no one around or just duking it out in the field. That already happens quite a lot.

 

[Oogabooga.3812]

My thoughts on siege:

 

Arrow carts: Damage and range are fine, but change the circle so that the further away you target, the wider the radius becomes, such that not everything in the wider circles would necessarily get hit, i.e. a set number of "arrows" that randomly hit spots within the circle like meteor shower.

 

Shield generators: Lower the duration of the bubble and increase the minimum distance so that the user cannot bubble himself. Alternatively, make the radius of the bubble smaller the closer it is placed to the generator.

 

Catapults: Revert to normalizing the damage. Also, please remove the set amount of time a shot can be in play: catapults shots fired from high ground should not mysteriously disappear after a period of time. By the way, why are there wheels on these things if we cannot move them? At least increase turning speed.

 

Trebuchets: Boost the damage and, like others have said, ping the location of the hit on the minimap. Instead of water fields, how about throwing players? They would take the normal fall damage upon landing, of course, unless they glide in their territory. Limit 1 player per toss.

 

Ballistae: Make the projectiles for skills 1 and 2 fire sooner in a similar arc to skill 3 and raise the height, like others have stated. Skill 4 is never used as intended, so how about a brief front shield that its design looks like it has? Such a shield would only block in the direction the ballista was facing when activated.

 

Golems: Add two mastery levels; one for faster moving golems, and one for gliding. Alpha/Guild golems should move at the same speed as Omegas.

 

My thoughts on schematics:

 

Watchtower should be activated by tactivator and cost supply, having a time limit of 1 hour.

Assault Rollers should be available in towers as well as camps in the banners category.

Dolyaks should lose their invulnerability/speediness immediately if the camp gets taken.

Hardened gates should be enough to remove Fortified gates.

 

As much as I hate seeing a golem troll in a camp, it's a good strategy, and they're willing to spend the gold and supply for it. Also, t3 walls should have fewer hit points and therefore take fewer supply to repair. Alternatively, remove t3.

 

 

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Oogabooga.3812" said:

> Catapults: Revert to normalizing the damage.

 

What? That's ridiculous. The increasing damage is the only thing that makes it *somewhat* worth to use at range - and even then 0% power is more dps than 100% power. If anything damage should be less for 0% power and more for 100%.

 

Also, golems should not contest camps, period. No it's not a good strategy. It's a stupid exploit, just like invoulnerable dollys was.

[Aeolus.3615]

> @"XenesisII.1540" said:

> If you think map and structures are the issue and at fault here instead of siege, you might as well not be playing wvw because those won't be changed.

>

> This isn't real life, real life common sense for the most part doesn't need to play a part in making a unique map experiences, red will build a tower down in a valley if they kitten well please! Even if it did we would have green side in ebg blocked off with walls and gates only access to dredge, smc, and frogs, Anz would be built on the entrance of dredge not on the side of it, the same with every outer tower in ebg.

>

> Siege dictates how you attack a structure. The whole reason people use cata's on OW is because the gate most times is suicide with siege from inside OW and from the keep raining down in that area, like seriously 3-5 trebs and mortars in that area from the keep alone. Adding 20 ft walls isn't going to change anything, people will just resort to using trebs or map queues(hey guess what they're doing now to take t3 stuff) or not even bothering at all, and the game should not get to the point of players not trying for structures, which is happening in some cases.

>

> The whole point of wvw is to take and defend stuff but not to the point where you don't want to bother doing that, which upgrading to t3 and dropping a boatload of siege to defend something will do. Notice how many won't bother with t3 smc or ebg keeps loaded with siege until they either have a map queue or a double team or wait until off hour coverage? Siege escalates the need for greater numbers to attack something, regardless of structure designs, even with a keep built on a hill with 20ft high walls players will still stuff it to hell with siege.

>

> The problem here is too many people think siege is suppose to be 100% safe, that defenders are suppose to be 100% safe to keep attackers away all the time. For everything in this game there needs to be counters, there's a balance that needs to be maintained between attacking and defending, you also have to make sure objectives continue to be the center of conflicts, conflicts that should be resolved in a reasonable amount of time. If you tip the game too heavy to offense it becomes a ktrain, if you tip the game too heavy to defense and nothing flipping then defenders will be left sitting on siege twiddling thumps, and attackers will just resort to finding an easy paper structure with no one around or just duking it out in the field. That already happens quite a lot.

>

 

Yah, i do agree with allmost of what you are sayign but on defense ur only safe ir ur not in combat on the ground area inside a keep it is like a -100% safe from 100% safe .... the momment u step half of stairs u get 20-40 players bomb and pulls sometimes more, so theres no safe zone, **wich is what leads to the bad siege humping**.

 

But siege dont dictate how u atack a structure, map layout and keep design does and its design flaws does, and that is where i say theres lame spots to atacked them to avoid minimal combat wich is dumb while defense team is way to punished, a more **50/50 gameplay should be leleved,** OW wall and gate is exactly that, idiotic placement where u can still ram the gate with a full stacked blob and 7-14 sup rams has i have seen, since not all servers have players numbers even if they reach t1 or t2... lol reason wall is a must and the mostly obvious thing to get hit from several trebs from SMC and siege from ogres, cause theres no counter to that, besides get a tons of shield gens....to delay it while theres no counter to siege from SMC and ogres on that strucutre, and when u can haveproxy catas on the OW walll while keeping spamming on top with 40-50 scourges... theres 0 defense.

 

And no the point of WvW is not to defend stuff ,Anet hates it, reason strucutres are harder to deffend than to take them, many players fail to take strucutres cause they are expecting free reward w/o effort and bail out, but that's another story....

 

_"If you tip the game too heavy to offense it becomes a ktrain, if you tip the game too heavy to defense and nothing flipping"_

 

And that's what we have... ktrains by one side and siege humping that discourages any fight....wich is what the game is and always was, u said yourself, t3 with siege humping becomes a burden for most, and the reason no one bothers to take "important" strucutres due how siege humping there is still... many of that strucutures if not all have massive flaws that boost offensive gameplay against those structures, and walls become just delayers to the siege on offense while siege humping is being build on some place cause strucutes are bad designed, there no real defense gameplay bsesides siege humping wich IMO is a bad solution to create decent gameplay for all.

WvW was designed for a massive server ktrain a medium and a smaller server somethign like big sever vs medium vs small, whide medium would only fight a litlle and create gameplay from the big one to cap back stuff and the smaller one would have to help the medium server of get ktrained by both, it was a pure pve ktrain envyrotment with some pvp.

 

I would say, before any kind of siege revision and those changes are implemented after the alliance system hits, walls need to be larger and weaker and against some siege, while area arroudn strucutres need to promote more ground pull and pushess fights than find ways to drop siege in places that help the offensive team mostly.

 

(edit)sorry about some of the bad english :\