Upcoming siege changes in next major update

Turelus

mike.gaziotisb16_ESO wrote: »

show previous quotes

kylewwefan wrote: »

I have no idea what any of this means? Would be nice to be able to fast travel to imperial city without having to run 10 minutes through cyrodil. It would also be good to be able to do cyrodil quests without getting one shotted and starting off back on the other side of the map half hour away.

I really can't gauge how much I should pick on you based on your comment, so I'll start off politely. If you don't understand what the thread is about then maybe just don't post in it? Your problems, however legitimate or not, have nothing to do with the thread.

You don't walk into a chemistry convention and say "I don't understand any of that, but I like turtles!" do you?

I'm assuming you have never spoken to @ClikC ?

However back to the topic at hand... Siege buffs interesting, purge side needs testing (sooner rather than later).

Rylana

Good thing I have a black belt in ballista-fu and a PhD in meatbagonomics.

dis gon b gud.

Maulkin

Enodoc wrote: »

show previous quotes

mike.gaziotisb16_ESO wrote: »

Manoekin wrote: »

Having 0 control over your own character is not fun or engaging gameplay. That's why the break free system exists, and why Purge and other spells like it even exist in the game at all. You're trying to fix Wrobel's problem for him in some roundabout way that makes no sense.

That is a very astute observation, that he's trying to fix Wrobel's problem. And it's not the most elegant of solutions, agreed, but I still believe it's better than what we've currently got.

Yes losing control of your char is frustrating. Getting rooted and silenced (which is for all intends and purposes same as getting stunned) with every gap closer was the single most infuriating and idiotic change thus far. So why do I not think so badly over even more irresistible CC?

show previous quotes

Ishammael wrote: »

The buffs to siege damage are good. The addition of magicka and stamina drain is good. Unpurgeable debuffs is awful. Six seconds is a long [...] time. Especially for classes with no mobility... Once you're stuck, you're dead as Mano observed.

On that note... Brian said that siege CC wouldn't be purgeable, but did he ever say that you won't be able to break free from it yourself? Or can you not do that now anyway?

Edit: OK, maybe I should clarify that; this is with reference to having no control over the character (root/snare), not all the different types of debuffs.

There's no hard CC secondary effect to siege. What we're saying is that having a 50% unpurgable snare is to some extent loss of control. Because it's irresistible, you can't remove it at any cost (stamina or magicka) and you have to just ride it out for the duration.

What makes me very skeptical about that is the duration (6") is equalised across all sieges (catas/trebs/ballistas). That makes ballistas and catapults very lethal because by the time the 6" have run out the same ballista will be firing at you again, meaning you can basically be pinned to the spot with no recourse.

As I've said, I'm not 100% behind this idea (unpurgable secondary effects). It needs testing first. The rest of the changes (resource drain, increased damage, cap on barrier/purge) are all very welcome.

myrrrorb14_ESO

Thought about this overnight and still can't comprehend having something unpurgible. Especially since there is a war skill called purge...

There needs to be a better solution. Unpurgible defile + heal nerf = very dead.

Have purge reduce duration or change from major to minor and minor to none. Limit the number of people affected. Something.

Just don't make purge useless. Or my Templar

Jammer480

It still blows my mind that people expect ZOS to make changes to pvp that benefit solo play or small groups...makes zero sense...

eliisra

myrrrorb14_ESO wrote: »

Thought about this overnight and still can't comprehend having something unpurgible. Especially since there is a war skill called purge...

There needs to be a better solution. Unpurgible defile + heal nerf = very dead.

Have purge reduce duration or change from major to minor and minor to none. Limit the number of people affected. Something.

Just don't make purge useless. Or my Templar

Yes, would be nice if class developers communicated with developers in charge of PvP mechanics

Unpurgebale snare + defile means that mag DK's and termplars are completely screwed. They lack the mobility to 100% avoid siege, they lack the mobility to get out once hit. Being unable to heal, unable to move because of snares and no way to remove it, it's just rip. They also cant shield the dmg while stuck in unpurgable siege, because of how battle spirit affects shields scaling of health. Just unplayable.

The increase in dmg is cool. The drain of resources is interested. But being unable to purge secondary effects needs to go, unless devs are planning to give DK+templars mobility, buff their shields and hand out a teleport. Which I kinda doubt.

frozywozy

WillhelmBlack wrote: »

show previous quotes

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Sanct16 wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler
Why do you hate small groups so much? This will make it even harder for groups that arent 24 man raids. You should promote smaller groups, not destroy them.

i keep seeing this. please explain how this hurts small groups? This is a tool for small groups to use to break up the larger groups and spread them out. it also allows small groups to defend a keep against ball groups. How does this hurt small groups?

20 man, small Zerg vs 6 man group, 2 tanky characters at front to apply CC's, 3 DD's and a healer. Out in the open field, which group do you think has someone spare to put up siege?

Keyword : openfield.

Joy_Division wrote: »

My quick thoughts:

1. Right now, ball-groups literally do not move when hit by siege. Something had to be done and that something was increase it's effectiveness
2. Everything favors larger groups. This siege, however, may prompt them to spread out. It also will help defend keeps against large groups which is the point of these weapons.
3. I think the secondary effects go too far. 6 seconds is a *long* time to be hit with an unpurgable effect. A magicka build that gets hit with an oil catapult is screwed: snare and half it's stamina gone? The solution to purgespam abuse is to reform purge, not make negative effects unpurgable.
4. Somewhere between the ineffectiveness of siege at present and the OP siege in this proposal is where siege effectiveness should be.
5. Don't forget flaming oil. It currently is bad and I didn;t see any mention about them. Now that I think about flaming oils not getting the job done, I have noticed that if I try to use them against rams at castle keep gatehouse through the grate, I never see any damage ... is this grate less than 6 meters above the ground?
6. I still think you should bring back ground oils.

http://www.esohead.com/skills/40211-retreating-maneuver

Sotha_Sil

frozywozy wrote: »

http://www.esohead.com/skills/40211-retreating-maneuver

Apparently maneuver won't work and I guess this is also the case for shuffle. The immunity will or will not (?) be applied but it won't cleanse snare for sure. It's what wheeler said.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Anything that removes a "negative" effect is considered a purge, so not just the "Purge" abliity as you noted.

Septimus_Magna

The most important result of these changes will most likely be that groups have to spread to minimize siege dmg and siege effects.

If you hit a stacked 24-man group with a meatbag, lightning ballista and a couple scattershots there's a big chance most of them wipe. The healing debuff will be heavily felt and the snare will keep all those players in roughly the same area which makes them very vulnerable to the following siege attacks.

Hopefully this will make it too 'dangerous' to run in a big group because they're the obvious target for every counter sieger.

If the massive groups spread out more its easier to pick them off one by one, especially if you are a highly skilled small group pvp player.The average player of those massive groups probably has less experience with small scale fights in which they dont have a dedicated healer with constant Barrier, Purges etc. This could make numbers less meaningful because you're killing most players one by one. This can only happen if a good portion of players actively uses counter siege so large groups get rekt when they stack.

Following this reasoning this could be a very effective change towards more player skilled pvp, instead of the biggest steel tornado group wins. Im really look forward to try out these changes.

LazyLewis

In my two years of playing this game this has to be one of the worst proposed updates I have ever seen. ARE YOU ACTUALLY KIDDING ME ZOS? THIS IS YOUR ANSWER.

Firstly this promotes more zerging because people are gonna wanna be in a bigger safer group with more healers than ever.

YOU ARE GONNA GIVE PEOPLE THE POWER TO DRAIN MULTIPLE PEOPLES STAMINA AND MAGIKA POOLS SIMULTANEOUSLY. WHO THE HELL COMES UP WITH THESE IDEAS?

IS THIS EVEN GONNA BE TESTED ON A LARGE SCALE FIRSTLY?

IM UTTERLY AND PROFOUNDLY SHOCKED AT THESE CHANGES.

*breathe*

LESS SKILL AND MORE ZERG
LESS SKILL AND MORE ZERG
LESS SKILL AND MORE ZERG
LESS SKILL AND MORE ZERG
LESS SKILL AND MORE ZERG
LESS SKILL AND MORE ZERG

Xeven

I don't mind powerful siege as long as it can only be placed in the vicinity of a keep, outpost, or resource. If I find a nice 1v2 or 1v3 I don't want meathead #1 setting up a ballista while I'm trying to stop meathead #2 from resing meathead #3.

themdogesbite

@Manoekin thank you for getting the points across i try to make in a more understandable manner then i manage to.

@mike.gaziotisb16_ESO

I try to go under the medium sized group category, but let me elaborate why i think this change is going to affect the size of group we run in the most.

Small groups wont have much problems with this since they usualy arent to close to keeps /are mobile enough to deal with it.

Large groups can easily spare people to place sieges everywhere they want to.

Medium sized groups will have a VERY difficult time with this change since those large groups are the ones we are trying to bomb, be it inside keeps or open fields. And we cant simply place sieges everywhere (We dont really want to either, we prefer to fight people with our abbilities over pressing left mouse button every 7 seconds as you mentioned.) But the way we fight we are almost always heavyily outnumbered and will close to always have siege on us. This change with a permanent healdebuff will majorly hurt the way we PvP, we get the shortest stick of everyone.

Id much rather see a stacking healdebuff that can be removed, it would still allow the window of no healing with great timeing, but isnt completely peneliseing you for not beeing a large enough group.

The other day we had a fight with wabbajack inside drakelowe and there were meatbags EVERYWHERE. On first flagg and on the postern walls too. We managed to win the fight in the end after trying to keep them from ressing and everntualy dwindeling their numbers down fully. If theese siege changes were in place, the fight would've been over before it even started due to them having so many sieges up togheter with them already beeing twice our size.

How do you counter a permanent healing debuff? You add more healers. Guess what kind of group can..

As mentioned before, this is a change that benefits the random pugling, most of them are running after that ball group.

Joy_Division

frozywozy wrote: »

show previous quotes

Joy_Division wrote: »

My quick thoughts:

1. Right now, ball-groups literally do not move when hit by siege. Something had to be done and that something was increase it's effectiveness
2. Everything favors larger groups. This siege, however, may prompt them to spread out. It also will help defend keeps against large groups which is the point of these weapons.
3. I think the secondary effects go too far. 6 seconds is a *long* time to be hit with an unpurgable effect. A magicka build that gets hit with an oil catapult is screwed: snare and half it's stamina gone? The solution to purgespam abuse is to reform purge, not make negative effects unpurgable.
4. Somewhere between the ineffectiveness of siege at present and the OP siege in this proposal is where siege effectiveness should be.
5. Don't forget flaming oil. It currently is bad and I didn;t see any mention about them. Now that I think about flaming oils not getting the job done, I have noticed that if I try to use them against rams at castle keep gatehouse through the grate, I never see any damage ... is this grate less than 6 meters above the ground?
6. I still think you should bring back ground oils.

http://www.esohead.com/skills/40211-retreating-maneuver

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Anything that removes a "negative" effect is considered a purge, so not just the "Purge" abliity as you noted.

CP5

Still finding this thread amusing. People wanted siege buffs now there are plenty shouting down the idea of it. Larger groups can spare people to use siege but smaller groups are both more mobile and provide significantly fewer targets. All a smaller group needs is one sneaky sieger with a good shot to hit the larger one. Rather than letting your heads explode with all this shouting how about we see on pts what this looks like? (this coming from someone who didn't like the first round of siege buffs where siege showed up in every fight)

Zimm

I don't mind siege buffs, typically I'm in a small group (3 to 5 players) and I think I could really use this to my advantage against a zerg. I know most zergs try to get as many healers as they can and I always try to debuff a larger group by hitting them with a meatbag when initiating combat. I can only imagine how much easier it'll be for our small group if we sneak up behind them, hit them with a meatbag and lightning ballista (to drop their magicka pool) and go to town on them as they scramble without their zerg heals. I honestly don't do much siege keep defense, I prefer to hop down and see if I can kite a few away from the zerg. Fix the lag, get rid of aoe caps, and I'll be happy.

Zheg

There should never be no counter, there should never be player-casted skills that can't be removed/avoided - the perma heal debuff is a mistake. Fix the issues you think exist with purge and cleanse mechanics, don't add debuffs that can't ever be removed. At the very least, if you keep the current plan, the counter should be something like siege shield prevents the meatbag debuff from applying or something stupid. If you're under a giant protective bubble, does it make sense to still get slapped with a strong debuff that can't be removed? Meh.

Side note, scattershot followed by cold stone treb will equal instant wipe? Sounds fun. Hint hint, camelot unchained beta will probably be starting right about when this patch drops Brian, or shortly thereafter. Good luck.

Ezareth

Joy_Division wrote: »

My quick thoughts:

1. Right now, ball-groups literally do not move when hit by siege. Something had to be done and that something was increase it's effectiveness
2. Everything favors larger groups. This siege, however, may prompt them to spread out. It also will help defend keeps against large groups which is the point of these weapons.
3. I think the secondary effects go too far. 6 seconds is a *long* time to be hit with an unpurgable effect. A magicka build that gets hit with an oil catapult is screwed: snare and half it's stamina gone? The solution to purgespam abuse is to reform purge, not make negative effects unpurgable.
4. Somewhere between the ineffectiveness of siege at present and the OP siege in this proposal is where siege effectiveness should be.
5. Don't forget flaming oil. It currently is bad and I didn;t see any mention about them. Now that I think about flaming oils not getting the job done, I have noticed that if I try to use them against rams at castle keep gatehouse through the grate, I never see any damage ... is this grate less than 6 meters above the ground?
6. I still think you should bring back ground oils.

I think the secondary effect of 6 seconds *sucks*...but it is designed to suck because the intent is to force people to spread out to avoid it. Avoiding Siege is going to be priority #1 for organized groups and that is a good thing.

Maybe instead of rolling around in a ball everywhere mopping up 1-2 players at a time they instead will be forced to attack multiple targets at once? This will break down a lot of the strategic advantages being given to ball groups and allow the sort of stroke/counterstroke style of combat that the majority of players enjoy (instead of being run over by a ball of AoE spam)

Let's be honest here. No PvPer fears siege right now. I sieged a keep last night while being attacked by a meatbag and 2 fire ballistas on me without my health every dropping below 90%. I think spending a good part of your time avoiding siege is going to take precedence to staying on crown. And when 3 different people lay down siege you're going to have to target all 3 at once which is going to actually give way to some *Real* group strategy and tactics which have been stale and unchanged for the past year +

PvP is stale and dying right now. This is a change that will mix things up which is exactly the sort of thing we need.

Dalglish

I think all siege-damage dots should not be purgable, but the heal debuff being non-purgable is a huge mistake.

Why even have heal abilities in Cyrodiil if they can be rendered (almost) mute with one siege weapon? For something to permanently debuff one of the most crucial aspects of any PvP engagement is completely reckless.

It doesn't make sense, it will encourage larger groups with dedicated siegers (instead of dedicated healers).

bowmanz607

johan.danielsson1994b16_ESO wrote: »

show previous quotes

bowmanz607 wrote: »

AbraXuSeXile wrote: »

Anyone who likes this idea doesnt like pvp. Sitting on a siege weapon left clicking hoping to grab a kill.

Boring.

this game was advertised as huge siege warfare.

It was also advertised to handle hundreds of players on the screen at once, it dosent.

well now your talking about the issues with game mechanics

Manoekin wrote: »

show previous quotes

mike.gaziotisb16_ESO wrote: »

Manoekin wrote: »

mike.gaziotisb16_ESO wrote: »

Manoekin wrote: »

Having 0 control over your own character is not fun or engaging gameplay. That's why the break free system exists, and why Purge and other spells like it even exist in the game at all. You're trying to fix @Wrobel's problem for him in some roundabout way that makes no sense.

That is a very astute observation, that he's trying to fix Wrobel's problem. And it's not the most elegant of solutions, agreed, but I still believe it's better than what we've currently got.

Yes losing control of your char is frustrating. Getting rooted and silenced (which is for all intends and purposes same as getting stunned) with every gap closer was the single most infuriating and idiotic change thus far. So why do I not think so badly over even more irresistible CC?

Because the stun on gap-closing is more effective when a larger group is chasing a small group or solo player, it's not really a big deal the other way round. The opposite is true of siege. I get hit with siege too, we all do. But for every 1 time I get hit, a ball group gets hit 100. Therefore the effect is far more pronounced on larger groups and it's hurting them more. So I hope it will be to the benefit of individuals and smaller more mobile teams.

Would I like a game with less emphasis on irresistible CC and different mechanics (like no AoE caps, less effective Purge/Barrier and more effective class based ults) to allow you to take out big groups with coordination and skill? You betcha, and I will keep campaigning for some of those changes until they are implemented or I get bored and quit.

But for now I'm happy to try out a change that will hurt me a bit, if I feel it's going to hurt the blob even more.

That was proven not true the first time they buffed siege damage. It resulted in larger groups forming because they needed people putting up siege during the fights. The larger group will always have more siege available and more opportunities to place siege.

I don't know, we experienced that siege buff very differently it seems. I was an advocate of it before it got implemented and I actually enjoyed it when it released to the point that I missed it when update 2.1 debuffed siege damage.

I spend 50% of my time in groups of <5 people and the other 50% solo. So having siege set up against me, or getting hit by siege is something that happens, but very very infrequently. It was the same with 1.6 (buffed siege) and it's the same now. The effectiveness or not of siege, did not change the amount of people that sieged me.

I don't recall ball groups being bigger back then (just less of them) compared to now. And yeah they suffered some terrible wipes on breaches, whereas now that rarely happens unless you stack an equally large group to defend it.

You're not playing any objectives then. I don't know how much you should comment on siege if it barely affects you. You won't be able to take a keep without significantly outnumbering the enemy. That's adding to lag (as it did when the buff happened and we predicted it would). Maybe it happened differently on EU, idk. The way to make you useful in a small group is to equalize player combat instead of forcing people to sit on siege and press left click.

See this is the issue. So many people are gripping about "omg balance the game dont change siege." People this is just a small part of changes they are making to the game. This will be implemented with other balances to the game such as adjusting or removing aoe caps. This is just one tool they have given to the players. A tool THAT WILL help to spread ball groups out. Moreover, this crap i keep reading about "o they should balance the game and not FORCE us to use siege." ummmm if you are attacking a keep you are using siege. if you are defending a keep you are using siege. if your not you are doing it wrong. So these changes are not forcing you to do anything, but simply supplementing what is already being used.

Wait a second you mean that in a battle where you are out numbered a big a** weapon that fire big a** flaming arrows and pots of oil etc can actually effect a person when you hit them point blank in the face??? that is crazy talk! come on people get a grip.

Now going back to this idea of being forced to use siege. this game was sold as large scale pvp with siege warfare. if you dont like using siege you dont have to. BUt dont complain about having to use siege in a game that was built for using siege. Thats is crazy. Moreover, wait until the other balance changes are announced before griping about being forced to do anything. This should not be the only way to fight other groups. It should be just a tool in the arsenal to fight other groups and what not. Other balances to the game such as aoe caps will help with fighting larger groups than yours.

Last, i keep seeing this idea that siege warfare is simply just standing their lef clicking. Ya sure in a dumbed down version of siege warfare where you will get ganked. Sitting on a siege the whole time you are sieging is ill advised. You are exposed to getting ganked. You sould be getting off your siege in between shots and fighting. Being able to balance shooting your siege while fighting is the real way to siege. Moreover, how is standing on siege pressing abutton any different from a sorc standing in mines hitting their shield button or a templar standing there spamming their BOL button?

And this idea you mention about "you cant take a keep without significant numbers" well ya. That is how the keeps are suppose to be. ABle to be defended by small numbers against numbers twice that size. It is not like that is some weird new warfare tactic ZOS pulled out of know where. That is how any defensive position would be in a war. What about 300? What about D-Day? What about the alamo? and the list goes on. Moreover, it is no the amount of people that are in and around the keep grounds. It is the ball groups spamming 500 abilities a second clashing with another ball group doing the same thing in a very compact area. the Siege changes is one way to spread out the ball groups. This coupled with the other unknown changes should ideally do the trick.

Catblade

Don't forget it's not just purge that won't work, Dark cloak, shuffle, rapid maneuvers- All useless around seize. Removing counters is asinine and counter productive no matter how you argue it. Might as well scrap the entire skill system and start over . If purge is such a big deal give it the bolt escape treatment and move the hell on don't remove counters completely that's asinine

bowmanz607

WillhelmBlack wrote: »

show previous quotes

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Sanct16 wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler
Why do you hate small groups so much? This will make it even harder for groups that arent 24 man raids. You should promote smaller groups, not destroy them.

i keep seeing this. please explain how this hurts small groups? This is a tool for small groups to use to break up the larger groups and spread them out. it also allows small groups to defend a keep against ball groups. How does this hurt small groups?

20 man, small Zerg vs 6 man group, 2 tanky characters at front to apply CC's, 3 DD's and a healer. Out in the open field, which group do you think has someone spare to put up siege?

ya see that is the issue. You are talking open field. For one thing, it is easier for a small group to avoid siege together rather than a large group. Additionally, 20 people should be able to wipe 6 ppl in open field with or without siege. Not to mention siege is much harder to use in open field cause it is much easier to avoid. Regardless, the bottom line is if a 20 man group goes head to head with a 6 man group in open field then the 6 man group should die quickly. No ifs ands or buts. the only time a 6man group should wipe a 20 man group is when that 20 man group is just chilling in the field and the 6 man group drops in out of know where with ults and aoe. However, even then you should just be iven a chance to wipe them. In reality a good group of 20 should still prevail. Where 6 man groups should have higher odds of beating a 20 man group is when they are holding a defensive position. IN that sort of position you should be dropping at least oine siege, especially with the changes. It is not our fault if you do not want to use the tools given to you.

Catblade

bowmanz607 wrote: »

show previous quotes

WillhelmBlack wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Sanct16 wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler
Why do you hate small groups so much? This will make it even harder for groups that arent 24 man raids. You should promote smaller groups, not destroy them.

i keep seeing this. please explain how this hurts small groups? This is a tool for small groups to use to break up the larger groups and spread them out. it also allows small groups to defend a keep against ball groups. How does this hurt small groups?

20 man, small Zerg vs 6 man group, 2 tanky characters at front to apply CC's, 3 DD's and a healer. Out in the open field, which group do you think has someone spare to put up siege?

ya see that is the issue. You are talking open field. For one thing, it is easier for a small group to avoid siege together rather than a large group. Additionally, 20 people should be able to wipe 6 ppl in open field with or without siege. Not to mention siege is much harder to use in open field cause it is much easier to avoid. Regardless, the bottom line is if a 20 man group goes head to head with a 6 man group in open field then the 6 man group should die quickly. No ifs ands or buts. the only time a 6man group should wipe a 20 man group is when that 20 man group is just chilling in the field and the 6 man group drops in out of know where with ults and aoe. However, even then you should just be iven a chance to wipe them. In reality a good group of 20 should still prevail. Where 6 man groups should have higher odds of beating a 20 man group is when they are holding a defensive position. IN that sort of position you should be dropping at least oine siege, especially with the changes. It is not our fault if you do not want to use the tools given to you.

That's nonsense 6 man groups wipe 20 man groups all the time. Bat swarm+ magika det have you even played pvp?

Joy_Division

Ezareth wrote: »

show previous quotes

Joy_Division wrote: »

My quick thoughts:

1. Right now, ball-groups literally do not move when hit by siege. Something had to be done and that something was increase it's effectiveness
2. Everything favors larger groups. This siege, however, may prompt them to spread out. It also will help defend keeps against large groups which is the point of these weapons.
3. I think the secondary effects go too far. 6 seconds is a *long* time to be hit with an unpurgable effect. A magicka build that gets hit with an oil catapult is screwed: snare and half it's stamina gone? The solution to purgespam abuse is to reform purge, not make negative effects unpurgable.
4. Somewhere between the ineffectiveness of siege at present and the OP siege in this proposal is where siege effectiveness should be.
5. Don't forget flaming oil. It currently is bad and I didn;t see any mention about them. Now that I think about flaming oils not getting the job done, I have noticed that if I try to use them against rams at castle keep gatehouse through the grate, I never see any damage ... is this grate less than 6 meters above the ground?
6. I still think you should bring back ground oils.

I think the secondary effect of 6 seconds *sucks*...but it is designed to suck because the intent is to force people to spread out to avoid it. Avoiding Siege is going to be priority #1 for organized groups and that is a good thing.

Maybe instead of rolling around in a ball everywhere mopping up 1-2 players at a time they instead will be forced to attack multiple targets at once? This will break down a lot of the strategic advantages being given to ball groups and allow the sort of stroke/counterstroke style of combat that the majority of players enjoy (instead of being run over by a ball of AoE spam)

Let's be honest here. No PvPer fears siege right now. I sieged a keep last night while being attacked by a meatbag and 2 fire ballistas on me without my health every dropping below 90%. I think spending a good part of your time avoiding siege is going to take precedence to staying on crown. And when 3 different people lay down siege you're going to have to target all 3 at once which is going to actually give way to some *Real* group strategy and tactics which have been stale and unchanged for the past year +

PvP is stale and dying right now. This is a change that will mix things up which is exactly the sort of thing we need.

Maybe. Which is why I am willing to try this and not forecasting RIP PvP like some other posters. Though I would prefer if it was our abilities that prompted gameplay as such you are describing rather than purchasable equipment.

bowmanz607

Raizin wrote: »

show previous quotes

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Hey gang!


[*] All side effects from siege weapons (snare, healing taken reduction, siege damage increase taken) are no longer purgable.

There fixed it and also - way to *** the game more by promoting larger grps some more.

I wonder, have u ever played your game?

Once again update that breaks more then fixes - ZoS hold up to its name! Yes!

please explain how you think this is true. I have seen a few posts on this. Yet no matter how many different arguments i use against this thought no one has said why this hurts small groups and favors large ones outside of this idea that they have pople to place siege and small groups dont. is there any other argument or is this the only ridiculous argument there is? Moreover, you say this promotes large groups while citing a sentence that talks about not being able to purge certain effects. You know who spams purges? Large groups. You know who stands in siege? Large groups spamming purge. Now large groups cant just stand in the siege and they cant spam purge for the win, hmmmm seems like a large group issue.

Cryhavoc

Sotha_Sil wrote: »

@Turelus I think the issue stated by smaller groups here is that with these changes (unpurgeable stuff), enemy randoms will be able to put some sieges and the players won't be able to counter it by their skills meaning that in any case, skills won't matter anymore but instead you will simply need numbers to win. (when attacking a keep)

This is why "unpurgeable" is no good. Keep defense remains the same, still a numbers game. Walls, siege, etc are no benefit to the defense.

If anything, they should buff defense siege even higher.

Docmandu

mike.gaziotisb16_ESO wrote: »

show previous quotes

Enodoc wrote: »

mike.gaziotisb16_ESO wrote: »

Manoekin wrote: »

Having 0 control over your own character is not fun or engaging gameplay. That's why the break free system exists, and why Purge and other spells like it even exist in the game at all. You're trying to fix Wrobel's problem for him in some roundabout way that makes no sense.

That is a very astute observation, that he's trying to fix Wrobel's problem. And it's not the most elegant of solutions, agreed, but I still believe it's better than what we've currently got.

Yes losing control of your char is frustrating. Getting rooted and silenced (which is for all intends and purposes same as getting stunned) with every gap closer was the single most infuriating and idiotic change thus far. So why do I not think so badly over even more irresistible CC?

Ishammael wrote: »

The buffs to siege damage are good. The addition of magicka and stamina drain is good. Unpurgeable debuffs is awful. Six seconds is a long [...] time. Especially for classes with no mobility... Once you're stuck, you're dead as Mano observed.

On that note... Brian said that siege CC wouldn't be purgeable, but did he ever say that you won't be able to break free from it yourself? Or can you not do that now anyway?

Edit: OK, maybe I should clarify that; this is with reference to having no control over the character (root/snare), not all the different types of debuffs.

There's no hard CC secondary effect to siege. What we're saying is that having a 50% unpurgable snare is to some extent loss of control. Because it's irresistible, you can't remove it at any cost (stamina or magicka) and you have to just ride it out for the duration.

What makes me very skeptical about that is the duration (6") is equalised across all sieges (catas/trebs/ballistas). That makes ballistas and catapults very lethal because by the time the 6" have run out the same ballista will be firing at you again, meaning you can basically be pinned to the spot with no recourse.

As I've said, I'm not 100% behind this idea (unpurgable secondary effects). It needs testing first. The rest of the changes (resource drain, increased damage, cap on barrier/purge) are all very welcome.

No worries... sorcs can still Bolt Escape from incoming siege... rest of us gimped players will need a target to gap close to, to get out of a siege circle fast.

And templars will toppling charge and then get stuck anyway.. they're already used to being stuck not able to do anything!

bowmanz607

LazyLewis wrote: »

In my two years of playing this game this has to be one of the worst proposed updates I have ever seen. ARE YOU ACTUALLY KIDDING ME ZOS? THIS IS YOUR ANSWER.

Firstly this promotes more zerging because people are gonna wanna be in a bigger safer group with more healers than ever.

YOU ARE GONNA GIVE PEOPLE THE POWER TO DRAIN MULTIPLE PEOPLES STAMINA AND MAGIKA POOLS SIMULTANEOUSLY. WHO THE HELL COMES UP WITH THESE IDEAS?

IS THIS EVEN GONNA BE TESTED ON A LARGE SCALE FIRSTLY?

IM UTTERLY AND PROFOUNDLY SHOCKED AT THESE CHANGES.

*breathe*

LESS SKILL AND MORE ZERG
LESS SKILL AND MORE ZERG
LESS SKILL AND MORE ZERG
LESS SKILL AND MORE ZERG
LESS SKILL AND MORE ZERG
LESS SKILL AND MORE ZERG

that makes no sense. the bigger the group the more you will get hit with siege. the smaller the group the less likely ppl will use siege against you. Also, the champ tree made it so any person who even half-way knows what they are doing have no issues with resource managment. this make resource management a real thing again. Also, you dont like getting hit with it, then guess waht...DONT STAND IN IT!!!! People keep talking about how people will run in bigger groups because they will need more heals. Ya maybe IF YOUR STANDING IN THE DAMN RED CIRCLE! Sure if people continue to stand in siege ike they curntly do know then ya you might want more healers and what not around you. Dont stand in the crap! dodgeroll! Again this change still needs to be tested and will be coupled with other changes in the game so dont get your panties in a wad just yet.

Take a deep breathe, step back, wait for the other changes to be announced, and then jump on the PTS to test it out.

Docmandu

Sotha_Sil wrote: »

show previous quotes

frozywozy wrote: »

http://www.esohead.com/skills/40211-retreating-maneuver

Apparently maneuver won't work and I guess this is also the case for shuffle. The immunity will or will not (?) be applied but it won't cleanse snare for sure. It's what wheeler said.

show previous quotes

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Anything that removes a "negative" effect is considered a purge, so not just the "Purge" abliity as you noted.

Problem is... if they make it somehow purgeable, it will completely be negated by the crown stacks that this change is trying to work against.

Turelus

Cryhavoc wrote: »

show previous quotes

Sotha_Sil wrote: »

@Turelus I think the issue stated by smaller groups here is that with these changes (unpurgeable stuff), enemy randoms will be able to put some sieges and the players won't be able to counter it by their skills meaning that in any case, skills won't matter anymore but instead you will simply need numbers to win. (when attacking a keep)

This is why "unpurgeable" is no good. Keep defense remains the same, still a numbers game. Walls, siege, etc are no benefit to the defense.

If anything, they should buff defense siege even higher.

What happens if the numbers are the defenders? You buff them once again.

TBH I think they can solve the meatbag at a skill or AoE cap level rather than making it unpurgeable. There have been some good arguments as to why that's not a good idea.

Have the meatbag function as it does now but raise (or remove) the cap of how many people are effected by it and make changes to purge so one or more people spamming it isn't the solution to beating it.

In a groups number way then I feel the AoE cap removal fixes the issue all on it's own, you stack 24 guys on one spot and get pelted with Lightning Ballista and Meatbag then you won't be able to permanently purge any more due to resources and additionally you need to cast more times because you have more people who need to be cleansed.

frozywozy

Erondil wrote: »

show previous quotes

Turelus wrote: »

Someone edit that quote string and remove my name, I keep coming back here expecting more poo slung at me.

I just had to take some breaths and mentally prepare myself because I saw "AbraXuSeXile mentioned you" and was expecting the worst.

How much do the smaller groups see siege being fired at them on flags within keeps at the moment? From my own experience leading groups I find normally we can't get anyone to place siege a a defence and if we do it's just one fire ballista. The meatbags tend to come from randoms also within the keep if we ever get one.

I haven't been around the last weeks (because Fallout) and I know Torsten has a heavy favour on siege weapons but from my own experience it's not been something we actively use once inside and fighting for flags.

Erondil makes a good point with flags becoming death zones now which might be something ZOS want to consider.

At some point we are literally sieged by everywhere. Meatbags and ballista/trebuchets from outside the breach, oils on every postern and oil over the main gate flag. Actually most of the time we wipe is because people keep ressing in our back and put sieges everywhere (though 1 siege doesnt do much true). We usually have one group mate going upfloor to clear oils etc (me or some other nb mostly) but when there are 4+ ppl up one of us cant clear it fast enough (and if the whole group goes up, they will get ressed as soon as we go back on the flags).

Erondil, in 4 of your last post, you elaborate into the fact that people keep ressing in your back. This isn't a problem related to siege. This is a problem related to Krag's set and the fact that there is absolutely no penality for getting resurrected over and over again. It has nothing to do with buffing sieges.

Your issue could be fixed by introducing one of the follwing options :

1) The more you die and the more time it takes for friendlies to resurrect you (channeling)
2) The more you die and the more time it takes for your body to becomes available to be resurrected (cross symbol)
3) When you get resurrected, you have to play with a resurrection sickness for 5 minutes (lower stats)
4) A player can only resurrect an ally every minute

@ZOS_BrianWheeler

RDMyers65b14_ESO wrote: »

First of all, since when have pugs ever brought siege to the fight? Just today, I was sieging a keep by myself while 6 pugs stood around and did nothing to help. Of course, after I brought down the walls, they were quick to rush the flags and claim the keep. Usually, they don't bother with sieging or if you are running multiple siege, they will steal one. *facepalm*

Overall, I like the changes but one. As a healer, I have to disagree with completely unpurgable damage. I can see placing a cap on the number of people who are purged but to make all the damage unpurgable is a bit extreme. I would like to hear the answer to the question of if siege shield would work against the unpurgable damage. Right now, I rarely use the skill because it is more effective to use purge than to put up the siege shield.

It is still early and it has not hit the PTS yet so I am going to take the wait and see approach. ZOS has said that it is subject to change.

It would make sense to have a new skill line for siege weapons.

What you describe here is the typical attitude and mindset of AP farmers. They rarely siege and have banked up over 10 millions AP but you will see them complaining in forums that there is nothing useful to spend their APs on. Shameful.

Sotha_Sil wrote: »

@Turelus I think the issue stated by smaller groups here is that with these changes (unpurgeable stuff), enemy randoms will be able to put some sieges and the players won't be able to counter it by their skills meaning that in any case, skills won't matter anymore but instead you will simply need numbers to win. (when attacking a keep)

Upload me a quick video of you deploying a siege as you rush inside a breach because I can't figure out your point here.

Alcast wrote: »

show previous quotes

Turelus wrote: »

Alcast wrote: »

RIP small/medium sized grps with that healing debuff. I guess ZOS really wants ppl to stack up hardcore so even rthe biggest idiots who have no clue what they are doing survives bc of numbers.

It is always nice to see that ZOS does not even bother asking experienced ppl about such changes

Stacking up with these changes (more so if also augmented by AoE cap changes) would be the dumbest counter possible.

Also what do you think this thread is for if not for asking experienced people about changes, sadly however it seems the "experienced" people only have time to post "OMG CHANGE!!! I HATE CHANGE!!! RIP ESO!!! FU ZOS!!!"

I already know they will not listen to ppl anyway although they say so haha. But dont worry, you will ge your new vanity pet in crownstore soon!!!

Ok so you don't bother giving constructive criticism because ZOS won't listen but you think they will listen more to your whining ? Make sense.