Maintenance for the week of December 16:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – December 16
• NA megaservers for patch maintenance – December 17, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for patch maintenance – December 17, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – December 16
• NA megaservers for patch maintenance – December 17, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for patch maintenance – December 17, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
New pvp direction?
-
Tavore1138✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Personally I think the concept of significantly upping siege damage is a good one but the added benefit of siege weapons needs to be mitigated in two ways IMO.
First the cost of laying down siege should be raised in line with the added benefits of doing so... not necessarily in terms of AP costs but in terms of time taken to raise and lower seige or perhaps more limits on placement or making it harder for players to abandon the equipment if they are being targeted by return fire so that we don't simply end up with Cyrodiil being wall to wall fire ballistas.
The other aspect would be reduced ticks from fire - the initial hit makes sense but the killer right now is the tick... if you are sieging right now and get hit you have to be very very fats to exit your weapon and pop both a heal pot and a heal skill simply to survive the tick that follows. The smart...errr... alecs... will say that you need to run Purge or equivalent and of course that can work... but IMO if a game design change forces all players to run a single skill simply to be able to play then it is an insufficiently considered change that needs some tweaking.GM - Malazan
Raid Leader - Hungry Wolves
Legio Mortuum2 -
GorraShatan✭✭✭✭rdbrown1987 wrote: »
Seems like a good way to find some fresh meat while ganking, no?0 -
Phaedrus✭✭✭I think they need to adjust the Alliance War skill Siege Shield.
1. Give it a stamina morph, it's really expensive to cast as a stamina build, it's basically half my resource pool.
2. Make it actually absorb damage instead of reduce damage taken, only siege damage though. And make it scale off of stats (wpn damage/stamina spell dmg/magicka) similar to other personal/group shields i.e. igneous shields from the DK skill line.
This way you can effectively counter siege damage if used correctly and coordinated by groups defending or attacking.Edited by Phaedrus on March 25, 2015 4:02PMPhaedrus Wolf1 -
azoriangaming✭✭✭✭GorraShatan wrote: »rdbrown1987 wrote: »
Seems like a good way to find some fresh meat while ganking, no?
that is true if you can actually get into the campaign long queues now ^^0 -
azoriangaming✭✭✭✭I think they need to adjust the Alliance War skill Siege Shield.
1. Give it a stamina morph, it's really expensive to cast as a stamina build, it's basically half my resource pool.
2. Make it actually absorb damage instead of reduce damage taken, only siege damage though. And make it scale off of stats (wpn damage/stamina spell dmg/magicka) similar to other personal/group shields i.e. igneous shields from the DK skill line.
This way you can effectively counter siege damage if used correctly and coordinated by groups defending or attacking.
nice idea0 -
azoriangaming✭✭✭✭SuraklinPrime wrote: »Personally I think the concept of significantly upping siege damage is a good one but the added benefit of siege weapons needs to be mitigated in two ways IMO.
First the cost of laying down siege should be raised in line with the added benefits of doing so... not necessarily in terms of AP costs but in terms of time taken to raise and lower seige or perhaps more limits on placement or making it harder for players to abandon the equipment if they are being targeted by return fire so that we don't simply end up with Cyrodiil being wall to wall fire ballistas.
The other aspect would be reduced ticks from fire - the initial hit makes sense but the killer right now is the tick... if you are sieging right now and get hit you have to be very very fats to exit your weapon and pop both a heal pot and a heal skill simply to survive the tick that follows. The smart...errr... alecs... will say that you need to run Purge or equivalent and of course that can work... but IMO if a game design change forces all players to run a single skill simply to be able to play then it is an insufficiently considered change that needs some tweaking.
aye I agree with this0 -
Bashev✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
Why the damage should be absorbed? ZoS increased the siege damage because they wanted to spread the players, not to stack on each other. With such a skill we will have the problem that we have before. All players stack together and absorb the damage.2. Make it it actually absorb damage instead of reduce damage taken, only siege damage though. And make it scale off of stats (wpn damage/stamina spell dmg/magicka) similar to other personal/group shields i.e. igneous shields from the DK skill line.
This way you can effectively counter siege damage if used correctly and coordinated by groups defending or attacking.
Edited by Bashev on March 25, 2015 4:15PMBecause I can!1 -
azoriangaming✭✭✭✭Yes these changes were needed. What I see from comments is that people find it amazing how it is now with siege weapons damage. But nothing has changed actually, it was kind of the same last year so it's nothing new really... it is just an upgrade to keep it as it previously was.
Concerning lag, it's far too easy to say "this patch fixed lag" as no technical improvements have been made. It's really not enough on our side to compare and have a true opinion about it. Several factors were pointed out : Cyrodiil pve quests might have attracted more pvers in the zone meaning less people on the zerg whereas pop was locked. Maybe yesterday was not a three factions fighting time, who knows ?
I really hope this doesn't become the end of Cyrodiil improvements until june...
yes that is my concern about pve players join campaigns now on already overpopulated campaigns forcing real pvp players to sit around in massive queues0 -
Phaedrus✭✭✭
Why the damage should be absorbed? ZoS increased the siege damage because they wanted to spread the players, not to stack on each other. With such a skill we will have the problem that we have before. All players stack together and absorb the damage.2. Make it it actually absorb damage instead of reduce damage taken, only siege damage though. And make it scale off of stats (wpn damage/stamina spell dmg/magicka) similar to other personal/group shields i.e. igneous shields from the DK skill line.
This way you can effectively counter siege damage if used correctly and coordinated by groups defending or attacking.
Ya for sure, I just think they overshot a little. This would give an effective counter when sieging a keep. Would give you those precious moments to react to incoming siege damage. I should have mentioned the damage absorption should not be allowed to stack. That would lead to more groups clumping up under 10 damage shields.
Also don't think it should absorb a full hit from the largest damaging siege (17k stone treb I think) So something like a 15k damage shield, somewhere in that range.Phaedrus Wolf0 -
azoriangaming✭✭✭✭
Why the damage should be absorbed? ZoS increased the siege damage because they wanted to spread the players, not to stack on each other. With such a skill we will have the problem that we have before. All players stack together and absorb the damage.2. Make it it actually absorb damage instead of reduce damage taken, only siege damage though. And make it scale off of stats (wpn damage/stamina spell dmg/magicka) similar to other personal/group shields i.e. igneous shields from the DK skill line.
This way you can effectively counter siege damage if used correctly and coordinated by groups defending or attacking.
Ya for sure, I just think they overshot a little. This would give an effective counter when sieging a keep. Would give you those precious moments to react to incoming siege damage. I should have mentioned the damage absorption should not be allowed to stack. That would lead to more groups clumping up under 10 damage shields.
Also don't think it should absorb a full hit from the largest damaging siege (17k stone treb I think) So something like a 15k damage shield, somewhere in that range.
maybe they could change the guard ability to include siege weapon so only one person takes the dmg but have it as can stop it for 6 targets only and maybe at a increased 30% dmg to the person who casts it this would bring even more meaning to roles in pvp eg having full tank roles if you want to run around with x amount of people.0 -
Darklord_Tiberius✭✭✭✭rdbrown1987 wrote: »So I'm starting a thread to see what everyones opinion is on the new direction of pvp?
My opinion in pvp at the moment is that siege rules the world in keep fights, open field fights and I don't see that much pvp actually happening now at all anymore and I kinda got bored after a little while of playing but the first 20mins or so was fun.
I also think the siege dmg should stay there is no issue with the dmg if you purge and play correctly it's fine but what really grinds my gears are that there is siege everywhere you looking even in the open field no keep in site or resource etc etc
I have to admit there was hardly any lag at all tonight in prime time in thornblade so for me that's a plus if you can deal with the siege vs siege stuff that is going off everywhere around.
I also noticed groups getting bigger and bigger when they noticed that they couldn't handle it with smaller groups which concerns me that it'll bring a bigger zerg mentality in the long run and turn into a numbers game.
So what are your opinions so far?
You must not run with a very strong PvP guild if you get bored in twenty minutes. Phoenix Rising rolls on Chillrend, Tuesday night we had probably the best siege defense battle to date in this game. We strolled down to Faregly and captured it from yellow. We held it for two hours before we called our PvP sesh for the night. I can upload a video, but we won against superior numbers because siege is actually useful now. On the other side of things we took BRK the night before with tons of siege hitting us and being outnumbered.
I do not see how bigger zergs will result because of this siege damage. If people do zerg they will die faster. We have seen it and we have done it to these so called "zergs". Your argument has a fundamental flaw.0 -
kitsinni✭✭✭✭✭One difference siege made is so many more death way more people running back so more ganking. It is funny though there are like 20 people at every gank point in stealth since now it is like the only way to PvP.0
-
azoriangaming✭✭✭✭Darklord_Tiberius wrote: »rdbrown1987 wrote: »So I'm starting a thread to see what everyones opinion is on the new direction of pvp?
My opinion in pvp at the moment is that siege rules the world in keep fights, open field fights and I don't see that much pvp actually happening now at all anymore and I kinda got bored after a little while of playing but the first 20mins or so was fun.
I also think the siege dmg should stay there is no issue with the dmg if you purge and play correctly it's fine but what really grinds my gears are that there is siege everywhere you looking even in the open field no keep in site or resource etc etc
I have to admit there was hardly any lag at all tonight in prime time in thornblade so for me that's a plus if you can deal with the siege vs siege stuff that is going off everywhere around.
I also noticed groups getting bigger and bigger when they noticed that they couldn't handle it with smaller groups which concerns me that it'll bring a bigger zerg mentality in the long run and turn into a numbers game.
So what are your opinions so far?
You must not run with a very strong PvP guild if you get bored in twenty minutes. Phoenix Rising rolls on Chillrend, Tuesday night we had probably the best siege defense battle to date in this game. We strolled down to Faregly and captured it from yellow. We held it for two hours before we called our PvP sesh for the night. I can upload a video, but we won against superior numbers because siege is actually useful now. On the other side of things we took BRK the night before with tons of siege hitting us and being outnumbered.
I do not see how bigger zergs will result because of this siege damage. If people do zerg they will die faster. We have seen it and we have done it to these so called "zergs". Your argument has a fundamental flaw.
yes I obviously run with not a very strong guild who won every chillrend campaign since chillrend's release until we left that campaign for thornblade to help other DC guilds a few weeks ago, your comment is offensive and is classed as baiting, I got bored as I see the game as siege vs siege now and this is my personal and honest opinion of how I felt yesterday, I played again today and found that I enjoyed it I just think it'll take me some time to get used to the changes,
obviously the people you were fighting are just aren't that tactical and didn't think about taking several walls down, this video you have I'm sure the data will show this.
Anyway this is a post about your thoughts on pvp not gripes to other members so keep it clean please.Edited by azoriangaming on March 26, 2015 9:23PM1 -
azoriangaming✭✭✭✭One difference siege made is so many more death way more people running back so more ganking. It is funny though there are like 20 people at every gank point in stealth since now it is like the only way to PvP.
lol yes i noticed this today and it was fun killing people that was at the gank points0 -
iseko✭✭✭✭rdbrown1987 wrote: »
@rdbrown1987 Im EP and all examples are from my point of view. Well, in open field siege can be handy but not always. Rarely is open field really flat. You've got trees, rocks, ditches etc. Depending on how many raids you have at your disposal you have different options. Enemy raid, dead ahead, lets assume equal numbers 1raid vs 1raid. Theyre dropping from horses, 3-6 are putting up siege. Get rapid manoevers up, break right (and break LOS if the area allows this). Activate a barrier on group. Tanks dive in the right flank with healers covering. Ranged dps take out siege weapons by concentrating attacks on 1-2 siegers at a time. Tanks and melee DPS getting 90% of the heals are taking care of the people not sieging. Theyre not supposed to insta kill them. Just give ranged dps time to take down the siege. If your raid gets stationary the siege gets time to re-aim. Keep the fighting in a circular movement. Use shield bubbles if necessary.
The basic idea is: They lose a chunk of their raid to siegers. Siege have to reload and aim, aiming is a *** with siege if the target doesnt stand still. If you flank em correctly and fast enough (rapid manoever as soon as you see em) combined with barriers for lucky shots and some siege bubbles over the tanks. Should be fine. This is ONE of a lot of different tactics you can use. If they dont put down siege... You do something very differently. I never use siege at the beginning of a fight. I want to be mobile. If however Im forced back or into a stationary spot... siege it is (probably).
The outer wall of a keep is kind of a ***. Very easy to defend. You have to get it down in 30s/1min. There are ways of doing that relatively easy. Once you've breached the outer, taking the inner has become so much easier now (since siege upgrade). Trebs shoot top platform of inner from walls. Defenders cant place any siege on top of the inner because they are outnumbered (siege wise, not enough room) and stacked to close on eachother (easy to hit two at a time). The only downside is that you are very spread out when doing this. Deploy your raid in an intelligent fashion. Don't let people randomly put down siege whereever they please. Tanks, melee dps, healers, ranged dps. They should be deployed in a specific order. And ffs healers dont siege. Have a plan ready in case they push out and make sure the raid(s) know what that plan is. Keep in mind also: enemy reinforcements can stealth hit you as well. Sieging the main gate has become very viable now. No oils where the archers are, no people shooting from on top. Once main gate is down you can get some covering fire from siege outside on to the flags.
So... Yea I like it
. If a zerg shows up, dont need siege for that. If a pulse train shows up... couple of fire ballistas to the face will fix that for you. As a raid leader I had to think a lot more in terms of tanks/melee dps/ranged DPS/healers. The siege upgrade just makes it better imho. PS: im not on thornblade. Lag spamming impulse trains with a ping rate of 999 to win. *** that *** so very very much. Some people like aoe spamming. Not a fan...
Edited by iseko on March 27, 2015 8:22AM3 -
Caza99✭✭✭✭The changes made it easier to defend against a larger force, and make siege useful against other players. A change I feel was needed and a good one.
Edited by Caza99 on March 27, 2015 8:30AMPC NA - @MercerESO3 -
azoriangaming✭✭✭✭rdbrown1987 wrote: »
@rdbrown1987 Im EP and all examples are from my point of view. Well, in open field siege can be handy but not always. Rarely is open field really flat. You've got trees, rocks, ditches etc. Depending on how many raids you have at your disposal you have different options. Enemy raid, dead ahead, lets assume equal numbers 1raid vs 1raid. Theyre dropping from horses, 3-6 are putting up siege. Get rapid manoevers up, break right (and break LOS if the area allows this). Activate a barrier on group. Tanks dive in the right flank with healers covering. Ranged dps take out siege weapons by concentrating attacks on 1-2 siegers at a time. Tanks and melee DPS getting 90% of the heals are taking care of the people not sieging. Theyre not supposed to insta kill them. Just give ranged dps time to take down the siege. If your raid gets stationary the siege gets time to re-aim. Keep the fighting in a circular movement. Use shield bubbles if necessary.
The basic idea is: They lose a chunk of their raid to siegers. Siege have to reload and aim, aiming is a *** with siege if the target doesnt stand still. If you flank em correctly and fast enough (rapid manoever as soon as you see em) combined with barriers for lucky shots and some siege bubbles over the tanks. Should be fine. This is ONE of a lot of different tactics you can use. If they dont put down siege... You do something very differently. I never use siege at the beginning of a fight. I want to be mobile. If however Im forced back or into a stationary spot... siege it is (probably).
The outer wall of a keep is kind of a ***. Very easy to defend. You have to get it down in 30s/1min. There are ways of doing that relatively easy. Once you've breached the outer, taking the inner has become so much easier now (since siege upgrade). Trebs shoot top platform of inner from walls. Defenders cant place any siege on top of the inner because they are outnumbered (siege wise, not enough room) and stacked to close on eachother (easy to hit two at a time). The only downside is that you are very spread out when doing this. Deploy your raid in an intelligent fashion. Don't let people randomly put down siege whereever they please. Tanks, melee dps, healers, ranged dps. They should be deployed in a specific order. And ffs healers dont siege. Have a plan ready in case they push out and make sure the raid(s) know what that plan is. Keep in mind also: enemy reinforcements can stealth hit you as well. Sieging the main gate has become very viable now. No oils where the archers are, no people shooting from on top. Once main gate is down you can get some covering fire from siege outside on to the flags.
So... Yea I like it. If a zerg shows up, dont need siege for that. If a pulse train shows up... couple of fire ballistas to the face will fix that for you. As a raid leader I had to think a lot more in terms of tanks/melee dps/ranged DPS/healers. The siege upgrade just makes it better imho. PS: im not on thornblade. Lag spamming impulse trains with a ping rate of 999 to win. *** that *** so very very much. Some people like aoe spamming. Not a fan...
yeah I agree this is much better than those endless lag fights1 -
azoriangaming✭✭✭✭The changes made it easier to defend against a larger force, and make siege useful against other players. A change I feel was needed and a good one.
yes I agree the changes was needed, can you remember the last time someone actually used a fire treb before 1.6 because I can't and this has made more options viable
0 -
iseko✭✭✭✭rdbrown1987 wrote: »rdbrown1987 wrote: »
@rdbrown1987 Im EP and all examples are from my point of view. Well, in open field siege can be handy but not always. Rarely is open field really flat. You've got trees, rocks, ditches etc. Depending on how many raids you have at your disposal you have different options. Enemy raid, dead ahead, lets assume equal numbers 1raid vs 1raid. Theyre dropping from horses, 3-6 are putting up siege. Get rapid manoevers up, break right (and break LOS if the area allows this). Activate a barrier on group. Tanks dive in the right flank with healers covering. Ranged dps take out siege weapons by concentrating attacks on 1-2 siegers at a time. Tanks and melee DPS getting 90% of the heals are taking care of the people not sieging. Theyre not supposed to insta kill them. Just give ranged dps time to take down the siege. If your raid gets stationary the siege gets time to re-aim. Keep the fighting in a circular movement. Use shield bubbles if necessary.
The basic idea is: They lose a chunk of their raid to siegers. Siege have to reload and aim, aiming is a *** with siege if the target doesnt stand still. If you flank em correctly and fast enough (rapid manoever as soon as you see em) combined with barriers for lucky shots and some siege bubbles over the tanks. Should be fine. This is ONE of a lot of different tactics you can use. If they dont put down siege... You do something very differently. I never use siege at the beginning of a fight. I want to be mobile. If however Im forced back or into a stationary spot... siege it is (probably).
The outer wall of a keep is kind of a ***. Very easy to defend. You have to get it down in 30s/1min. There are ways of doing that relatively easy. Once you've breached the outer, taking the inner has become so much easier now (since siege upgrade). Trebs shoot top platform of inner from walls. Defenders cant place any siege on top of the inner because they are outnumbered (siege wise, not enough room) and stacked to close on eachother (easy to hit two at a time). The only downside is that you are very spread out when doing this. Deploy your raid in an intelligent fashion. Don't let people randomly put down siege whereever they please. Tanks, melee dps, healers, ranged dps. They should be deployed in a specific order. And ffs healers dont siege. Have a plan ready in case they push out and make sure the raid(s) know what that plan is. Keep in mind also: enemy reinforcements can stealth hit you as well. Sieging the main gate has become very viable now. No oils where the archers are, no people shooting from on top. Once main gate is down you can get some covering fire from siege outside on to the flags.
So... Yea I like it. If a zerg shows up, dont need siege for that. If a pulse train shows up... couple of fire ballistas to the face will fix that for you. As a raid leader I had to think a lot more in terms of tanks/melee dps/ranged DPS/healers. The siege upgrade just makes it better imho. PS: im not on thornblade. Lag spamming impulse trains with a ping rate of 999 to win. *** that *** so very very much. Some people like aoe spamming. Not a fan...
yeah I agree this is much better than those endless lag fights
Not... quite sure if you're being sarcastic or not but I'll assume not :P.
Gotta use the terrain more, give orders in fight. A fight is dynamic not static. There is no 1 best tactic. See what the enemy is doing and react. Don't rush in on an uphill batle with siege on top and snipers on the sides. You are going to get massacred. Don't just attack because you see an enemy. Might be better to kite, surround or whatever. Just my opinion... Impulse trains don't work as well as people think. It's just the lag that comes with it that makes it so effective. Without the lag, impulse trains are fairly easy to kill because a) removal of AOE caps B ) impulse trains are easy to predict. Spreading out when you see one incoming, a salvo (5-6) of nicely timed inevitable detonations/meteors and fire ballistas. Boom... That is more of an open field scenario. In confined spaces (inner keep, outposts) they are problematic. Again: prob a *** of lag, no room to avoid it incoming.
An enemy impulse train running around in an enemy zerg... thats again problematic. But in that scenario you are probably SERIOUSLY outnumbered xD
1 -
azoriangaming✭✭✭✭rdbrown1987 wrote: »rdbrown1987 wrote: »
@rdbrown1987 Im EP and all examples are from my point of view. Well, in open field siege can be handy but not always. Rarely is open field really flat. You've got trees, rocks, ditches etc. Depending on how many raids you have at your disposal you have different options. Enemy raid, dead ahead, lets assume equal numbers 1raid vs 1raid. Theyre dropping from horses, 3-6 are putting up siege. Get rapid manoevers up, break right (and break LOS if the area allows this). Activate a barrier on group. Tanks dive in the right flank with healers covering. Ranged dps take out siege weapons by concentrating attacks on 1-2 siegers at a time. Tanks and melee DPS getting 90% of the heals are taking care of the people not sieging. Theyre not supposed to insta kill them. Just give ranged dps time to take down the siege. If your raid gets stationary the siege gets time to re-aim. Keep the fighting in a circular movement. Use shield bubbles if necessary.
The basic idea is: They lose a chunk of their raid to siegers. Siege have to reload and aim, aiming is a *** with siege if the target doesnt stand still. If you flank em correctly and fast enough (rapid manoever as soon as you see em) combined with barriers for lucky shots and some siege bubbles over the tanks. Should be fine. This is ONE of a lot of different tactics you can use. If they dont put down siege... You do something very differently. I never use siege at the beginning of a fight. I want to be mobile. If however Im forced back or into a stationary spot... siege it is (probably).
The outer wall of a keep is kind of a ***. Very easy to defend. You have to get it down in 30s/1min. There are ways of doing that relatively easy. Once you've breached the outer, taking the inner has become so much easier now (since siege upgrade). Trebs shoot top platform of inner from walls. Defenders cant place any siege on top of the inner because they are outnumbered (siege wise, not enough room) and stacked to close on eachother (easy to hit two at a time). The only downside is that you are very spread out when doing this. Deploy your raid in an intelligent fashion. Don't let people randomly put down siege whereever they please. Tanks, melee dps, healers, ranged dps. They should be deployed in a specific order. And ffs healers dont siege. Have a plan ready in case they push out and make sure the raid(s) know what that plan is. Keep in mind also: enemy reinforcements can stealth hit you as well. Sieging the main gate has become very viable now. No oils where the archers are, no people shooting from on top. Once main gate is down you can get some covering fire from siege outside on to the flags.
So... Yea I like it. If a zerg shows up, dont need siege for that. If a pulse train shows up... couple of fire ballistas to the face will fix that for you. As a raid leader I had to think a lot more in terms of tanks/melee dps/ranged DPS/healers. The siege upgrade just makes it better imho. PS: im not on thornblade. Lag spamming impulse trains with a ping rate of 999 to win. *** that *** so very very much. Some people like aoe spamming. Not a fan...
yeah I agree this is much better than those endless lag fights
Not... quite sure if you're being sarcastic or not but I'll assume not :P.
Gotta use the terrain more, give orders in fight. A fight is dynamic not static. There is no 1 best tactic. See what the enemy is doing and react. Don't rush in on an uphill batle with siege on top and snipers on the sides. You are going to get massacred. Don't just attack because you see an enemy. Might be better to kite, surround or whatever. Just my opinion... Impulse trains don't work as well as people think. It's just the lag that comes with it that makes it so effective. Without the lag, impulse trains are fairly easy to kill because a) removal of AOE caps B ) impulse trains are easy to predict. Spreading out when you see one incoming, a salvo (5-6) of nicely timed inevitable detonations/meteors and fire ballistas. Boom... That is more of an open field scenario. In confined spaces (inner keep, outposts) they are problematic. Again: prob a *** of lag, no room to avoid it incoming.
An enemy impulse train running around in an enemy zerg... thats again problematic. But in that scenario you are probably SERIOUSLY outnumbered xD
nope not sarcastic those lag fight used to really wind me up,1 -
Magus✭✭✭✭✭rdbrown1987 wrote: »
@rdbrown1987 Im EP and all examples are from my point of view. Well, in open field siege can be handy but not always. Rarely is open field really flat. You've got trees, rocks, ditches etc. Depending on how many raids you have at your disposal you have different options. Enemy raid, dead ahead, lets assume equal numbers 1raid vs 1raid. Theyre dropping from horses, 3-6 are putting up siege. Get rapid manoevers up, break right (and break LOS if the area allows this). Activate a barrier on group. Tanks dive in the right flank with healers covering. Ranged dps take out siege weapons by concentrating attacks on 1-2 siegers at a time. Tanks and melee DPS getting 90% of the heals are taking care of the people not sieging. Theyre not supposed to insta kill them. Just give ranged dps time to take down the siege. If your raid gets stationary the siege gets time to re-aim. Keep the fighting in a circular movement. Use shield bubbles if necessary.
The basic idea is: They lose a chunk of their raid to siegers. Siege have to reload and aim, aiming is a *** with siege if the target doesnt stand still. If you flank em correctly and fast enough (rapid manoever as soon as you see em) combined with barriers for lucky shots and some siege bubbles over the tanks. Should be fine. This is ONE of a lot of different tactics you can use. If they dont put down siege... You do something very differently. I never use siege at the beginning of a fight. I want to be mobile. If however Im forced back or into a stationary spot... siege it is (probably).
The outer wall of a keep is kind of a ***. Very easy to defend. You have to get it down in 30s/1min. There are ways of doing that relatively easy. Once you've breached the outer, taking the inner has become so much easier now (since siege upgrade). Trebs shoot top platform of inner from walls. Defenders cant place any siege on top of the inner because they are outnumbered (siege wise, not enough room) and stacked to close on eachother (easy to hit two at a time). The only downside is that you are very spread out when doing this. Deploy your raid in an intelligent fashion. Don't let people randomly put down siege whereever they please. Tanks, melee dps, healers, ranged dps. They should be deployed in a specific order. And ffs healers dont siege. Have a plan ready in case they push out and make sure the raid(s) know what that plan is. Keep in mind also: enemy reinforcements can stealth hit you as well. Sieging the main gate has become very viable now. No oils where the archers are, no people shooting from on top. Once main gate is down you can get some covering fire from siege outside on to the flags.
So... Yea I like it. If a zerg shows up, dont need siege for that. If a pulse train shows up... couple of fire ballistas to the face will fix that for you. As a raid leader I had to think a lot more in terms of tanks/melee dps/ranged DPS/healers. The siege upgrade just makes it better imho. PS: im not on thornblade. Lag spamming impulse trains with a ping rate of 999 to win. *** that *** so very very much. Some people like aoe spamming. Not a fan...
This guy gets it.Duraeon / Maoh
Former Emperor of Haderus, Trueflame, and Azura's Star
PC/NA2 -
azoriangaming✭✭✭✭rdbrown1987 wrote: »
@rdbrown1987 Im EP and all examples are from my point of view. Well, in open field siege can be handy but not always. Rarely is open field really flat. You've got trees, rocks, ditches etc. Depending on how many raids you have at your disposal you have different options. Enemy raid, dead ahead, lets assume equal numbers 1raid vs 1raid. Theyre dropping from horses, 3-6 are putting up siege. Get rapid manoevers up, break right (and break LOS if the area allows this). Activate a barrier on group. Tanks dive in the right flank with healers covering. Ranged dps take out siege weapons by concentrating attacks on 1-2 siegers at a time. Tanks and melee DPS getting 90% of the heals are taking care of the people not sieging. Theyre not supposed to insta kill them. Just give ranged dps time to take down the siege. If your raid gets stationary the siege gets time to re-aim. Keep the fighting in a circular movement. Use shield bubbles if necessary.
The basic idea is: They lose a chunk of their raid to siegers. Siege have to reload and aim, aiming is a *** with siege if the target doesnt stand still. If you flank em correctly and fast enough (rapid manoever as soon as you see em) combined with barriers for lucky shots and some siege bubbles over the tanks. Should be fine. This is ONE of a lot of different tactics you can use. If they dont put down siege... You do something very differently. I never use siege at the beginning of a fight. I want to be mobile. If however Im forced back or into a stationary spot... siege it is (probably).
The outer wall of a keep is kind of a ***. Very easy to defend. You have to get it down in 30s/1min. There are ways of doing that relatively easy. Once you've breached the outer, taking the inner has become so much easier now (since siege upgrade). Trebs shoot top platform of inner from walls. Defenders cant place any siege on top of the inner because they are outnumbered (siege wise, not enough room) and stacked to close on eachother (easy to hit two at a time). The only downside is that you are very spread out when doing this. Deploy your raid in an intelligent fashion. Don't let people randomly put down siege whereever they please. Tanks, melee dps, healers, ranged dps. They should be deployed in a specific order. And ffs healers dont siege. Have a plan ready in case they push out and make sure the raid(s) know what that plan is. Keep in mind also: enemy reinforcements can stealth hit you as well. Sieging the main gate has become very viable now. No oils where the archers are, no people shooting from on top. Once main gate is down you can get some covering fire from siege outside on to the flags.
So... Yea I like it. If a zerg shows up, dont need siege for that. If a pulse train shows up... couple of fire ballistas to the face will fix that for you. As a raid leader I had to think a lot more in terms of tanks/melee dps/ranged DPS/healers. The siege upgrade just makes it better imho. PS: im not on thornblade. Lag spamming impulse trains with a ping rate of 999 to win. *** that *** so very very much. Some people like aoe spamming. Not a fan...
This guy gets it.
yup0 -
Aimelin✭✭✭They've had a year to come up with a "direction" to take to improve pvp and performance, and the answer is increasing siege dmg ....1
-
Talcyndl✭✭✭✭✭rdbrown1987 wrote: »
Why sadly?
Folks should just head out to the PvE hubs. It will spread out the fights (helping lag). In my experience, it's also pretty fun to fight PvP with the NPCs there.Tal'gro Bol
PvP Vice Officer [Retired] and Huscarl of Vokundein
http://www.legend-gaming.net/vokundein/0 -
azoriangaming✭✭✭✭rdbrown1987 wrote: »
Why sadly?
Folks should just head out to the PvE hubs. It will spread out the fights (helping lag). In my experience, it's also pretty fun to fight PvP with the NPCs there.
because these people are making queues longer for actual pvp players,0 -
TheLaw✭✭✭✭@ZOS_BrianWheeler has a "unique" vision on PVP in ESO. Yet, very few share this vision. Changes like this make the game less fun to play, it's as simple as that. I remember @ZOS_PaulSage stating multiple times that, first and foremost, they wanted to make a fun game. I'm confused on why Paul Sage sits back and let's changes like this further ruin ESO's already flawed PVP system.-= Shahrzad the Great |Sorc| =-0
