SkyShroud.2865 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"Israel.7056" said: > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > 5 can't really stop 25, is just a deterrence. Also, you assume that the children will grow up to have same mentality as the adults that just use only siege. As for developing skills, I think those that overwhelm others would be less likely to further their skills than those that got overwhelmed. With those said, your issue is still with fraction A. > > It depends on a lot of variables but generally speaking 10-15 can shut down 25-40 at most major objectives if they know what they're doing. 25+ can stall out a map q if they understand how to use defensive siege properly. > > My issue is with siege. It just so happens that on this particular issue C and A are largely indistinguishable in terms of playstyle so we can't talk about nerfing siege without effecting them both. You need to have people willing to go out to disable siege, defensive siege don't stop a map queue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JOO TOO.5193 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said: > Hey everyone! > > We're currently looking to make some siege revisions. We'd like your feedback! I know several posts have been made in the past, but we'd like to get the feedback in one thread for review. > One note on our part: Siege should continue to be an important part of World vs. World. We don't want to make a change that would make siege useless. > > So let us know your thoughts on the current state of siege and what you'd like to see differently! Here's my two cents, as a long time WvWer who is in a fight oriented guild, and know that I hope this is in no way slowing down alliance launch. First, I would like to ask what many are asking, what you are looking to achieve? I'll try and keep it short, so I'll work off my own assumptions and give what answers I can, and I assume I will be biased. I think one competent defender should be able to slow down roughly a half dozen competent attackers for no more than a few minutes, enough time for a tag to respond, but not enough to be leisurely about it, this should be taxing on the local supply for both sides, and generally feel active and rewarding for all involved. The main offenders to this idea of balance, in my opinion, tend to be disablers, and a lack of scouting tools. Disablers allow one person to stop a siege dead for 30 seconds per 10 supply, often with little risk of failure or reprisal, I recommend nerfing their ability to hit siege through gates, either requiring line of effect from the detonation point, or just reducing effect radius if there is no line of effect, and also either lowering the disable timer, heavily limit the number of siege sites affected, or make it a "weakness/vulnerability" type effect, so the attackers aren't just doing nothing until the siege comes back online, and defenders aren't just making suicide runs every 30 seconds until a tag decides to swing by. On the other side of things, I think a "detection trap" would be a fantastic addition to the traps and tricks vendor, simply applying the sentry debuff in a radius when triggered(maybe just add it to stealth trap?). One major flaw I see with the recent uptick of reflect skills is omegas, they are now basically useless, as the only siege to be affected by player skills, even possibly harming themselves vs NPC wizards. Other things to maybe look at are AC damage against players vs AC damage against siege, is it a point blank siege killer, or an anti personnel weapon, or is it fine being both? I personally would like it doing a bit less damage vs rams, or at least reduced effect for spamming 5 of them in one area. One last thought would be some sort of anti trap item on the traps and trick vendor, like a one time use detector or something. I hope this is helpful, and not too biased or "wall of text". TLDR: Nerf disablers just enough so they don't stop sieges dead, just slow them down. Add more to the traps and tricks vendor(scouting trap, trap detector, ect). Fix omegas so they aren't laughably useless vs reflects. Rebalance ACs to discourage hardcore AC spam, and *maybe* give them a clear niche(might be good to split into 2 different siege builds). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trajan.4953 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 So Siege Humpers want better Siege, and Fighters want better fights. What was the point of this thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > @"Ansau.7326" said: > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > @"Israel.7056" said: > > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > > > > > What mentioned as children are non-stacked servers where filled with many fresh players since those servers are normally open for freshies to join unlike stacked servers that historically stacked upon over and over again while closed from time to time due to overpopulation. This is not comparison to your group of people who just want to siege since you particularly mentioned T1. > > > > > > > > > > Your issue is with the first fraction that do whatever it takes to win, that is your source of problem since you mentioned there is certain T1 server. I am sure they fight better than fresh blood. > > > > > > > > > > You entire basis is base on some bad sheeps and a revision that will condemn all other servers that can be outpopulated from time to time. Pretty much the same mentality why people kept on opposing blowing up servers since years ago. > > > > > > > > My primary contention is that the tools the "children" use to "prevent being overwhelmed" are the same tools that "fraction A" uses to win by "any means necessary." If it can be used by 5 to defend against 25, which is the usual canard, then it can also be used by 50 to defend against another 50. > > > > > > > > My secondary contention is that the tools that the "children" use to "prevent from being overwhelmed" also prevents them from developing any real skill at the game which further exacerbates the "skill gap." It keeps them "children" because it's a safety net that catches them when they fall. As the "skill gap" widens it becomes harder and harder for the "children" to ever feel like they can catch up so it creates a feedback loop whereby the bad players get worse and the good players get better. > > > > > > 5 can't really stop 25, is just a deterrence. Also, you assume that the children will grow up to have same mentality as the adults that just use only siege. As for developing skills, I think those that overwhelm others would be less likely to further their skills than those that got overwhelmed. With those said, your issue is still with fraction A. > > > > Don't know which WvW are you playing, but 5 can perfectly stop a group of 25 sieging a tower or keep. All you need is 2 arrowcarts and someone to drop a disabling siege trap in stealth. > > I hate to say this but that would means the 25 zerg is really lowly skilled and they deserve to be stopped by only 5. I disagree because the defense/offense balance favors the defenders often. Has nothing to do with skill (we really talking about skill when discussing siege?) and everything to do with tactivators and plenty of supply. Even better for the defenders when they have a map queue available to zone in with an emergency waypoint after delaying the 25 for a long time. Remember, arrow carts' AoE target cap is 50, larger than the 25. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenesisII.1540 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"JOO TOO.5193" said: > TLDR: Nerf disablers just enough so they don't stop sieges dead, just slow them down. Rebalance ACs to discourage hardcore AC spam, and *maybe* give them a clear niche(might be good to split into 2 different siege builds). You haven't been noticing commanders not dropping rams right up on gates anymore? There's still dummies that do and they deserve to be disabled through the gate, but a lot more are placing their siege a little distance away from the gate and to the sides now, which means risking going on top to drop a disabler which can also mean you getting aoe bombed to death. Disablers are fine as they are, just need to be smart about siege placement. AC's have a clear niche, to clear people from an area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senji.2048 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 Adding **Ammunition System** to siege weapons. The maximum count and recharge can vary for different weapons. It would still allow to burst damage in critical moments, but prevent from endless spamming (especially for arrow carts). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aspirine.6852 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"morrolan.9608" said: > > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > > @"morrolan.9608" said: > > > My reaction is please finish alliances as a priority before making other changes. > > > > > > Having said that in answer to the query, nerf ACs. Siege should primarily be about be obtaining access to objectives not killing other players. Someone else has suggested restricting the number of players an AC hits like most aoes in the game this is a good suggestion.. > > > > Nope, siege is also there for defence and slowing the blob a bit for reinforcements to arrive. If they are not strong enough you can literally take any keep on the map without problems if your blob is big enough. I assume that this is the case on your server. > > Siege should be there for defence in terms of countering other siege not in terms of making it easy to kill players. Hmm I think siege was designed for a small group to hold of a larger group. You know it should be way easier to defend than to attack, just like in real castle warfare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shining One.1635 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 What 50-man zergs are being wiped out by arrow carts? I rarely get any kills on a zerg with an arrow cart, and it's usually someone who decides to be AFK while the rest of his team is working on the gate/wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gendo.2370 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 please make siege blueprints take up less inventory slots! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denise.8145 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 first thing about siege weapons is that if your standing on a wall, in an arrowcart / balista and you try to defend a keep from a hord of attackers, you are instandly vaporised by AOE attacks from the attackers. I think besides the issue that a ballista can´t shoot over the own wall infront of you (so you have to place them on top of other buildings around, like the supply hutt, witch is totaly stupid in my opinion) the siege weapons by itself are fine. what i would change though is giving the players on a siege weapon, on top of a wall, a dmg reducing buff, depending on the amount of other players around him. Meaning, the LESS players are around him, the less DMG he takes. that way he has a chance to inflict some distraction, and possibly hold the tower/keep untill the zerg from the home land arrives to properly defend against the attacking force. Now days it is nearly impossible to defend a tower with just a hand full of players. What are the walls good for, then just an obsticle that need to be crushed down in a few seconds by 5 catapults, build directly next to them? Speaking of witch.....we should maybe look into catapults and a minimum range in witch they do dmg to a wall.....it is stupid to build them right next to the wall....just saying. but back to the point...walls...what are they good for? shouldn´t they provide a HUGE cover bonus for the players on top of them? now they are breakable like paper, and if you stand on them you are faster resting in peaces then you can say eckieckipeteng! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cobbah.3102 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 OK my 2 cents worth double the damage of siege especially in T1 give the lower server some competitive edge against these ridiculous builds and blobs or maybe just roll it back to pre hot ,I imagine the complaints seem to be coming from said T1 blob servers just so it is easier for them to take objectives , about time everyone just hardened the kitten up and play the game . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawdler.8521 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > @"morrolan.9608" said: > > > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > > > @"morrolan.9608" said: > > > > My reaction is please finish alliances as a priority before making other changes. > > > > > > > > Having said that in answer to the query, nerf ACs. Siege should primarily be about be obtaining access to objectives not killing other players. Someone else has suggested restricting the number of players an AC hits like most aoes in the game this is a good suggestion.. > > > > > > Nope, siege is also there for defence and slowing the blob a bit for reinforcements to arrive. If they are not strong enough you can literally take any keep on the map without problems if your blob is big enough. I assume that this is the case on your server. > > > > Siege should be there for defence in terms of countering other siege not in terms of making it easy to kill players. > > Hmm I think siege was designed for a small group to hold of a larger group. You know it should be way easier to defend than to attack, just like in real castle warfare. Or you could surround them and watch them starve to death. Thats pretty easy. Either way, walls and gates *are* easier to "defend" than no walls and gates. And even if you take out all siege from the equation, a T3 last longer than T0, doesnt it? That is the point of the gates and walls. To delay, not defend or offer a position to effectivly attack the enemy from. You want realism? Alright fine. But then I want to see everyone jumping off the side of a wall to attack a siegeing force break their legs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apharma.3741 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 Shield generators: Currently they’re used to give attackers (in large numbers of 50+) near immunity to all defences except getting another equally as large force to help defend. However most of the time the objective is gone by the time the defending numbers arrive or near gone. I would like to see them being used only for defence so you can only build them in an objective. However this would lead to objectives never being taken, so maybe it’s time to do away with shield gens we can build and instead put a single shield generator at the centre of the structure, adjust LoS and range rules so it can be used to delay an attack without being destroyed. Arrow carts: 4-5 superior arrow carts makes fighting near an objective impossible, it also makes attacking almost impossible without the above mentioned shield generators. I’d personally prefer arrow carts to be spaced out a bit more, used to give defenders an advantage but not the overwhelming advantage and benefits you get for simply building 3-5 superior arrow carts. Also can we get rid of normal arrow carts please? They’re next to useless with the amount of healing and damage reduction since heart of thorns. Ballista, catapult and trebs I feel are generally in a decent spot in terms of damage to the objective supply. What I do think needs addressing is how quickly you can spike an objective. It’s not fun to lose a tower that you spent hours upgrading and having to escort dolyaks and defend camps for in the blink of an eye because you don’t get participation for sitting in a tower on a map that’s being left alone for an hour or two. You then have to go flip camps and leave the tower to keep your participation (because there’s no commander and they don’t want spots taken up) up. This means you’re usually not in the tower when that 50 man group rolls up and decides to take down the walls in about a minute. For reference it takes 53 (95 alpine BL) hits for a single superior catapult to take down a wall, when you have 5 of them it takes just over 10 hits (19 alpine BL) to get into a tower. Add in more and you can be inside a T3 tower and it’s gone extremely fast. Personally if arrow carts were changed so they weren’t able to have 5 or more covering an area I feel like objectives need to take longer to get into so fights can happen around objectives more while defensive siege in terms of arrow carts are less oppressive but still give an advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aspirine.6852 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > > @"morrolan.9608" said: > > > > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > > > > @"morrolan.9608" said: > > > > > My reaction is please finish alliances as a priority before making other changes. > > > > > > > > > > Having said that in answer to the query, nerf ACs. Siege should primarily be about be obtaining access to objectives not killing other players. Someone else has suggested restricting the number of players an AC hits like most aoes in the game this is a good suggestion.. > > > > > > > > Nope, siege is also there for defence and slowing the blob a bit for reinforcements to arrive. If they are not strong enough you can literally take any keep on the map without problems if your blob is big enough. I assume that this is the case on your server. > > > > > > Siege should be there for defence in terms of countering other siege not in terms of making it easy to kill players. > > > > Hmm I think siege was designed for a small group to hold of a larger group. You know it should be way easier to defend than to attack, just like in real castle warfare. > > Or you could surround them and watch them starve to death. Thats pretty easy. > > Either way, walls and gates *are* easier to "defend" than no walls and gates. And even if you take out all siege from the equation, a T3 last longer than T0, doesnt it? That is the point of the gates and walls. To delay, not defend or offer a position to effectivly attack the enemy from. > > You want realism? Alright fine. But then I want to see everyone jumping off the side of a wall to attack a siegeing force break their legs. I have a glider.. So ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morrolan.9608 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > @"morrolan.9608" said: > > > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > > > @"morrolan.9608" said: > > > > My reaction is please finish alliances as a priority before making other changes. > > > > > > > > Having said that in answer to the query, nerf ACs. Siege should primarily be about be obtaining access to objectives not killing other players. Someone else has suggested restricting the number of players an AC hits like most aoes in the game this is a good suggestion.. > > > > > > Nope, siege is also there for defence and slowing the blob a bit for reinforcements to arrive. If they are not strong enough you can literally take any keep on the map without problems if your blob is big enough. I assume that this is the case on your server. > > > > Siege should be there for defence in terms of countering other siege not in terms of making it easy to kill players. > > Hmm I think siege was designed for a small group to hold of a larger group. You know it should be way easier to defend than to attack, just like in real castle warfare. If you want it to be realistic it should take days at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawdler.8521 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > > > @"morrolan.9608" said: > > > > > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > > > > > @"morrolan.9608" said: > > > > > > My reaction is please finish alliances as a priority before making other changes. > > > > > > > > > > > > Having said that in answer to the query, nerf ACs. Siege should primarily be about be obtaining access to objectives not killing other players. Someone else has suggested restricting the number of players an AC hits like most aoes in the game this is a good suggestion.. > > > > > > > > > > Nope, siege is also there for defence and slowing the blob a bit for reinforcements to arrive. If they are not strong enough you can literally take any keep on the map without problems if your blob is big enough. I assume that this is the case on your server. > > > > > > > > Siege should be there for defence in terms of countering other siege not in terms of making it easy to kill players. > > > > > > Hmm I think siege was designed for a small group to hold of a larger group. You know it should be way easier to defend than to attack, just like in real castle warfare. > > > > Or you could surround them and watch them starve to death. Thats pretty easy. > > > > Either way, walls and gates *are* easier to "defend" than no walls and gates. And even if you take out all siege from the equation, a T3 last longer than T0, doesnt it? That is the point of the gates and walls. To delay, not defend or offer a position to effectivly attack the enemy from. > > > > You want realism? Alright fine. But then I want to see everyone jumping off the side of a wall to attack a siegeing force break their legs. > > I have a glider.. So ok. Contrary to belief, gliders shaped like golems, bubbles or blocky clouds doesnt fly well, neither does chickens tied to a string. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apharma.3741 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > > > > @"morrolan.9608" said: > > > > > > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > > > > > > @"morrolan.9608" said: > > > > > > > My reaction is please finish alliances as a priority before making other changes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Having said that in answer to the query, nerf ACs. Siege should primarily be about be obtaining access to objectives not killing other players. Someone else has suggested restricting the number of players an AC hits like most aoes in the game this is a good suggestion.. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nope, siege is also there for defence and slowing the blob a bit for reinforcements to arrive. If they are not strong enough you can literally take any keep on the map without problems if your blob is big enough. I assume that this is the case on your server. > > > > > > > > > > Siege should be there for defence in terms of countering other siege not in terms of making it easy to kill players. > > > > > > > > Hmm I think siege was designed for a small group to hold of a larger group. You know it should be way easier to defend than to attack, just like in real castle warfare. > > > > > > Or you could surround them and watch them starve to death. Thats pretty easy. > > > > > > Either way, walls and gates *are* easier to "defend" than no walls and gates. And even if you take out all siege from the equation, a T3 last longer than T0, doesnt it? That is the point of the gates and walls. To delay, not defend or offer a position to effectivly attack the enemy from. > > > > > > You want realism? Alright fine. But then I want to see everyone jumping off the side of a wall to attack a siegeing force break their legs. > > > > I have a glider.. So ok. > > Contrary to belief, gliders shaped like golems, bubbles or blocky clouds doesnt fly well, neither does chickens tied to a string. Agreed they should be made out of wood and some form of fabric and when I hit them with my magical fireball they should realistically catch fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aspirine.6852 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > > > > @"morrolan.9608" said: > > > > > > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > > > > > > @"morrolan.9608" said: > > > > > > > My reaction is please finish alliances as a priority before making other changes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Having said that in answer to the query, nerf ACs. Siege should primarily be about be obtaining access to objectives not killing other players. Someone else has suggested restricting the number of players an AC hits like most aoes in the game this is a good suggestion.. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nope, siege is also there for defence and slowing the blob a bit for reinforcements to arrive. If they are not strong enough you can literally take any keep on the map without problems if your blob is big enough. I assume that this is the case on your server. > > > > > > > > > > Siege should be there for defence in terms of countering other siege not in terms of making it easy to kill players. > > > > > > > > Hmm I think siege was designed for a small group to hold of a larger group. You know it should be way easier to defend than to attack, just like in real castle warfare. > > > > > > Or you could surround them and watch them starve to death. Thats pretty easy. > > > > > > Either way, walls and gates *are* easier to "defend" than no walls and gates. And even if you take out all siege from the equation, a T3 last longer than T0, doesnt it? That is the point of the gates and walls. To delay, not defend or offer a position to effectivly attack the enemy from. > > > > > > You want realism? Alright fine. But then I want to see everyone jumping off the side of a wall to attack a siegeing force break their legs. > > > > I have a glider.. So ok. > > Contrary to belief, gliders shaped like golems, bubbles or blocky clouds doesnt fly well, neither does chickens tied to a string. :) good point. I think catapults placed right next to a wall would also have some devastating effects on the 50 people behind it btw ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkyShroud.2865 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > @"Ansau.7326" said: > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said: > > > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > > > > > > > What mentioned as children are non-stacked servers where filled with many fresh players since those servers are normally open for freshies to join unlike stacked servers that historically stacked upon over and over again while closed from time to time due to overpopulation. This is not comparison to your group of people who just want to siege since you particularly mentioned T1. > > > > > > > > > > > > Your issue is with the first fraction that do whatever it takes to win, that is your source of problem since you mentioned there is certain T1 server. I am sure they fight better than fresh blood. > > > > > > > > > > > > You entire basis is base on some bad sheeps and a revision that will condemn all other servers that can be outpopulated from time to time. Pretty much the same mentality why people kept on opposing blowing up servers since years ago. > > > > > > > > > > My primary contention is that the tools the "children" use to "prevent being overwhelmed" are the same tools that "fraction A" uses to win by "any means necessary." If it can be used by 5 to defend against 25, which is the usual canard, then it can also be used by 50 to defend against another 50. > > > > > > > > > > My secondary contention is that the tools that the "children" use to "prevent from being overwhelmed" also prevents them from developing any real skill at the game which further exacerbates the "skill gap." It keeps them "children" because it's a safety net that catches them when they fall. As the "skill gap" widens it becomes harder and harder for the "children" to ever feel like they can catch up so it creates a feedback loop whereby the bad players get worse and the good players get better. > > > > > > > > 5 can't really stop 25, is just a deterrence. Also, you assume that the children will grow up to have same mentality as the adults that just use only siege. As for developing skills, I think those that overwhelm others would be less likely to further their skills than those that got overwhelmed. With those said, your issue is still with fraction A. > > > > > > Don't know which WvW are you playing, but 5 can perfectly stop a group of 25 sieging a tower or keep. All you need is 2 arrowcarts and someone to drop a disabling siege trap in stealth. > > > > I hate to say this but that would means the 25 zerg is really lowly skilled and they deserve to be stopped by only 5. > > I disagree because the defense/offense balance favors the defenders often. Has nothing to do with skill (we really talking about skill when discussing siege?) and everything to do with tactivators and plenty of supply. Even better for the defenders when they have a map queue available to zone in with an emergency waypoint after delaying the 25 for a long time. Remember, arrow carts' AoE target cap is 50, larger than the 25. You are assuming that people are stupid enough to sit in ac long enough for ac to kill them. And your example is not stopping a 25 zerg, your given example is delaying a 25 zerg, that is vast different. 5 person can never stop a 25 zerg. The technical usage of words need to be concise and correct, otherwise, the arguments will be just moot. A lot of people reasonings of nerfing ac is because they hate a blob hugging towers or keep with sieges. Of course, there also other people with hidden agenda of nerfing ac because they want a easy ktrain like eotm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimppossible.1829 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 First look at the weak chains of Sieges! (Before even thinking of introducing something new) What ruins Most of the wvw game with blob fights for keeps and towers?! I mean then ofcourse Shield generators! fix that and you keep a lot of ppl more in wvw cause this is Hell frustrating for defenders! 1. Shields have to be limited in numbers for a close area and can not work to close from eachother so they become sort of invincable by protecting them selves and other shields At the same time. Secondly! Defenders and siege building defenders are going so tired and lame from looking after sieges every hour. The game was ment for fun not to exaust ppl! Make siege duration 2 hours that would be a lot lot lot nicer and more respectful to all Those ppl that work there butts of to spent sieges, place sieges and refresh sieges! Those 2 points...improve that and the game at wvw will improve lots lots more fun and lots lots less irritation. A chain is as strong as its weakest link! Good luck Arena net and Thanks from all defenders at WVW!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunkamania.7561 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"cobbah.3102" said: > OK my 2 cents worth double the damage of siege especially in T1 give the lower server some competitive edge against these ridiculous builds and blobs or maybe just roll it back to pre hot ,I imagine the complaints seem to be coming from said T1 blob servers just so it is easier for them to take objectives , about time everyone just hardened the kitten up and play the game . You need a blob to take anything since siege and defending is so op. If they have more than you and you're outnumbered that's a balance issue. Should be fixed with alliances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > @"Ansau.7326" said: > > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said: > > > > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > What mentioned as children are non-stacked servers where filled with many fresh players since those servers are normally open for freshies to join unlike stacked servers that historically stacked upon over and over again while closed from time to time due to overpopulation. This is not comparison to your group of people who just want to siege since you particularly mentioned T1. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your issue is with the first fraction that do whatever it takes to win, that is your source of problem since you mentioned there is certain T1 server. I am sure they fight better than fresh blood. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You entire basis is base on some bad sheeps and a revision that will condemn all other servers that can be outpopulated from time to time. Pretty much the same mentality why people kept on opposing blowing up servers since years ago. > > > > > > > > > > > > My primary contention is that the tools the "children" use to "prevent being overwhelmed" are the same tools that "fraction A" uses to win by "any means necessary." If it can be used by 5 to defend against 25, which is the usual canard, then it can also be used by 50 to defend against another 50. > > > > > > > > > > > > My secondary contention is that the tools that the "children" use to "prevent from being overwhelmed" also prevents them from developing any real skill at the game which further exacerbates the "skill gap." It keeps them "children" because it's a safety net that catches them when they fall. As the "skill gap" widens it becomes harder and harder for the "children" to ever feel like they can catch up so it creates a feedback loop whereby the bad players get worse and the good players get better. > > > > > > > > > > 5 can't really stop 25, is just a deterrence. Also, you assume that the children will grow up to have same mentality as the adults that just use only siege. As for developing skills, I think those that overwhelm others would be less likely to further their skills than those that got overwhelmed. With those said, your issue is still with fraction A. > > > > > > > > Don't know which WvW are you playing, but 5 can perfectly stop a group of 25 sieging a tower or keep. All you need is 2 arrowcarts and someone to drop a disabling siege trap in stealth. > > > > > > I hate to say this but that would means the 25 zerg is really lowly skilled and they deserve to be stopped by only 5. > > > > I disagree because the defense/offense balance favors the defenders often. Has nothing to do with skill (we really talking about skill when discussing siege?) and everything to do with tactivators and plenty of supply. Even better for the defenders when they have a map queue available to zone in with an emergency waypoint after delaying the 25 for a long time. Remember, arrow carts' AoE target cap is 50, larger than the 25. > > You are assuming that people are stupid enough to sit in ac long enough for ac to kill them. And your example is not stopping a 25 zerg, your given example is delaying a 25 zerg, that is vast different. 5 person can never stop a 25 zerg. The technical usage of words need to be concise and correct, otherwise, the arguments will be just moot. > > A lot of people reasonings of nerfing ac is because they hate a blob hugging towers or keep with sieges. Of course, there also other people with hidden agenda of nerfing ac because they want a easy ktrain like eotm. Don't pretend there is a vast difference with word usage. There is no difference between a zerg being delayed long enough until they quit from some constraint (i.e. map queue, time, supply, boredom) and a zerg being "stopped". The end result is the same. There is no skill involved in that, only "how much supply we got?". It isn't a hidden agenda to point out an imbalance between offense/defense. Tactivators and things like fortified gates buffed defense but what did offense get? Charr car? So I don't blame people when they request nerfing AC damage or increasing the damage on walls from trebuchets. I won't ignore either how the defensive playstyle has become one of the more efficient ways to win a match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MUDse.7623 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618" said: > well, it would help a lot if line of sight would be revised. > > Especially for eles. And maybe revert the meteor shower nerf on hitting siege. > > > At the moment, as an ele defender, you have to stand on the very outer lip of a wall to do ANYTHING. > > Good thing the attackers can either pull you down or the scourges, who dont even need to stop, spam you to death. > > So, what does a smart defender do? Use the arrow card. Anything else is suicide. > > So, if you want to nerf ACs. Fine. But then make defending easier. It is stupid that a defender can see the enemy but not hit them, because of some tiny ledge, but at the same time is eaten alive by scourge aoe spam. if you remove line of sight restriction for eles or change the wall so it doesnt block line of sight anymore, then attackers can kill you behind the wall easily so you cant even get close to it. a minimum distance for catapults would help you more, for example the boulder has to fly at least 80% of the distance when you just tap the skill 2 on even terrain, hitting a wall before that will result in 0 dmg. then you have to build the catapults on a distance. with catapults on a distance. you are still not safe from their range spiking you on the wall then. but if they do that, they are not at their catapult wich can be taken out by someone else in that time. through gates you can already hit with AoE from range while LoS is blocked so you are pretty safe doing it and dont need to get on top of the gate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"MUDse.7623" said: > a minimum distance for catapults would help you more, for example the boulder has to fly at least 80% of the distance when you just tap the skill 2 on even terrain, hitting a wall before that will result in 0 dmg. then you have to build the catapults on a distance. with catapults on a distance. you are still not safe from their range spiking you on the wall then. but if they do that, they are not at their catapult wich can be taken out by someone else in that time. through gates you can already hit with AoE from range while LoS is blocked so you are pretty safe doing it and dont need to get on top of the gate. How do you envision sieging this western inner breakable wall with a minimum distance catapult? Or perhaps you know of a trebuchet placement that can reach it? Maybe a small havoc team can sneak some omega golems back there?  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MUDse.7623 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > @"MUDse.7623" said: > > a minimum distance for catapults would help you more, for example the boulder has to fly at least 80% of the distance when you just tap the skill 2 on even terrain, hitting a wall before that will result in 0 dmg. then you have to build the catapults on a distance. with catapults on a distance. you are still not safe from their range spiking you on the wall then. but if they do that, they are not at their catapult wich can be taken out by someone else in that time. through gates you can already hit with AoE from range while LoS is blocked so you are pretty safe doing it and dont need to get on top of the gate. > > How do you envision sieging this western inner breakable wall with a minimum distance catapult? Or perhaps you know of a trebuchet placement that can reach it? >  > treb can reach it easily by shooting over the other walls from south outer gate for example. catapult could really be an issue there, not sure if they can hit above the wall aswell and queue on our map with bay :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts