nerf siege

CGPsaint

TheMightyRevan wrote: »

CGPsaint wrote: »

Siege is a core component of AvA gameplay, whether it be sieging a keep, defending a keep, or used in the open field to attack /defend. There is already a telegraph showing where the siege attack will hit so you can avoid/dodge the initial hit, and if you do get hit, you do have the option of healing. Not sure where the issue lies.

for the 10th time, siege isnt a problem on its own, it becomes one when you get sieged while already having 10 people on you. Saying you can easily just dodge/avoid or heal, makes it clear that you dont seem to get the point. Please if you dont know what youre talking about, just dont reply to a thread.

Also good luck trying to heal when you get the meatbag healing debuff.

It sounds like the real issue is that you're already fighting 10 enemies AND are within range of enemy siege.

nuttytom

VaranisArano wrote: »

nuttytom wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

nuttytom wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Cyrodiil is an AvAvA zone that's primarily about objective control. That's how the points are alloted. That's how transport around the map is controlled. That's how the majority of AP is made. Its why the tower-runners know they can get a steady stream of fights from sitting on a resource in the firat place. "Skill" is a secondary objective by far. Objective control, regardless of "skill" is what Cyrodiil is designed for.

Players are allowed to use the tools in their arsenal to deal with enemies on their objectives.

Siege is frankly excellent for dealing with the sort of player who captures a resource to draw out fights and then proceeds to run rings around the tower. We all know what happens if you get baited into engaging them on their own terms. So much smarter and faster to just drop down a siege AOE, blanket the structure in damage, and make them either run away or come out to face you head on.

Siege is less useful in an open field fight unless the enemy is coming to you. I used to see this plenty on the long fields from BRK to Sej or Sej to the bridge. First, open fields have a lot of room to manuever. Second, most siege either gets overrun or abandoned pretty quickly as the fight moves out of range. It's not super useful unless your back is to the objective...and the enemy is silly enough to press into a siege defended position. If the enemy made us chase them instead, that siege had to get packed up or lost. Yeah, it can be repositioned, but it's also the responsibility of the attacker to pick their battles rather than expect the defenders to work without their full arsenal, you know?

And finally, if you can't kill the player who's using a siege weapon, that's not a problem that will be fixed by nerfing siege weapons.

Im not saying that siege shouldnt be used at all, im saying the damage of siege vs players is way too overtuned as i have shown in that screenshot above. Dont you want cyrodiil to be a fun environment to play in? How is standing outside a tower shooting siege for 20 mins any fun at all? Yes of course cyrodiil is objective based, but every pvp game should have some degree of skill and room for players to improve their own skills and gameplay, siege makes it so you dont even have to try to learn how to fight properly, you can just in a zerg and shoot at small groups with a coldfire ballista. Really fun and engaging gameplay btw. And for your last point, did you know people can literally build to never die and tank damage, but also place siege and deal 30k+ damage to players, ive literally seen it with my own eyes. You are yet another person that clearly does not experience the same pvp as a lot of us do, so you have no real time experience with the issues presented in this thread.

Since I played during the Summerset Siege Buffs, which were way, way more overturned than siege is now AND Sloads procced from siege, I'm not easily impressed. Using siege weapons in every type of fight is by no means a new tactic. As for your screenshot of a Coldharbor Ballista? Of course it hits like a truck. Its supposed to.

Overall, your contention seems to me to be that siege should be nerfed because:

• Siege is a crutch for players who naturally couldn't kill you otherwise.
• Siege should only be used in fights where you approve and where it's not a substitute for what you consider skilled gameplay.
• Siege is uncounterable because you are unable to kill the players using it.

Counterpoints:

• If you're dying to siege as a skilled player, you are surely skilled enough to adapt your gameplay/build to avoid, purge, counter, or survive the siege damage however you choose. Or should you choose not to, accept the consequences of your choice.
• Siege is appropriate to use anywhere in Cyrodiil and you really don't get to dictate what the enemy brings to a fight. A skilled player should be prepared for anything, including siege weapons, and pick their battles and retreats wisely.
• Your inability to kill the tanky/undying players using siege weapons will not be fixed by nerfing the siege weapon they're using.

Cyrodiil isn't a skills exhibition. Its an AvAvA zone designed around large groups and objective control. Siege weapons (and zergs) fit right in with that vision. Promoting skilled fights is more of a Deathmatch or Dueling thing.

And personally, I'd suggest that if your current skills, build, and tactics can't cope with players using siege weapons, you probably need to adapt anyways or at least pick your battles, whether or not ZOS listens to your plea.

Dude your counterpoints literally arent true at all. How are you supposed to adapt to getting shot at by multiple sieges by a zerg of 20+ players (which btw all tick for 7k+ a second).

From everything you have said its just extremely clear that you have never experienced what i am actually talking about in this thread.

I have no problem killing players, but when my 4 man group (for example) is getting shot by multiple siege weapons (coldfire, fire ballista, meatbag etc) from 20+ people standing behind their zerg, then are we actually supposed to do in this situation. again, the fact that you just say to "adapt" speaks volumes to what kind of pvp you experience compared to me.

After every fight vs a zerg we can check our combat metrics addon and see that siege is the highest damage received by extreme amounts, way way more than any actual skill used by players. I honestly believe you must be one of the players that im talking about, the ones that just place siege when theyre inside a zerg.

ANother is the fact that meatbags apply defile to you which completely destroys you healing. How is that fair when you are vs 20+ players? The siege simply puts way too much pressure on you when you are already massively outnumbered.

You were right about one thing tho, siege definitely is a massive crutch for players.

I believe I mentioned that picking your battles is part of adapting, yeah? A group of four should not expect to win against a group of twenty, and especially not against a zerg backed up by even more players using siege.

Yet you expect ZOS to nerf siege so your 4-man group can win?

Okay. You do you.

By that standard, Cyrodiil will never be fair. It's not designed for 1v10s, no siege. It's not designed for 4 v 20s, no siege. It's not designed for a 4-man group to turtle up under the sort of siege that challenges ball groups. If you play outnumbered in an AvAvA zone, it's kinda pointless to complain that it's not fair, IMO.


Yes, meatbags apply defile. That's intentional, and it's one of the major counters to ball groups who have dedicated healers and stacked heals from their group members. ZOS added it to Cyrodiil back when we had 24-man ball groups and it's remained effective at its purpose now that those groups are down to 12.

I'll assume your group is unable to move out of the AOE and either unable or unwilling to purge the effect. So I'm unsurprised that meatbags hit your 4-man group like a truck, but the benefits that meatbags bring as counters to the much stronger ball groups mean that they shouldn't be nerfed.


Frankly, it sounds like your ideal nerf would be one that decreased siege damage in proportion to your group size.

You should actually just try and fight outnumbered for once, because its clear you dont, and then you will see what im talking about.

And no, my ideal nerf would be to decrease siege damage vs players as a whole.

Its really not about "picking fights" because wherever you go you will just run into a zerg (which are basically the only fun fights in cyro) who will eventually just place 10+ sieges on you and kill you like that, literally no player skill involved.

Again, you arent seeing what im talking about actually happen because you most likely play in a zerg yourself and have people sieging your enemies for you or even do it yourself.

CGPsaint

nuttytom wrote: »

Its really not about "picking fights" because wherever you go you will just run into a zerg (which are basically the only fun fights in cyro) who will eventually just place 10+ sieges on you and kill you like that, literally no player skill involved.

Literally the only time that I see allies placing siege outside of attacking/defending keeps/outposts is when groups of enemies insist on kiting around resource towers or in-and-out of buildings near resources. I very rarely see anyone just tossing down siege randomly in open fields in the middle of fights.

VaranisArano

nuttytom wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

nuttytom wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

nuttytom wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Cyrodiil is an AvAvA zone that's primarily about objective control. That's how the points are alloted. That's how transport around the map is controlled. That's how the majority of AP is made. Its why the tower-runners know they can get a steady stream of fights from sitting on a resource in the firat place. "Skill" is a secondary objective by far. Objective control, regardless of "skill" is what Cyrodiil is designed for.

Players are allowed to use the tools in their arsenal to deal with enemies on their objectives.

Siege is frankly excellent for dealing with the sort of player who captures a resource to draw out fights and then proceeds to run rings around the tower. We all know what happens if you get baited into engaging them on their own terms. So much smarter and faster to just drop down a siege AOE, blanket the structure in damage, and make them either run away or come out to face you head on.

Siege is less useful in an open field fight unless the enemy is coming to you. I used to see this plenty on the long fields from BRK to Sej or Sej to the bridge. First, open fields have a lot of room to manuever. Second, most siege either gets overrun or abandoned pretty quickly as the fight moves out of range. It's not super useful unless your back is to the objective...and the enemy is silly enough to press into a siege defended position. If the enemy made us chase them instead, that siege had to get packed up or lost. Yeah, it can be repositioned, but it's also the responsibility of the attacker to pick their battles rather than expect the defenders to work without their full arsenal, you know?

And finally, if you can't kill the player who's using a siege weapon, that's not a problem that will be fixed by nerfing siege weapons.

Im not saying that siege shouldnt be used at all, im saying the damage of siege vs players is way too overtuned as i have shown in that screenshot above. Dont you want cyrodiil to be a fun environment to play in? How is standing outside a tower shooting siege for 20 mins any fun at all? Yes of course cyrodiil is objective based, but every pvp game should have some degree of skill and room for players to improve their own skills and gameplay, siege makes it so you dont even have to try to learn how to fight properly, you can just in a zerg and shoot at small groups with a coldfire ballista. Really fun and engaging gameplay btw. And for your last point, did you know people can literally build to never die and tank damage, but also place siege and deal 30k+ damage to players, ive literally seen it with my own eyes. You are yet another person that clearly does not experience the same pvp as a lot of us do, so you have no real time experience with the issues presented in this thread.

Since I played during the Summerset Siege Buffs, which were way, way more overturned than siege is now AND Sloads procced from siege, I'm not easily impressed. Using siege weapons in every type of fight is by no means a new tactic. As for your screenshot of a Coldharbor Ballista? Of course it hits like a truck. Its supposed to.

Overall, your contention seems to me to be that siege should be nerfed because:

• Siege is a crutch for players who naturally couldn't kill you otherwise.
• Siege should only be used in fights where you approve and where it's not a substitute for what you consider skilled gameplay.
• Siege is uncounterable because you are unable to kill the players using it.

Counterpoints:

• If you're dying to siege as a skilled player, you are surely skilled enough to adapt your gameplay/build to avoid, purge, counter, or survive the siege damage however you choose. Or should you choose not to, accept the consequences of your choice.
• Siege is appropriate to use anywhere in Cyrodiil and you really don't get to dictate what the enemy brings to a fight. A skilled player should be prepared for anything, including siege weapons, and pick their battles and retreats wisely.
• Your inability to kill the tanky/undying players using siege weapons will not be fixed by nerfing the siege weapon they're using.

Cyrodiil isn't a skills exhibition. Its an AvAvA zone designed around large groups and objective control. Siege weapons (and zergs) fit right in with that vision. Promoting skilled fights is more of a Deathmatch or Dueling thing.

And personally, I'd suggest that if your current skills, build, and tactics can't cope with players using siege weapons, you probably need to adapt anyways or at least pick your battles, whether or not ZOS listens to your plea.

Dude your counterpoints literally arent true at all. How are you supposed to adapt to getting shot at by multiple sieges by a zerg of 20+ players (which btw all tick for 7k+ a second).

From everything you have said its just extremely clear that you have never experienced what i am actually talking about in this thread.

I have no problem killing players, but when my 4 man group (for example) is getting shot by multiple siege weapons (coldfire, fire ballista, meatbag etc) from 20+ people standing behind their zerg, then are we actually supposed to do in this situation. again, the fact that you just say to "adapt" speaks volumes to what kind of pvp you experience compared to me.

After every fight vs a zerg we can check our combat metrics addon and see that siege is the highest damage received by extreme amounts, way way more than any actual skill used by players. I honestly believe you must be one of the players that im talking about, the ones that just place siege when theyre inside a zerg.

ANother is the fact that meatbags apply defile to you which completely destroys you healing. How is that fair when you are vs 20+ players? The siege simply puts way too much pressure on you when you are already massively outnumbered.

You were right about one thing tho, siege definitely is a massive crutch for players.

I believe I mentioned that picking your battles is part of adapting, yeah? A group of four should not expect to win against a group of twenty, and especially not against a zerg backed up by even more players using siege.

Yet you expect ZOS to nerf siege so your 4-man group can win?

Okay. You do you.

By that standard, Cyrodiil will never be fair. It's not designed for 1v10s, no siege. It's not designed for 4 v 20s, no siege. It's not designed for a 4-man group to turtle up under the sort of siege that challenges ball groups. If you play outnumbered in an AvAvA zone, it's kinda pointless to complain that it's not fair, IMO.


Yes, meatbags apply defile. That's intentional, and it's one of the major counters to ball groups who have dedicated healers and stacked heals from their group members. ZOS added it to Cyrodiil back when we had 24-man ball groups and it's remained effective at its purpose now that those groups are down to 12.

I'll assume your group is unable to move out of the AOE and either unable or unwilling to purge the effect. So I'm unsurprised that meatbags hit your 4-man group like a truck, but the benefits that meatbags bring as counters to the much stronger ball groups mean that they shouldn't be nerfed.


Frankly, it sounds like your ideal nerf would be one that decreased siege damage in proportion to your group size.

You should actually just try and fight outnumbered for once, because its clear you dont, and then you will see what im talking about.

And no, my ideal nerf would be to decrease siege damage vs players as a whole.

Its really not about "picking fights" because wherever you go you will just run into a zerg (which are basically the only fun fights in cyro) who will eventually just place 10+ sieges on you and kill you like that, literally no player skill involved.

Again, you arent seeing what im talking about actually happen because you most likely play in a zerg yourself and have people sieging your enemies for you or even do it yourself.

If you reduce siege damage to players as a whole, you nerf one of the few methods that PUGs have to fight ball groups.

katanagirl1

nuttytom wrote: »

should this happen when already fighting vs heavily outnumbered?

(plenty more screens for you if you need btw)

Can’t see the name of the player that hit you with the siege, but it looks like the same guy each time. Maybe get out of the aoe before it kills you, lol.

Turtle_Bot

I play almost exclusively small scale/solo (and have for roughly 2 years now with a max group size no bigger than 5 or 6, usually 3-4 or solo) and imo sieges are fine as they are.

Are they annoying? Yes.

Is it frustrating to get sieged down when fighting against zergs? Also yes.

Does it mean I want them nerfed? Hard No!

Sieges are the only thing currently in the game that allows pug groups and zergs to have a shot at killing coordinated ball groups (which even then a keeps worth of sieges are needed because of the ridiculous mobility and CC immunity on every class and that healing is allowed to stack far too much currently).

By nerfing siege damage against players, you make ball groups literally uncounterable outside of another more optimised and better coordinated ball group and this would make cyrodiil even worse to play in than it currently is.

The best thing they can do for sieges is to fix performance so that the AoE's and damage from sieges isn't invisible which brings back counter play to siege fire.

The_Titan_Tim

Siege wouldn’t be anywhere near the problem they are, if one person couldn’t lay down 10 of them at once, and run back and forth manning every single one.

If you want to talk about Siege nerfs, I would attack it from that angle, as Siege are a game-changer when you’ve got even one, they become a game-breaker when you’ve got one guy repeatedly hitting you with multiple, especially oils.

biminirwb17_ESO

Purge the Coldfire DOT and you would not die so readily, it looks like your death recap showed you were hit by 2 coldfire shots and died to the damage over time. (the two 3x shows the dot ticks).

Buff siege would be my suggestion - plus a siege weapon than does oblivion damage.

Jaraal

biminirwb17_ESO wrote: »

Purge the Coldfire DOT and you would not die so readily, it looks like your death recap showed you were hit by 2 coldfire shots and died to the damage over time. (the two 3x shows the dot ticks).

Buff siege would be my suggestion - plus a siege weapon than does oblivion damage.

Cold stone actually does Oblivion damage. Never gets resisted like cold fire. No DOT though, and slow loading. But it can one shot for 26k.

Love setting it up inside a keep and using constrained view so I can see over the wall but the enemies can't. Then target a squishy on a cheap fire ballista that can't be bothered to use a siege shield, let 'er rip, and hear that satisfying death click when it hits.

Jaraal

nuttytom wrote: »

I always wonder when I'm playing what a "Cold Harbor" siege weapon is. It's obviously not from the Coldharbour plane of Oblivion. Maybe somebody just got a cold deal at Harbor Freight, or perhaps it was imported from Cold Harbor, Virginia?

Wolfshade

Jaraal wrote: »

Cold stone actually does Oblivion damage. Never gets resisted like cold fire.

Are you sure about that? Could that be the reason there are no red circles to see if the guys die instantly?

tonyblack

TheMightyRevan wrote: »

CGPsaint wrote: »

Siege is a core component of AvA gameplay, whether it be sieging a keep, defending a keep, or used in the open field to attack /defend. There is already a telegraph showing where the siege attack will hit so you can avoid/dodge the initial hit, and if you do get hit, you do have the option of healing. Not sure where the issue lies.

for the 10th time, siege isnt a problem on its own, it becomes one when you get sieged while already having 10 people on you. Saying you can easily just dodge/avoid or heal, makes it clear that you dont seem to get the point. Please if you dont know what youre talking about, just dont reply to a thread.

Also good luck trying to heal when you get the meatbag healing debuff.

The problem here isn’t the fact that one of those 10 players put siege just to kill one, but the fact that you can achieve that level of survivability where it’s possible to tank that many while being able to kill any inexperienced players within seconds in tight spaces without much of counterplay. No game with good balancing should enable and cater to such playstyle. Outnumbered should die and there should be more counters against tank metas.

RedTalon

Been nerfed enough, you all have it easy now am days during siege defense we use to be able to line up oil pots right on the floor and dump them all at once has a mob of players ran in and all died at once. not to mention the otyher fun things.

Concrete

My unkillable group died to siege. NERF SIEGE!!!!

Major_Soulless

Siege is fine as it is. Unless you’re very squish no siege should be a 1 tap kill you can heal through it pretty easily really just be mindful of plaguebreak of course lol.

Unless as a compromise trebuchets are nerfed and the actual siege you used to take keeps are left as they are otherwise the amount of time to take a keep would double and that just helps the aforementioned troll tanks

Elendir2am

Posts made by the OP in this thread are arguments against "nerf siege" to me.

GreatGildersleeve

nuttytom wrote: »

should this happen when already fighting vs heavily outnumbered?

(plenty more screens for you if you need btw)

Yes. Yes it should.

I only solo in Cyro and never bother with open field siege. It’s just silly since I’ll get zerged in under a second so why waste the AP? On keeps etc. this is a viable play style and anyone saying otherwise should likely turn their combat cues on so they can see those big red circles under their feet. 😉

Xandreia_

nuttytom wrote: »

Luke_Flamesword wrote: »

Just play battlegrounds or Imperial City, lol Cyrodiil is not a deathmatch but it's war game all about keeps, sieges, etc. I also don't understand problem - sieges have cooldowns and very low mobility with long animations of puting them on/off. They are mostly used only from safe position, because on open field you don't have big chances with siege, when enemy player is on you with all skills...

I think you missed the point here, that is, siege IS being used open field, in towers, and even deployed literally on top of where players are fighting due to the fact these players who are using the siege are extremely tanky or have the safety of extreme numbers and healers on their side again defeating the purpose of using any meaningful skills or builds as you said. There is simply nothing said player can do but watch as a weapon is set up to kill them in a moment's notice. No skills will save them from this. There is simply no counter.

As for the Battlegrounds IC suggestion, it does nothing to address the fact that cyrodiil is straying from its, what I feel, core purpose. Again there is no calls for nerfing siege damage to keep as these fights are enjoyable but more what should the true purpose of siege be? To shoot down individual players with no requirement of skill, knowledge of the game and a safe bypass of PvP or their actual function of creating an environment of "epic scale" keep fights?

I have been saying this on here for years and get flamed evey single time, being a solo/small scale player having 6 cold fires/ meat bags placed on you while getting ult dumped isn't fun, I wish you couldn't place siege on less than 4 players but that's never gonna happen lol

Xandreia_

VaranisArano wrote: »

nuttytom wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

nuttytom wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Cyrodiil is an AvAvA zone that's primarily about objective control. That's how the points are alloted. That's how transport around the map is controlled. That's how the majority of AP is made. Its why the tower-runners know they can get a steady stream of fights from sitting on a resource in the firat place. "Skill" is a secondary objective by far. Objective control, regardless of "skill" is what Cyrodiil is designed for.

Players are allowed to use the tools in their arsenal to deal with enemies on their objectives.

Siege is frankly excellent for dealing with the sort of player who captures a resource to draw out fights and then proceeds to run rings around the tower. We all know what happens if you get baited into engaging them on their own terms. So much smarter and faster to just drop down a siege AOE, blanket the structure in damage, and make them either run away or come out to face you head on.

Siege is less useful in an open field fight unless the enemy is coming to you. I used to see this plenty on the long fields from BRK to Sej or Sej to the bridge. First, open fields have a lot of room to manuever. Second, most siege either gets overrun or abandoned pretty quickly as the fight moves out of range. It's not super useful unless your back is to the objective...and the enemy is silly enough to press into a siege defended position. If the enemy made us chase them instead, that siege had to get packed up or lost. Yeah, it can be repositioned, but it's also the responsibility of the attacker to pick their battles rather than expect the defenders to work without their full arsenal, you know?

And finally, if you can't kill the player who's using a siege weapon, that's not a problem that will be fixed by nerfing siege weapons.

Im not saying that siege shouldnt be used at all, im saying the damage of siege vs players is way too overtuned as i have shown in that screenshot above. Dont you want cyrodiil to be a fun environment to play in? How is standing outside a tower shooting siege for 20 mins any fun at all? Yes of course cyrodiil is objective based, but every pvp game should have some degree of skill and room for players to improve their own skills and gameplay, siege makes it so you dont even have to try to learn how to fight properly, you can just in a zerg and shoot at small groups with a coldfire ballista. Really fun and engaging gameplay btw. And for your last point, did you know people can literally build to never die and tank damage, but also place siege and deal 30k+ damage to players, ive literally seen it with my own eyes. You are yet another person that clearly does not experience the same pvp as a lot of us do, so you have no real time experience with the issues presented in this thread.

Since I played during the Summerset Siege Buffs, which were way, way more overturned than siege is now AND Sloads procced from siege, I'm not easily impressed. Using siege weapons in every type of fight is by no means a new tactic. As for your screenshot of a Coldharbor Ballista? Of course it hits like a truck. Its supposed to.

Overall, your contention seems to me to be that siege should be nerfed because:

• Siege is a crutch for players who naturally couldn't kill you otherwise.
• Siege should only be used in fights where you approve and where it's not a substitute for what you consider skilled gameplay.
• Siege is uncounterable because you are unable to kill the players using it.

Counterpoints:

• If you're dying to siege as a skilled player, you are surely skilled enough to adapt your gameplay/build to avoid, purge, counter, or survive the siege damage however you choose. Or should you choose not to, accept the consequences of your choice.
• Siege is appropriate to use anywhere in Cyrodiil and you really don't get to dictate what the enemy brings to a fight. A skilled player should be prepared for anything, including siege weapons, and pick their battles and retreats wisely.
• Your inability to kill the tanky/undying players using siege weapons will not be fixed by nerfing the siege weapon they're using.

Cyrodiil isn't a skills exhibition. Its an AvAvA zone designed around large groups and objective control. Siege weapons (and zergs) fit right in with that vision. Promoting skilled fights is more of a Deathmatch or Dueling thing.

And personally, I'd suggest that if your current skills, build, and tactics can't cope with players using siege weapons, you probably need to adapt anyways or at least pick your battles, whether or not ZOS listens to your plea.

Dude your counterpoints literally arent true at all. How are you supposed to adapt to getting shot at by multiple sieges by a zerg of 20+ players (which btw all tick for 7k+ a second).

From everything you have said its just extremely clear that you have never experienced what i am actually talking about in this thread.

I have no problem killing players, but when my 4 man group (for example) is getting shot by multiple siege weapons (coldfire, fire ballista, meatbag etc) from 20+ people standing behind their zerg, then are we actually supposed to do in this situation. again, the fact that you just say to "adapt" speaks volumes to what kind of pvp you experience compared to me.

After every fight vs a zerg we can check our combat metrics addon and see that siege is the highest damage received by extreme amounts, way way more than any actual skill used by players. I honestly believe you must be one of the players that im talking about, the ones that just place siege when theyre inside a zerg.

ANother is the fact that meatbags apply defile to you which completely destroys you healing. How is that fair when you are vs 20+ players? The siege simply puts way too much pressure on you when you are already massively outnumbered.

You were right about one thing tho, siege definitely is a massive crutch for players.

I believe I mentioned that picking your battles is part of adapting, yeah? A group of four should not expect to win against a group of twenty, and especially not against a zerg backed up by even more players using siege.

The average skill level of an entire zerg is usually less than a 4 man group and it IS possible to win even with them sieging you the problem is that those people will never get better and resort to running cold fires combined with elfbane to win. A few years ago solo and small scale was fun, now the game is fully aimed at the casual player and vets are being punished for being decent. If you can't see an issue in this then you just might be part of it.

TheMightyRevan

tonyblack wrote: »

TheMightyRevan wrote: »

CGPsaint wrote: »

Siege is a core component of AvA gameplay, whether it be sieging a keep, defending a keep, or used in the open field to attack /defend. There is already a telegraph showing where the siege attack will hit so you can avoid/dodge the initial hit, and if you do get hit, you do have the option of healing. Not sure where the issue lies.

for the 10th time, siege isnt a problem on its own, it becomes one when you get sieged while already having 10 people on you. Saying you can easily just dodge/avoid or heal, makes it clear that you dont seem to get the point. Please if you dont know what youre talking about, just dont reply to a thread.

Also good luck trying to heal when you get the meatbag healing debuff.

The problem here isn’t the fact that one of those 10 players put siege just to kill one, but the fact that you can achieve that level of survivability where it’s possible to tank that many while being able to kill any inexperienced players within seconds in tight spaces without much of counterplay. No game with good balancing should enable and cater to such playstyle. Outnumbered should die and there should be more counters against tank metas.

So basically you want eso to be a game with no personal skill involved... ok. Go tell that to any score pushing trial group. Why even bother playing an online multiplayer game then.

TheMightyRevan

Most of the people in this thread dont seem to get the point. We dont want siege to disappear or to get a huge nerf. It needs to be balanced with skills and sets. By no means should it be more effective for a 4 man group, to whip out a coldfire ballista in the middle of a fight with a zerg, than to use actual skills and sets. And that is literally the case right now.

Xandreia_

TheMightyRevan wrote: »

Most of the people in this thread dont seem to get the point. We dont want siege to disappear or to get a huge nerf. It needs to be balanced with skills and sets. By no means should it be more effective for a 4 man group, to whip out a coldfire ballista in the middle of a fight with a zerg, than to use actual skills and sets. And that is literally the case right now.

A million times this!

emilyhyoyeon

Lol

Elendir2am

TheMightyRevan wrote: »

Most of the people in this thread dont seem to get the point. We dont want siege to disappear or to get a huge nerf. It needs to be balanced with skills and sets. By no means should it be more effective for a 4 man group, to whip out a coldfire ballista in the middle of a fight with a zerg, than to use actual skills and sets. And that is literally the case right now.

I don't see any difference between well placed meatball hit they use and well timed plaguebreak you use. Both need some skill.

Why should your skill be only one, which means something. Maby you should stop to look at them like at some lesser being, which are there for your AP and fun only.

blktauna

Concrete wrote: »

My unkillable group died to siege. NERF SIEGE!!!!

^^^ this

wolfie1.0.

I would be OK with nerfing seige if they did one of two things:

Removed the telegraph indicating where they targeted

Or

Converted all of the damage to be oblivion damage.

tonyblack

TheMightyRevan wrote: »

tonyblack wrote: »

TheMightyRevan wrote: »

CGPsaint wrote: »

Siege is a core component of AvA gameplay, whether it be sieging a keep, defending a keep, or used in the open field to attack /defend. There is already a telegraph showing where the siege attack will hit so you can avoid/dodge the initial hit, and if you do get hit, you do have the option of healing. Not sure where the issue lies.

for the 10th time, siege isnt a problem on its own, it becomes one when you get sieged while already having 10 people on you. Saying you can easily just dodge/avoid or heal, makes it clear that you dont seem to get the point. Please if you dont know what youre talking about, just dont reply to a thread.

Also good luck trying to heal when you get the meatbag healing debuff.

The problem here isn’t the fact that one of those 10 players put siege just to kill one, but the fact that you can achieve that level of survivability where it’s possible to tank that many while being able to kill any inexperienced players within seconds in tight spaces without much of counterplay. No game with good balancing should enable and cater to such playstyle. Outnumbered should die and there should be more counters against tank metas.

So basically you want eso to be a game with no personal skill involved... ok. Go tell that to any score pushing trial group. Why even bother playing an online multiplayer game then.

But those examples aren’t equal. High end pve content tuned with specific group size, composition and skill level in mind. To relate to the OP example it’s more akin of complaint “why can’t i solo cloudrest while those noobs zerg it in full pug group with ease”.

Naftal

This thread is ridiculous. I disagree with every suggested nerf to sieges and wonder how anyone ever got to the point they'd complain about siege damage on forums.

Holycannoli

Siege is one of the more reliable ways to deal with the out of control healing and the tank meta.

The only issue I have with it is deploying more than one at a time per person. It should be limited to one per person. Other than that I think it's working fine.

VaranisArano

Here's the real source of my confusion with this request: how long has it been since ZOS actually increased siege damage?

I know they've adjusted it for CP over the years, but I don't think that's a recent change unless I've missed something major in the patch notes. Feel free to correct me if I have.

Moreover, the last time ZOS nerfed siege after Summerset, it was because there were complaints across the board from all sorts of playstyles. Solo and smallscale players. Zerging players. PUGs. Guilds. It was routine for zergs of players to open multiple breaches while attacking keeps and still lose after a lengthy fight because defending siege was so powerful. ZoS didn't want that and reverted the buffs.


That this tells me is that siege damage likely isn't overtuned for Cyrodiil as a whole. It seems to me instead that siege damage is taking the blame for a whole host of behaviors and tactics that some players don't like.

"Someone's firing siege at solo players"
"Someone's firing siege at small groups"
"Someone's using siege while in a zerg"
"Someone's using siege instead of their skills"
"Someone's got a tanky build and is using siege"
"Someone's wearing Elfbane and firing coldfire siege "

^That's not a problem with siege damage. Its just complaining "Someone's playing the game in ways I don't approve of."

Cyrodiil is a big AvAvA war zone that's open to everyone from solo to zergs, casual to hard-core, unskilled newbies to skilled vets. Good luck trying to dictate how other people should play.