Turtle_Bot wrote: »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.
Its so many almost impossible to kill troll tanks in the game that you need to use artillery to kill them.
I say we need better anti tank weapons, NLAW pls
Or an oblivion fire lancer is more realistic.
Troll tanks are a separate issue that yes does need addressing. Are you saying that siege is the answer for this? Should a low level inexperience player who perhaps is trying to figure out how best to use his skills be shown that simply setting up a ballista is better? You also fail to account for the fact that such tanks are using the weapons themselves so they are able to kill. Are you happy for that scenario too?
It has an indicated red circle . Just move away and boom, you get 0 damage from siege.
Also my brother in Talos, if you get hit by a stone trebuchet I think you should die.
It has an indicated red circle . Just move away and boom, you get 0 damage from siege.
Also my brother in Talos, if you get hit by a stone trebuchet I think you should die.
The whole "move out of the red circle" thing is fine until you are being root spammed until you can't break out and end up just on your knees. Until you have been in the situation OP is saying you have absolutely no idea of what the issue is. Being chased around a tower by a group isn't the problem, having meatbags, trebs and ballistas pointed at you while kiting a full group or more IS the problem. We want to fight outnumbered, we don't want to have more siege than people on us and having more siege than the people we are running with is ridiculous, it's quite obvious the forums are filled with more casuals that don't understand 1vx or small scale so any opposition to siege is instantly jumped upon with a casual mindset and hatred of small scale. Turns out "play as you want" only means "play like a casual and zerg solos"
edward_frigidhands wrote: »Its so many almost impossible to kill troll tanks in the game that you need to use artillery to kill them.
I say we need better anti tank weapons, NLAW pls
Or an oblivion fire lancer is more realistic.
Troll tanks are a separate issue that yes does need addressing. Are you saying that siege is the answer for this? Should a low level inexperience player who perhaps is trying to figure out how best to use his skills be shown that simply setting up a ballista is better? You also fail to account for the fact that such tanks are using the weapons themselves so they are able to kill. Are you happy for that scenario too?
There is no such thing as "troll tanks".
HailstoSithis wrote: »Setting up a siege weapon could have a cast/assembly-time.
It would make sense that a giant siege weapon would take time to setup anyways. Then again, carrying them in our pockets doesn't make any sense at all except for the fact this is a fantasy-MMORPG.
In order to address/counter this sort of gameplay in Cyrodiil though, I think a cast/assembly-time for siege weapons could help offset this trend.
What do you think @nuttytom?
should this happen when already fighting vs heavily outnumbered?
(plenty more screens for you if you need btw)
Turtle_Bot wrote: »HailstoSithis wrote: »Setting up a siege weapon could have a cast/assembly-time.
It would make sense that a giant siege weapon would take time to setup anyways. Then again, carrying them in our pockets doesn't make any sense at all except for the fact this is a fantasy-MMORPG.
In order to address/counter this sort of gameplay in Cyrodiil though, I think a cast/assembly-time for siege weapons could help offset this trend.
What do you think @nuttytom?
they already do, the sieges don't instantly place and allow you to fire, it takes about 5 seconds or more to set one up to then be allowed to fire it, it also takes considerable time to pack them up again as well (another 5+ seconds), all the time they are being set up or packed up, you can't do anything (can't even move) otherwise they don't place or pack up. The issue is that players complaining about them don't bother pressuring the siege placers (placing/packing up sieges can also be interrupted/stunned, same as using them too, which I do often) so using them out in the open is actually very risky against good players who will immediately focus you down with DoTs, AoEs or hit and run interruptions.
VaranisArano wrote: »It has an indicated red circle . Just move away and boom, you get 0 damage from siege.
Also my brother in Talos, if you get hit by a stone trebuchet I think you should die.
The whole "move out of the red circle" thing is fine until you are being root spammed until you can't break out and end up just on your knees. Until you have been in the situation OP is saying you have absolutely no idea of what the issue is. Being chased around a tower by a group isn't the problem, having meatbags, trebs and ballistas pointed at you while kiting a full group or more IS the problem. We want to fight outnumbered, we don't want to have more siege than people on us and having more siege than the people we are running with is ridiculous, it's quite obvious the forums are filled with more casuals that don't understand 1vx or small scale so any opposition to siege is instantly jumped upon with a casual mindset and hatred of small scale. Turns out "play as you want" only means "play like a casual and zerg solos"
I really don't understand the logic here, aside from "Siege means I lose to casuals. Please nerf it."
Here's how I see most of these encounters go down:
This tower-runner is running around the tower, trying to lure in a group to chase them. Because the tower-runner is built for this sort of fight, and does it very well. They are an excellent example of this type of outnumbered fighting, able to pick apart a chasing group and burst people who overextend. If the group is disorganized and chases, this tower runner will tear them apart one by one.
The group refuses to chase (their first smart move) and sets up siege instead (their second smart move) because no one is contractually obligated to fight a tower runner in a tower.
The tower runner is not built to withstand siege. The tower runner tries to dodge the siege circles, but it turns out that the group is using roots and CCs to stop the tower runner from running (their third smart move.)
Who got outplayed there?
Like, I can totally see why tower runners don't like siege. Once the siege comes out, that's a pretty sure bet that the enemy players haven't fallen for their trap. Moreover, the tower runner would have to leave the comfort zone of their tower and fight the group on their own ground to stop the siege. Siege utterly flips the terms of the engagement from a mano a mano fight of "skill" to a group performing group tactics properly.
It's an AvAvA zone. Individual skill sometimes trumps numbers, but Numbers + Group Tactics almost always trumps individual skill unless you are exceptionally good. And most tower runners are only exceptionally good at fighting disorganized groups who chase, not groups who wisely refuse to take the bait.
Edited: autocorrect ate some words.
HailstoSithis wrote: »Turtle_Bot wrote: »HailstoSithis wrote: »Setting up a siege weapon could have a cast/assembly-time.
It would make sense that a giant siege weapon would take time to setup anyways. Then again, carrying them in our pockets doesn't make any sense at all except for the fact this is a fantasy-MMORPG.
In order to address/counter this sort of gameplay in Cyrodiil though, I think a cast/assembly-time for siege weapons could help offset this trend.
What do you think @nuttytom?
they already do, the sieges don't instantly place and allow you to fire, it takes about 5 seconds or more to set one up to then be allowed to fire it, it also takes considerable time to pack them up again as well (another 5+ seconds), all the time they are being set up or packed up, you can't do anything (can't even move) otherwise they don't place or pack up. The issue is that players complaining about them don't bother pressuring the siege placers (placing/packing up sieges can also be interrupted/stunned, same as using them too, which I do often) so using them out in the open is actually very risky against good players who will immediately focus you down with DoTs, AoEs or hit and run interruptions.
Oh okay. It's been like 2+ years since I've played so that was lost on me. Well shoot, if this is already the case, I don't see the problem with siege anymore lol.
TheMightyRevan wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »It has an indicated red circle . Just move away and boom, you get 0 damage from siege.
Also my brother in Talos, if you get hit by a stone trebuchet I think you should die.
The whole "move out of the red circle" thing is fine until you are being root spammed until you can't break out and end up just on your knees. Until you have been in the situation OP is saying you have absolutely no idea of what the issue is. Being chased around a tower by a group isn't the problem, having meatbags, trebs and ballistas pointed at you while kiting a full group or more IS the problem. We want to fight outnumbered, we don't want to have more siege than people on us and having more siege than the people we are running with is ridiculous, it's quite obvious the forums are filled with more casuals that don't understand 1vx or small scale so any opposition to siege is instantly jumped upon with a casual mindset and hatred of small scale. Turns out "play as you want" only means "play like a casual and zerg solos"
I really don't understand the logic here, aside from "Siege means I lose to casuals. Please nerf it."
Here's how I see most of these encounters go down:
This tower-runner is running around the tower, trying to lure in a group to chase them. Because the tower-runner is built for this sort of fight, and does it very well. They are an excellent example of this type of outnumbered fighting, able to pick apart a chasing group and burst people who overextend. If the group is disorganized and chases, this tower runner will tear them apart one by one.
The group refuses to chase (their first smart move) and sets up siege instead (their second smart move) because no one is contractually obligated to fight a tower runner in a tower.
The tower runner is not built to withstand siege. The tower runner tries to dodge the siege circles, but it turns out that the group is using roots and CCs to stop the tower runner from running (their third smart move.)
Who got outplayed there?
Like, I can totally see why tower runners don't like siege. Once the siege comes out, that's a pretty sure bet that the enemy players haven't fallen for their trap. Moreover, the tower runner would have to leave the comfort zone of their tower and fight the group on their own ground to stop the siege. Siege utterly flips the terms of the engagement from a mano a mano fight of "skill" to a group performing group tactics properly.
It's an AvAvA zone. Individual skill sometimes trumps numbers, but Numbers + Group Tactics almost always trumps individual skill unless you are exceptionally good. And most tower runners are only exceptionally good at fighting disorganized groups who chase, not groups who wisely refuse to take the bait.
Edited: autocorrect ate some words.
Who was talking about towers. People put up sieges everywhere, not just in towers after failing to chase. Literally in a keep courtyard in your face. That's definetely ridicolous. Also Siege literally beats group tactics 90 % of the time. Like what game are you even playing.
@TheMightyRevan he's playing the same game as you, just at a higher level. Perhaps he didn't read the thread very thoroughly though because he assumed good players were complaining about taking siege in outnumbered situations.
Having followed the thread myself though, I can see it is more about bad players dying to other bad players.
Siege in a keep courtyard is not ridiculous. That's pretty much exactly where it should be. Get some healers on your team, stop playing a glass cannon, and learn how to Cyrodiil.
VaranisArano wrote: »TheMightyRevan wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »It has an indicated red circle . Just move away and boom, you get 0 damage from siege.
Also my brother in Talos, if you get hit by a stone trebuchet I think you should die.
The whole "move out of the red circle" thing is fine until you are being root spammed until you can't break out and end up just on your knees. Until you have been in the situation OP is saying you have absolutely no idea of what the issue is. Being chased around a tower by a group isn't the problem, having meatbags, trebs and ballistas pointed at you while kiting a full group or more IS the problem. We want to fight outnumbered, we don't want to have more siege than people on us and having more siege than the people we are running with is ridiculous, it's quite obvious the forums are filled with more casuals that don't understand 1vx or small scale so any opposition to siege is instantly jumped upon with a casual mindset and hatred of small scale. Turns out "play as you want" only means "play like a casual and zerg solos"
I really don't understand the logic here, aside from "Siege means I lose to casuals. Please nerf it."
Here's how I see most of these encounters go down:
This tower-runner is running around the tower, trying to lure in a group to chase them. Because the tower-runner is built for this sort of fight, and does it very well. They are an excellent example of this type of outnumbered fighting, able to pick apart a chasing group and burst people who overextend. If the group is disorganized and chases, this tower runner will tear them apart one by one.
The group refuses to chase (their first smart move) and sets up siege instead (their second smart move) because no one is contractually obligated to fight a tower runner in a tower.
The tower runner is not built to withstand siege. The tower runner tries to dodge the siege circles, but it turns out that the group is using roots and CCs to stop the tower runner from running (their third smart move.)
Who got outplayed there?
Like, I can totally see why tower runners don't like siege. Once the siege comes out, that's a pretty sure bet that the enemy players haven't fallen for their trap. Moreover, the tower runner would have to leave the comfort zone of their tower and fight the group on their own ground to stop the siege. Siege utterly flips the terms of the engagement from a mano a mano fight of "skill" to a group performing group tactics properly.
It's an AvAvA zone. Individual skill sometimes trumps numbers, but Numbers + Group Tactics almost always trumps individual skill unless you are exceptionally good. And most tower runners are only exceptionally good at fighting disorganized groups who chase, not groups who wisely refuse to take the bait.
Edited: autocorrect ate some words.
Who was talking about towers. People put up sieges everywhere, not just in towers after failing to chase. Literally in a keep courtyard in your face. That's definetely ridicolous. Also Siege literally beats group tactics 90 % of the time. Like what game are you even playing.
The OP first brought up towers as one example of a place where siege is used. And the person I was replying to was literally talking about being chased around a tower by a group + siege...so that who's talking about towers.
Question for you: What's ridiculous about players using siege weapons to defend their own keep?
TheMightyRevan wrote: »its ridicolous when siege is a better response for combat in general, than skills and sets. And again it doesnt matter where you are, you could be in the middle of nowhere in cyro and they would pull out a siege.
TheMightyRevan wrote: »its ridicolous when siege is a better response for combat in general, than skills and sets. And again it doesnt matter where you are, you could be in the middle of nowhere in cyro and they would pull out a siege.
With the current meta being groups of tank builds with 40K+ health bars and countless stacks of healing, sometimes the best option is to throw down siege and put some meatbags or cold fire into the group to help break it up. Your option is to either overrun the siege and force the user to get off, or to simply leave the range of the siege and force the user to pack up and relocate. All of the complaints keep boiling down to people not liking the fact that they can't just adapt, improvise, and overcome and would rather just see yet another nerf.
@nuttytom Show a video where there is more siege being shot at you than there are of you. In other words-- if your group is 5 strong I want to see 6 siege being shot at you. If you are 12 strong I want to see 13 siege being shot at you. If you're solo I want to see at least 2 siege being shot at you.
[snip]
@nuttytom Show a video where there is more siege being shot at you than there are of you. In other words-- if your group is 5 strong I want to see 6 siege being shot at you. If you are 12 strong I want to see 13 siege being shot at you. If you're solo I want to see at least 2 siege being shot at you.
[snip]