Upcoming siege changes in next major update

Satiar

jrkhan wrote: »

Zheg wrote: »

jrkhan wrote: »

@Satiar

I'm not sure what to tell you if you can't theory craft a way to take a keep against 2x your number of unorganized defenders using the proposed siege mechanic...

Maybe use your superior coordination to flag neighboring keeps before the 2x your number arrive?
Maybe try, not moving in a predictable pattern, so the siege has a harder time hitting you?
Maybe try, seiging with 6 and have the rest of your group cut off defenders at choke points?

Maybe move to an area of the keep where only 1 or 2 siege can hit you?

And those are just ways that don't involve actually changing group formation.

If these sorts of things don't help out, the defenders probably aren't potatoes... They shouldn't have to use the same tactic as you to beat you.

You describe a scenario 'attacking a keep with 2x your numbers defending' that if you were marginally creative, you could avoid in the first place.

This comes from experience taking keeps in bwb before 1.5, when 3 guys with siege could easily wipe stacked groups. Tactics like these were necessary.. Now groups like yours just barrel through anything that isn't another ball group.

And when there are no nearby keeps left and there's only one keep that makes sense to hit? Something so obvious even enemy pugs know to be there before a scout warns them? What then? Go hit drakelowe? Smart.

Or how about when there are two keeps left that make sense to hit? Stack with the other group/s hitting the other keep and Zerg it down? I'm sure everyone would love that. Or maybe go push the third alliance who is at 2 bars and down to their tri keeps so you can motivate the remaining pop to log?

Experienced groups who push well defended keeps with enemy siege already know how difficult it is for a single team to do. There are times when you literally can't NOT be hit by countersiege if you want to actually siege down a wall or door. Everyone who say 'just spread out' does so because they have little to zero experience actually pushing those tough well defended objectives and probably just zerg surf. Most of the time we push a heavily defended brk, it's just us. The proposals I've heard thus far are spread out (shows a clear lack of understanding of what those fights even look like), bring far more numbers (that'll help the performance...), or go push a useless undefended objective instead. All great ideas, keep em coming.

When there are no nearby keeps left, things do get interesting.
Brk is not an example of this as first flagging or taking arrius is certainly helpful.

Note:
None of the suggestions you quoted in my post involved either spreading out, changing to worthless objectives, or bringing more people.

So, for arguments sake, let's say brk is the last emp keep,you've already taken Arrius, and it's just your group against the entire red faction (AD has logged for the night)

Assuming you are fighting pugs:
If you choose to hit a target that your enemy is already actively defending, 'convince them you are weak when you are not'
Unorganized pugs will venture out of the keep if you aren't actively attacking it.
Then have a few people flag the keep, reconsolidate, wipe them open field.

Or if they really won't leave the keep and they have more patience then you? (At which point they are more disciplined than you)

Quickly switch sides, placing troll siege as you go, settle in a relatively defensible spot, and whittle away at it.

There are more strategies than these - but let's see you specifically talk about these first.

I've been taking keeps with experienced groups for a year and a half now.
There is no time where you are forced to eat siege damage.
If you are taking heavy siege you are doing it wrong.
There are times when group leaders make the call to do so anyway, because the current mechanics make it far easier than it should be to do, but don't pretend that's the only option.

Wat?

Unless you are PvDooring a keep, you need to set up a siege line inside and/or out. Defenders will skirmish your line the entire time abd BLANKET you with siege. If you're not getting counter sieges than you're taking empty keeps or keeps with randoms in it who are SO NEW at the game they do t know to put down siege.

Essentially, are you high sir?

Plus, as a raid lead I try to do things like... not push a faction to thier gates? I don't want to stomp on faces I don't want to make a faction log off. I almost never take Arrius/Farra/Kings because it quite literally can kill a factions will to Pvp. If you're suggesting the best way to take a heavily contested keep should be to do just that, than your priorities are messed up.

maxjapank

Enodoc wrote: »

maxjapank wrote: »

Ghostbane wrote: »

Brian,

Not sure if this is taboo, or not following the Lore, but,

Ground Oils?

I keep hearing "ground oils", and though I understand the intention of using something against zergs, using a pot of oil on the ground was always silly. And I would never support reverting "oil pots" back to this. But I am not against the idea of something else in its place.

I don't see why not. If I had a pot of oil, and I tipped it up in-place, at ground level, it would spread out radially from the pot. The only problem with it is that it wouldn't damage allies, which it should do (but then, all siege should damage allies).

Sorry. Still not seeing it. Oil pots have always been used to drop down from something. Not put on the ground.

frozywozy

Satiar wrote: »

jrkhan wrote: »

Zheg wrote: »

jrkhan wrote: »

@Satiar

I'm not sure what to tell you if you can't theory craft a way to take a keep against 2x your number of unorganized defenders using the proposed siege mechanic...

Maybe use your superior coordination to flag neighboring keeps before the 2x your number arrive?
Maybe try, not moving in a predictable pattern, so the siege has a harder time hitting you?
Maybe try, seiging with 6 and have the rest of your group cut off defenders at choke points?

Maybe move to an area of the keep where only 1 or 2 siege can hit you?

And those are just ways that don't involve actually changing group formation.

If these sorts of things don't help out, the defenders probably aren't potatoes... They shouldn't have to use the same tactic as you to beat you.

You describe a scenario 'attacking a keep with 2x your numbers defending' that if you were marginally creative, you could avoid in the first place.

This comes from experience taking keeps in bwb before 1.5, when 3 guys with siege could easily wipe stacked groups. Tactics like these were necessary.. Now groups like yours just barrel through anything that isn't another ball group.

And when there are no nearby keeps left and there's only one keep that makes sense to hit? Something so obvious even enemy pugs know to be there before a scout warns them? What then? Go hit drakelowe? Smart.

Or how about when there are two keeps left that make sense to hit? Stack with the other group/s hitting the other keep and Zerg it down? I'm sure everyone would love that. Or maybe go push the third alliance who is at 2 bars and down to their tri keeps so you can motivate the remaining pop to log?

Experienced groups who push well defended keeps with enemy siege already know how difficult it is for a single team to do. There are times when you literally can't NOT be hit by countersiege if you want to actually siege down a wall or door. Everyone who say 'just spread out' does so because they have little to zero experience actually pushing those tough well defended objectives and probably just zerg surf. Most of the time we push a heavily defended brk, it's just us. The proposals I've heard thus far are spread out (shows a clear lack of understanding of what those fights even look like), bring far more numbers (that'll help the performance...), or go push a useless undefended objective instead. All great ideas, keep em coming.

When there are no nearby keeps left, things do get interesting.
Brk is not an example of this as first flagging or taking arrius is certainly helpful.

Note:
None of the suggestions you quoted in my post involved either spreading out, changing to worthless objectives, or bringing more people.

So, for arguments sake, let's say brk is the last emp keep,you've already taken Arrius, and it's just your group against the entire red faction (AD has logged for the night)

Assuming you are fighting pugs:
If you choose to hit a target that your enemy is already actively defending, 'convince them you are weak when you are not'
Unorganized pugs will venture out of the keep if you aren't actively attacking it.
Then have a few people flag the keep, reconsolidate, wipe them open field.

Or if they really won't leave the keep and they have more patience then you? (At which point they are more disciplined than you)

Quickly switch sides, placing troll siege as you go, settle in a relatively defensible spot, and whittle away at it.

There are more strategies than these - but let's see you specifically talk about these first.

I've been taking keeps with experienced groups for a year and a half now.
There is no time where you are forced to eat siege damage.
If you are taking heavy siege you are doing it wrong.
There are times when group leaders make the call to do so anyway, because the current mechanics make it far easier than it should be to do, but don't pretend that's the only option.

Wat?

Unless you are PvDooring a keep, you need to set up a siege line inside and/or out. Defenders will skirmish your line the entire time abd BLANKET you with siege. If you're not getting counter sieges than you're taking empty keeps or keeps with randoms in it who are SO NEW at the game they do t know to put down siege.

Essentially, are you high sir?

Plus, as a raid lead I try to do things like... not push a faction to thier gates? I don't want to stomp on faces I don't want to make a faction log off. I almost never take Arrius/Farra/Kings because it quite literally can kill a factions will to Pvp. If you're suggesting the best way to take a heavily contested keep should be to do just that, than your priorities are messed up.

And this is exactly why the last campaign and since the beginning of this one, we see DC with very high AP gains even though the campaign score is pretty even. Guilds like yours will claim that they are being respectful to the other factions by not pushing them, and in the meantime you farm huge amount of AP killing pugs or guilds with less experience. Then in the end of the campaign you make a final huge push to secure the campaign victory and you claim that it was a well earned one.

This doesn't really help to even out the fights. If you really wanna be helpful, push the reds and the yellow to their gates and then maybe some wise DC guild will realize that it is time to reroll in another campaign because there is no competition whatsoever on Azura Star anymore.

But again, I doubt this will happen. People enjoy way too much killing large numbers without too much efforts. Such as what we see everyday when said DC group camps Sej, Nikel and Arrius mine tower.

Satiar

frozywozy wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

jrkhan wrote: »

Zheg wrote: »

jrkhan wrote: »

@Satiar

I'm not sure what to tell you if you can't theory craft a way to take a keep against 2x your number of unorganized defenders using the proposed siege mechanic...

Maybe use your superior coordination to flag neighboring keeps before the 2x your number arrive?
Maybe try, not moving in a predictable pattern, so the siege has a harder time hitting you?
Maybe try, seiging with 6 and have the rest of your group cut off defenders at choke points?

Maybe move to an area of the keep where only 1 or 2 siege can hit you?

And those are just ways that don't involve actually changing group formation.

If these sorts of things don't help out, the defenders probably aren't potatoes... They shouldn't have to use the same tactic as you to beat you.

You describe a scenario 'attacking a keep with 2x your numbers defending' that if you were marginally creative, you could avoid in the first place.

This comes from experience taking keeps in bwb before 1.5, when 3 guys with siege could easily wipe stacked groups. Tactics like these were necessary.. Now groups like yours just barrel through anything that isn't another ball group.

And when there are no nearby keeps left and there's only one keep that makes sense to hit? Something so obvious even enemy pugs know to be there before a scout warns them? What then? Go hit drakelowe? Smart.

Or how about when there are two keeps left that make sense to hit? Stack with the other group/s hitting the other keep and Zerg it down? I'm sure everyone would love that. Or maybe go push the third alliance who is at 2 bars and down to their tri keeps so you can motivate the remaining pop to log?

Experienced groups who push well defended keeps with enemy siege already know how difficult it is for a single team to do. There are times when you literally can't NOT be hit by countersiege if you want to actually siege down a wall or door. Everyone who say 'just spread out' does so because they have little to zero experience actually pushing those tough well defended objectives and probably just zerg surf. Most of the time we push a heavily defended brk, it's just us. The proposals I've heard thus far are spread out (shows a clear lack of understanding of what those fights even look like), bring far more numbers (that'll help the performance...), or go push a useless undefended objective instead. All great ideas, keep em coming.

When there are no nearby keeps left, things do get interesting.
Brk is not an example of this as first flagging or taking arrius is certainly helpful.

Note:
None of the suggestions you quoted in my post involved either spreading out, changing to worthless objectives, or bringing more people.

So, for arguments sake, let's say brk is the last emp keep,you've already taken Arrius, and it's just your group against the entire red faction (AD has logged for the night)

Assuming you are fighting pugs:
If you choose to hit a target that your enemy is already actively defending, 'convince them you are weak when you are not'
Unorganized pugs will venture out of the keep if you aren't actively attacking it.
Then have a few people flag the keep, reconsolidate, wipe them open field.

Or if they really won't leave the keep and they have more patience then you? (At which point they are more disciplined than you)

Quickly switch sides, placing troll siege as you go, settle in a relatively defensible spot, and whittle away at it.

There are more strategies than these - but let's see you specifically talk about these first.

I've been taking keeps with experienced groups for a year and a half now.
There is no time where you are forced to eat siege damage.
If you are taking heavy siege you are doing it wrong.
There are times when group leaders make the call to do so anyway, because the current mechanics make it far easier than it should be to do, but don't pretend that's the only option.

Wat?

Unless you are PvDooring a keep, you need to set up a siege line inside and/or out. Defenders will skirmish your line the entire time abd BLANKET you with siege. If you're not getting counter sieges than you're taking empty keeps or keeps with randoms in it who are SO NEW at the game they do t know to put down siege.

Essentially, are you high sir?

Plus, as a raid lead I try to do things like... not push a faction to thier gates? I don't want to stomp on faces I don't want to make a faction log off. I almost never take Arrius/Farra/Kings because it quite literally can kill a factions will to Pvp. If you're suggesting the best way to take a heavily contested keep should be to do just that, than your priorities are messed up.

And this is exactly why the last campaign and since the beginning of this one, we see DC with very high AP gains even though the campaign score is pretty even. Guilds like yours will claim that they are being respectful to the other factions by not pushing them, and in the meantime you farm huge amount of AP killing pugs or guilds with less experience. Then in the end of the campaign you make a final huge push to secure the campaign victory and you claim that it was a well earned one.

This doesn't really help to even out the fights. If you really wanna be helpful, push the reds and the yellow to their gates and then maybe some wise DC guild will realize that it is time to reroll in another campaign because there is no competition whatsoever on Azura Star anymore.

But again, I doubt this will happen. People enjoy way too much killing large numbers without too much efforts. Such as what we see everyday when said DC group camps Sej, Nikel and Arrius mine tower.

The whole reason VE rerolled was the awful faction imbalance, watching DC and AD get rolled to thier gates every night with less and less resistance each time. It was disgusting. Our first major beef with a DC guild came from us refusing to join them in zerging Arrius and pushing the gates.

I won't deny trying to get my guys fights and kills when online, cuz honestly most of the time it only takes me wiping EP/AD at Bleakers/Ash a few times before they go on the defensive. But unlike red, which has zero qualms taking every single DC keep, resource and scroll when organized resistance is not strong, I'm actually cognizant of what this does to the game. Gate camping people on EP never did a thing except kill all competition, I refuse to repeat that problem on DC.

And if you find that a better alternative to running around the mike gate or chal mine, than I don't even know what to say to you.

Darlgon

Manoekin wrote: »

I don't blame you for not knowing. There are a lot of things in this game you can't know without testing them first because the information is not there. Theorycrafting is really, really important, and I've been lucky to have been surrounded by some of the best since the beginning of the game.

Thanks, I think. My theory crafting mostly comes from checking in-game tool tips, getting what data I can from FTC and other addons, which dont always agree, and mainly trying to keep up with the official ZoS statements are

Well.. since someone seems to be bent on me being proven wrong today.. May as well correct this one.

Lets look at Brians comments in this thread so far.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Battlespirit did indeed change the value of damage from Siege weapons, which we are looking to correct with these changes.

Did he say. only against players? Does the Battle Spirit Debuff?

in-Game ToolTips wrote:

- Increase Health 5000
- Reduce damage taken 50%
- Reduce healing received and damage shield strength by 50%
- Increase range of abilities with greater than 28m range by 8m

Yep ... interesting.. I guess the NPCs do NOT have this Battle Spirit Debuff then, which is why they melt to siege and players do not.

Funny tho. My heal values actually get reduced on my tooltips, and my shields are half power of outside Cyrodiil.

I have YET to find a previous quote from ZoS about siege ignoring the cap, which was introduced around the same time as Battle Spirit.All I can find so far?

From Jan 26,2015

1.6 Patch Notes wrote:

Updated the Cyrodiil buff Battle Spirit so it now reduces damage taken and healing received.

And

From March 3, 2015

1.6.5 Patch Notes wrote:

Other Major Gameplay Changes

The only stats that now cap are Impenetrable, reducing the Critical Strike bonus damage to 0%, and Armor and Spell
Removed hard caps on the number of targets that can be affected by area of effect abilities.
AoE abilities can now hit up to 60 targets; the first 6 will take 100% damage, the next 24 targets will take 50% damage, and the last 30 targets will take 25% damage.
Abilities that apply a secondary effect, such as Dark Talons, will only immobilize the first 6 targets who take damage.
Healing reduction and damage reduction bonuses are now multiplicative instead of additive.
For example, two 50% damage reduction bonuses would have previously resulted in 100% reduced damage, but will now cause 75% reduced damage.

Siege still produces an AOE in my book. Why the division between Team Eric and Team Brian.. no idea who gets credit for what?

FENGRUSH

Totally missed this thread. Wheres the siege weapon that does more damage per targets hit - FENGRUSH will use this one!

Darlgon

Hmm.. Wheeler is on ESO Live tomorrow.. start peppering the thread...

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/234090/official-discussion-thread-for-eso-lives-next-episode-12-4

Teargrants

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Totally missed this thread. Wheres the siege weapon that does more damage per targets hit - FENGRUSH will use this one!

You mean this siege?

Darlgon

Teargrants wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Totally missed this thread. Wheres the siege weapon that does more damage per targets hit - FENGRUSH will use this one!

You mean this siege?

Ooohh..

LIGHTNING BALLISTA TREB CATAPULT..

COOOL.

ZOS_BrianWheeler

Further discussion points about Meatbag going on:

We are currently discussing a -50% value on the healing taken debuff instead of -75% (which it currently is on Live), as well as reducing the duration to 6s from 16s, keeping it in line with the other siege sub-effects. We are still leaning towards keeping it unpurgable but with the values noted here.

There are also many points made here about Purge (the ability) which the combat team is noting as well, and we appreciate the constructive posts about Purge, Barrier, and smart heals along with the Siege chat!

jrkhan

Satiar wrote: »

jrkhan wrote: »

Zheg wrote: »

jrkhan wrote: »

@Satiar

I'm not sure what to tell you if you can't theory craft a way to take a keep against 2x your number of unorganized defenders using the proposed siege mechanic...

Maybe use your superior coordination to flag neighboring keeps before the 2x your number arrive?
Maybe try, not moving in a predictable pattern, so the siege has a harder time hitting you?
Maybe try, seiging with 6 and have the rest of your group cut off defenders at choke points?

Maybe move to an area of the keep where only 1 or 2 siege can hit you?

And those are just ways that don't involve actually changing group formation.

If these sorts of things don't help out, the defenders probably aren't potatoes... They shouldn't have to use the same tactic as you to beat you.

You describe a scenario 'attacking a keep with 2x your numbers defending' that if you were marginally creative, you could avoid in the first place.

This comes from experience taking keeps in bwb before 1.5, when 3 guys with siege could easily wipe stacked groups. Tactics like these were necessary.. Now groups like yours just barrel through anything that isn't another ball group.

And when there are no nearby keeps left and there's only one keep that makes sense to hit? Something so obvious even enemy pugs know to be there before a scout warns them? What then? Go hit drakelowe? Smart.

Or how about when there are two keeps left that make sense to hit? Stack with the other group/s hitting the other keep and Zerg it down? I'm sure everyone would love that. Or maybe go push the third alliance who is at 2 bars and down to their tri keeps so you can motivate the remaining pop to log?

Experienced groups who push well defended keeps with enemy siege already know how difficult it is for a single team to do. There are times when you literally can't NOT be hit by countersiege if you want to actually siege down a wall or door. Everyone who say 'just spread out' does so because they have little to zero experience actually pushing those tough well defended objectives and probably just zerg surf. Most of the time we push a heavily defended brk, it's just us. The proposals I've heard thus far are spread out (shows a clear lack of understanding of what those fights even look like), bring far more numbers (that'll help the performance...), or go push a useless undefended objective instead. All great ideas, keep em coming.

When there are no nearby keeps left, things do get interesting.
Brk is not an example of this as first flagging or taking arrius is certainly helpful.

Note:
None of the suggestions you quoted in my post involved either spreading out, changing to worthless objectives, or bringing more people.

So, for arguments sake, let's say brk is the last emp keep,you've already taken Arrius, and it's just your group against the entire red faction (AD has logged for the night)

Assuming you are fighting pugs:
If you choose to hit a target that your enemy is already actively defending, 'convince them you are weak when you are not'
Unorganized pugs will venture out of the keep if you aren't actively attacking it.
Then have a few people flag the keep, reconsolidate, wipe them open field.

Or if they really won't leave the keep and they have more patience then you? (At which point they are more disciplined than you)

Quickly switch sides, placing troll siege as you go, settle in a relatively defensible spot, and whittle away at it.

There are more strategies than these - but let's see you specifically talk about these first.

I've been taking keeps with experienced groups for a year and a half now.
There is no time where you are forced to eat siege damage.
If you are taking heavy siege you are doing it wrong.
There are times when group leaders make the call to do so anyway, because the current mechanics make it far easier than it should be to do, but don't pretend that's the only option.

Wat?

Unless you are PvDooring a keep, you need to set up a siege line inside and/or out. Defenders will skirmish your line the entire time abd BLANKET you with siege. If you're not getting counter sieges than you're taking empty keeps or keeps with randoms in it who are SO NEW at the game they do t know to put down siege.

Essentially, are you high sir?

Plus, as a raid lead I try to do things like... not push a faction to thier gates? I don't want to stomp on faces I don't want to make a faction log off. I almost never take Arrius/Farra/Kings because it quite literally can kill a factions will to Pvp. If you're suggesting the best way to take a heavily contested keep should be to do just that, than your priorities are messed up.

I'm neither high nor inexperienced.

So, you are saying, you refuse to discourage pugs by taking inner keeps... And would prefer the pugs instead hit you with siege weapons, but you don't want those weapons to pose a credible threat? ?

Am I misunderstanding you here or is that literally what you are saying?

That would be like saying, I don't want to discourage my opponents, so I play with one hand tied behind my back, don't bother dodging any of their punches, and expect to win anyway.


If you want to actually talk about how to deal with pugs wielding effective siege, then respond specifically to the points I've made.

Reiterating the current strategy you use, is not a good way to convince people that other possible strategies can't be effective.

nordickittyhawk

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Totally missed this thread. Wheres the siege weapon that does more damage per targets hit - FENGRUSH will use this one!

Thats a really clever concept that would wipe out ball groups!.

Also @ZOS_BrianWheeler since your buffing seige. Are you going to trying to encourage more use for the siege bubble/shield if so id like see them poping up around alot (Just make sure ball groups cant use em)

Starshadw

nordickittyhawk wrote: »

Are you going to trying to encourage more use for the siege bubble/shield if so id like see them poping up around alot (Just make sure ball groups cant use em)

And of course, therein lies the rub. Because anything solo-ers/small groups can use, zergs/blobs can use.

Manoekin

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Further discussion points about Meatbag going on:

We are currently discussing a -50% value on the healing taken debuff instead of -75% (which it currently is on Live), as well as reducing the duration to 6s from 16s, keeping it in line with the other siege sub-effects. We are still leaning towards keeping it unpurgable but with the values noted here.

There are also many points made here about Purge (the ability) which the combat team is noting as well, and we appreciate the constructive posts about Purge, Barrier, and smart heals along with the Siege chat!

Why should I not replace the healers in my group with Obsidian Shield spamming DK's? It would produce more effective damage mitigation than a heal that's only 75% as effective as the tooltip. You're going to break an entire aspect of the game.

frozywozy

Manoekin wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Further discussion points about Meatbag going on:

We are currently discussing a -50% value on the healing taken debuff instead of -75% (which it currently is on Live), as well as reducing the duration to 6s from 16s, keeping it in line with the other siege sub-effects. We are still leaning towards keeping it unpurgable but with the values noted here.

There are also many points made here about Purge (the ability) which the combat team is noting as well, and we appreciate the constructive posts about Purge, Barrier, and smart heals along with the Siege chat!

Why should I not replace the healers in my group with Obsidian Shield spamming DK's? It would produce more effective damage mitigation than a heal that's only 75% as effective as the tooltip. You're going to break an entire aspect of the game.

Igneous Shield scales off health. Dragonknight with 30k+ health and enough magicka to spam Igneous Shield while having enough stamina to dodge roll a couple times to avoid siege damage? GL with that!

RoamingRiverElk

Starshadw wrote: »

nordickittyhawk wrote: »

Are you going to trying to encourage more use for the siege bubble/shield if so id like see them poping up around alot (Just make sure ball groups cant use em)

And of course, therein lies the rub. Because anything solo-ers/small groups can use, zergs/blobs can use.

The only thing where that's different is skills/siege which do increasing damage / negative effects the more targets are hit. And in reverse - the less damage / negative effects the less targets are hit. Dynamic ultimate generation helped with this. Magicka detonation fails because its curve isn't steep enough from 1 target hit (very little damage) to 24 targets hit (huge damage). Dynamic ultimate generation would not only help small groups, it would also help magicka DKs. And it would actually reward you for *doing things* instead of just getting ultimate generation for free.

jrkhan

Manoekin wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Further discussion points about Meatbag going on:

We are currently discussing a -50% value on the healing taken debuff instead of -75% (which it currently is on Live), as well as reducing the duration to 6s from 16s, keeping it in line with the other siege sub-effects. We are still leaning towards keeping it unpurgable but with the values noted here.

There are also many points made here about Purge (the ability) which the combat team is noting as well, and we appreciate the constructive posts about Purge, Barrier, and smart heals along with the Siege chat!

Why should I not replace the healers in my group with Obsidian Shield spamming DK's? It would produce more effective damage mitigation than a heal that's only 75% as effective as the tooltip. You're going to break an entire aspect of the game.

I think the idea is, if your group is hit by a 90% of the time avoidable siege weapon (either by proactively placing your own troll siege, or simply moving out of the way) then the 10% of the time you are hit, you should be at a disadvantage.
Sometimes, even after being hit, your stacked group will still prevail. Sometimes they will not.
This is as it should be.

Regarding your remark on Obsidian Shield, perhaps healing debuffs should also effect damage shields granted to other players.
It would also help reign in barrier.
While not effecting sorc shields in any way (this is not a nerf sorc thread)!

WRX

Manoekin wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Further discussion points about Meatbag going on:

We are currently discussing a -50% value on the healing taken debuff instead of -75% (which it currently is on Live), as well as reducing the duration to 6s from 16s, keeping it in line with the other siege sub-effects. We are still leaning towards keeping it unpurgable but with the values noted here.

There are also many points made here about Purge (the ability) which the combat team is noting as well, and we appreciate the constructive posts about Purge, Barrier, and smart heals along with the Siege chat!

Why should I not replace the healers in my group with Obsidian Shield spamming DK's? It would produce more effective damage mitigation than a heal that's only 75% as effective as the tooltip. You're going to break an entire aspect of the game.

25%, I think you just put the wrong number.

But you are completely right. @ZOS_BrianWheeler I think nearly all people agree that the sieges do need a buff. The previous buff done before the battle spirit buff was fairly reasonable, and many groups got wiped in choke points with all types of siege.

But giving no counter to getting hit by siege is drastic. As I mentioned before, I actually like the resource drain idea, make that unable to be purged.

Healing and snares should have a counter that can be used by all players, stamina or magicka, even if it is a skill that you must apply prior to being hit. Again I go back to reworking the guard skill, and give it the ability to be resistant to siege effects only for x amount of seconds. Nothing extreme, but something reasonable enough for you to survive one or two siege hits. If you get by a siege when the buff is not active on yourself, then you receive the full effect.

The above option is not ideal, but it offers some sort of mild counter, meanwhile making siege still very valuable.

Enodoc

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Totally missed this thread. Wheres the siege weapon that does more damage per targets hit - FENGRUSH will use this one!

That was what I suggested for AoEs in the AoE thread

WRX

jrkhan wrote: »

Manoekin wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Further discussion points about Meatbag going on:

We are currently discussing a -50% value on the healing taken debuff instead of -75% (which it currently is on Live), as well as reducing the duration to 6s from 16s, keeping it in line with the other siege sub-effects. We are still leaning towards keeping it unpurgable but with the values noted here.

There are also many points made here about Purge (the ability) which the combat team is noting as well, and we appreciate the constructive posts about Purge, Barrier, and smart heals along with the Siege chat!

Why should I not replace the healers in my group with Obsidian Shield spamming DK's? It would produce more effective damage mitigation than a heal that's only 75% as effective as the tooltip. You're going to break an entire aspect of the game.

I think the idea is, if your group is hit by a 90% of the time avoidable siege weapon (either by proactively placing your own troll siege, or simply moving out of the way) then the 10% of the time you are hit, you should be at a disadvantage.
Sometimes, even after being hit, your stacked group will still prevail. Sometimes they will not.
This is as it should be.

Regarding your remark on Obsidian Shield, perhaps healing debuffs should also effect damage shields granted to other players.
It would also help reign in barrier.
While not effecting sorc shields in any way (this is not a nerf sorc thread)!

No way. The point he was trying to make is it removes players main way to mitigate damage. We don't need to add on top of that.

bowmanz607

I would like to point something out to people that say this helps the large groups. The reasoning here seems to be that it is because they have more numbers and can set down more siege. Here is the issue. Many of you are trying to put small groups on equal terms as the large groups. That is just not logical. What this does is give a CHANCE for a small group to fight a larger griup. Everyone has equal access to siege. The problem right now is that siege does not give a small group a chance against larger ones. So currently a large group has the advantage of siege because there is currently little value to a small group dropping siege on a larger group whereas a larger group can utilize siege to put more pressure on that smaller group. What these changes allow is for small groups to now pressure those larger griups.

Additionally, the removal of soft caps is another way to give a CHANCE for smaller groups to defeat a larger group.

When push comes to shove smaller groups will always have an inherent disadvantage of numbers. Trying to make it otherwise is illogical. Ya sure a large group has more bodies for siege. That does not mean that the siege will not be useful for smaller groups. The issue now is that the game mechanics give incentives to run in groups such as a gain and damage mitigation for aoe damage. The game caters to large groups in that way. Simply giving everyone access to the same tools does not give more incentives to run in a large group. It merely gives everyone equal acess.

By saying that the siege changes are giving more incentives to run in a group because they have more numbers to use them is like saying that skills give more incentives to run in a group because you have more numbers to use more skills.

At some point having superior numbers is going to win. The issue is not whether superior numbers should win, but whether smaller numbers have an opportunity or chance to win against larger numbers. Currently the answer is no. With these changes the answer moves toward the answer yes.

jrkhan

WRX wrote: »

jrkhan wrote: »

Manoekin wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Further discussion points about Meatbag going on:

We are currently discussing a -50% value on the healing taken debuff instead of -75% (which it currently is on Live), as well as reducing the duration to 6s from 16s, keeping it in line with the other siege sub-effects. We are still leaning towards keeping it unpurgable but with the values noted here.

There are also many points made here about Purge (the ability) which the combat team is noting as well, and we appreciate the constructive posts about Purge, Barrier, and smart heals along with the Siege chat!

Why should I not replace the healers in my group with Obsidian Shield spamming DK's? It would produce more effective damage mitigation than a heal that's only 75% as effective as the tooltip. You're going to break an entire aspect of the game.

I think the idea is, if your group is hit by a 90% of the time avoidable siege weapon (either by proactively placing your own troll siege, or simply moving out of the way) then the 10% of the time you are hit, you should be at a disadvantage.
Sometimes, even after being hit, your stacked group will still prevail. Sometimes they will not.
This is as it should be.

Regarding your remark on Obsidian Shield, perhaps healing debuffs should also effect damage shields granted to other players.
It would also help reign in barrier.
While not effecting sorc shields in any way (this is not a nerf sorc thread)!

No way. The point he was trying to make is it removes players main way to mitigate damage. We don't need to add on top of that.

I thought it was more of a concern about the relative strength of mitigation options.
The issue with purge is, the only scenario that meatbag is really intended to counter (a condensed group spamming heals), that group will always also have the counter to the counter.

Healing group is currently both rock and paper to the meatbags scissors.
And there's no further counter play to be had by the defender.

Maybe purge should increase in cost based on the number of effects removed.
Maybe meatbag or lightening should also debuff mana regen

WRX

jrkhan wrote: »

WRX wrote: »

jrkhan wrote: »

Manoekin wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Further discussion points about Meatbag going on:

We are currently discussing a -50% value on the healing taken debuff instead of -75% (which it currently is on Live), as well as reducing the duration to 6s from 16s, keeping it in line with the other siege sub-effects. We are still leaning towards keeping it unpurgable but with the values noted here.

There are also many points made here about Purge (the ability) which the combat team is noting as well, and we appreciate the constructive posts about Purge, Barrier, and smart heals along with the Siege chat!

Why should I not replace the healers in my group with Obsidian Shield spamming DK's? It would produce more effective damage mitigation than a heal that's only 75% as effective as the tooltip. You're going to break an entire aspect of the game.

I think the idea is, if your group is hit by a 90% of the time avoidable siege weapon (either by proactively placing your own troll siege, or simply moving out of the way) then the 10% of the time you are hit, you should be at a disadvantage.
Sometimes, even after being hit, your stacked group will still prevail. Sometimes they will not.
This is as it should be.

Regarding your remark on Obsidian Shield, perhaps healing debuffs should also effect damage shields granted to other players.
It would also help reign in barrier.
While not effecting sorc shields in any way (this is not a nerf sorc thread)!

No way. The point he was trying to make is it removes players main way to mitigate damage. We don't need to add on top of that.

I thought it was more of a concern about the relative strength of mitigation options.
The issue with purge is, the only scenario that meatbag is really intended to counter (a condensed group spamming heals), that group will always also have the counter to the counter.

Healing group is currently both rock and paper to the meatbags scissors.
The way to 'purge' it, is to avoid getting hit in the first place.

Avoidance is a hard thing to say as a counter though.

Want to counter the ball groups? Avoid them.

I get what you are saying, but there needs to be a mechanic that helps counter the siege, meanwhile making siege not as useless as it is right now. Regardless, good groups will adapt, just hate to see such drastic "fixes" like this.

Satiar

jrkhan wrote: »

WRX wrote: »

jrkhan wrote: »

Manoekin wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Further discussion points about Meatbag going on:

We are currently discussing a -50% value on the healing taken debuff instead of -75% (which it currently is on Live), as well as reducing the duration to 6s from 16s, keeping it in line with the other siege sub-effects. We are still leaning towards keeping it unpurgable but with the values noted here.

There are also many points made here about Purge (the ability) which the combat team is noting as well, and we appreciate the constructive posts about Purge, Barrier, and smart heals along with the Siege chat!

Why should I not replace the healers in my group with Obsidian Shield spamming DK's? It would produce more effective damage mitigation than a heal that's only 75% as effective as the tooltip. You're going to break an entire aspect of the game.

I think the idea is, if your group is hit by a 90% of the time avoidable siege weapon (either by proactively placing your own troll siege, or simply moving out of the way) then the 10% of the time you are hit, you should be at a disadvantage.
Sometimes, even after being hit, your stacked group will still prevail. Sometimes they will not.
This is as it should be.

Regarding your remark on Obsidian Shield, perhaps healing debuffs should also effect damage shields granted to other players.
It would also help reign in barrier.
While not effecting sorc shields in any way (this is not a nerf sorc thread)!

No way. The point he was trying to make is it removes players main way to mitigate damage. We don't need to add on top of that.

I thought it was more of a concern about the relative strength of mitigation options.
The issue with purge is, the only scenario that meatbag is really intended to counter (a condensed group spamming heals), that group will always also have the counter to the counter.

Healing group is currently both rock and paper to the meatbags scissors.
And there's no further counter play to be had by the defender.

The way to 'purge' it, is to avoid getting hit in the first place.
Or..
Introduce options for further counter play.
A 'negate' type siege would be interesting.

This is what people are saying : why not just go up to the group and negate them? The old fashioned way?

People want siege to do literally everything for them it seems.

Zheg

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Further discussion points about Meatbag going on:

We are currently discussing a -50% value on the healing taken debuff instead of -75% (which it currently is on Live), as well as reducing the duration to 6s from 16s, keeping it in line with the other siege sub-effects. We are still leaning towards keeping it unpurgable but with the values noted here.

There are also many points made here about Purge (the ability) which the combat team is noting as well, and we appreciate the constructive posts about Purge, Barrier, and smart heals along with the Siege chat!

What about the oil catapults? So much discussion has focused on the meatbags and them being unpurgeable, but honestly the oil catas are the dark horse. They will be so incredibly strong with snare and -5k stam per hit that it won't matter if meatbags last for 60 seconds and are unpurgeable, people will quickly realize the best way to wipe players is pepper them with multiple oil catas and just laugh as they can stand there unable to break cc and die. Does it really matter if your incoming healing is reduced when your healers all have zero stam and can't cast any heals to begin with because they're cc'd and rendered useless?

Manoekin

bowmanz607 wrote: »

I would like to point something out to people that say this helps the large groups. The reasoning here seems to be that it is because they have more numbers and can set down more siege. Here is the issue. Many of you are trying to put small groups on equal terms as the large groups. That is just not logical. What this does is give a CHANCE for a small group to fight a larger griup. Everyone has equal access to siege. The problem right now is that siege does not give a small group a chance against larger ones. So currently a large group has the advantage of siege because there is currently little value to a small group dropping siege on a larger group whereas a larger group can utilize siege to put more pressure on that smaller group. What these changes allow is for small groups to now pressure those larger griups.

Additionally, the removal of soft caps is another way to give a CHANCE for smaller groups to defeat a larger group.

When push comes to shove smaller groups will always have an inherent disadvantage of numbers. Trying to make it otherwise is illogical. Ya sure a large group has more bodies for siege. That does not mean that the siege will not be useful for smaller groups. The issue now is that the game mechanics give incentives to run in groups such as a gain and damage mitigation for aoe damage. The game caters to large groups in that way. Simply giving everyone access to the same tools does not give more incentives to run in a large group. It merely gives everyone equal acess.

By saying that the siege changes are giving more incentives to run in a group because they have more numbers to use them is like saying that skills give more incentives to run in a group because you have more numbers to use more skills.

At some point having superior numbers is going to win. The issue is not whether superior numbers should win, but whether smaller numbers have an opportunity or chance to win against larger numbers. Currently the answer is no. With these changes the answer moves toward the answer yes.

I think my thoughts on this is, even these changes to siege isn't going to be some magical change where your small group can now wipe the zerg that lags out the server or anything. It's just overkill. We can balance the game out more by removing AOE caps and buffing siege reasonably.

bowmanz607

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Further discussion points about Meatbag going on:

We are currently discussing a -50% value on the healing taken debuff instead of -75% (which it currently is on Live), as well as reducing the duration to 6s from 16s, keeping it in line with the other siege sub-effects. We are still leaning towards keeping it unpurgable but with the values noted here.

There are also many points made here about Purge (the ability) which the combat team is noting as well, and we appreciate the constructive posts about Purge, Barrier, and smart heals along with the Siege chat!

I think those are some pretty good numbers if you make it purgeable.

I think a lot of people forget that ya it may be a 50% healing reduction, but much of that will be offset by champ points. Not only does a player generally have champ points in increased healing effectiveness from all sources, but also increased healing for a healer having points in increasing their effectivness to others. When you start stacking those numbers together that 50% healing debuff actually operates at a lower percentage. Heck, thinka bout it.

Additionally, I think this will increase the value in heavy armor. As it stands now, heavy armor is back to a stage where it is more beneficial to run light or medium for the most part. (although it is still much more effective than pre 1.6.). This change will increase the appeal of a player wearing heavy armor for the healing received passive. (perhaps even making health regen more viable too). Moreover, the extra damage mitigation from heavy armor will prove more useful while getting attacked with this debuff on you.

Last, have anyone seen what defile does to a templars heals. Nothing! A templars BOL is so powerful that defile doesnt have much noticeable effect. This also goes for healing ward.

jrkhan

Satiar wrote: »

jrkhan wrote: »

WRX wrote: »

jrkhan wrote: »

Manoekin wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Further discussion points about Meatbag going on:

We are currently discussing a -50% value on the healing taken debuff instead of -75% (which it currently is on Live), as well as reducing the duration to 6s from 16s, keeping it in line with the other siege sub-effects. We are still leaning towards keeping it unpurgable but with the values noted here.

There are also many points made here about Purge (the ability) which the combat team is noting as well, and we appreciate the constructive posts about Purge, Barrier, and smart heals along with the Siege chat!

Why should I not replace the healers in my group with Obsidian Shield spamming DK's? It would produce more effective damage mitigation than a heal that's only 75% as effective as the tooltip. You're going to break an entire aspect of the game.

I think the idea is, if your group is hit by a 90% of the time avoidable siege weapon (either by proactively placing your own troll siege, or simply moving out of the way) then the 10% of the time you are hit, you should be at a disadvantage.
Sometimes, even after being hit, your stacked group will still prevail. Sometimes they will not.
This is as it should be.

Regarding your remark on Obsidian Shield, perhaps healing debuffs should also effect damage shields granted to other players.
It would also help reign in barrier.
While not effecting sorc shields in any way (this is not a nerf sorc thread)!

No way. The point he was trying to make is it removes players main way to mitigate damage. We don't need to add on top of that.

I thought it was more of a concern about the relative strength of mitigation options.
The issue with purge is, the only scenario that meatbag is really intended to counter (a condensed group spamming heals), that group will always also have the counter to the counter.

Healing group is currently both rock and paper to the meatbags scissors.
And there's no further counter play to be had by the defender.

The way to 'purge' it, is to avoid getting hit in the first place.
Or..
Introduce options for further counter play.
A 'negate' type siege would be interesting.

This is what people are saying : why not just go up to the group and negate them? The old fashioned way?

People want siege to do literally everything for them it seems.

Sure, negate is a bit redundant. Of course, if you are already CC immune it won't matter much anyway.
I do want to see an (unpurgable) AOE resource regen debuff somewhere.

The main thing is, siege is something that @ZOS_BrianWheeler can adjust, as opposed to tuning class abilities.

Can we lobby to have him 'promoted' to also have jurisdiction over combat and character mechanics?

WRX

Satiar wrote: »

jrkhan wrote: »

WRX wrote: »

jrkhan wrote: »

Manoekin wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Further discussion points about Meatbag going on:

We are currently discussing a -50% value on the healing taken debuff instead of -75% (which it currently is on Live), as well as reducing the duration to 6s from 16s, keeping it in line with the other siege sub-effects. We are still leaning towards keeping it unpurgable but with the values noted here.

There are also many points made here about Purge (the ability) which the combat team is noting as well, and we appreciate the constructive posts about Purge, Barrier, and smart heals along with the Siege chat!

Why should I not replace the healers in my group with Obsidian Shield spamming DK's? It would produce more effective damage mitigation than a heal that's only 75% as effective as the tooltip. You're going to break an entire aspect of the game.

I think the idea is, if your group is hit by a 90% of the time avoidable siege weapon (either by proactively placing your own troll siege, or simply moving out of the way) then the 10% of the time you are hit, you should be at a disadvantage.
Sometimes, even after being hit, your stacked group will still prevail. Sometimes they will not.
This is as it should be.

Regarding your remark on Obsidian Shield, perhaps healing debuffs should also effect damage shields granted to other players.
It would also help reign in barrier.
While not effecting sorc shields in any way (this is not a nerf sorc thread)!

No way. The point he was trying to make is it removes players main way to mitigate damage. We don't need to add on top of that.

I thought it was more of a concern about the relative strength of mitigation options.
The issue with purge is, the only scenario that meatbag is really intended to counter (a condensed group spamming heals), that group will always also have the counter to the counter.

Healing group is currently both rock and paper to the meatbags scissors.
And there's no further counter play to be had by the defender.

The way to 'purge' it, is to avoid getting hit in the first place.
Or..
Introduce options for further counter play.
A 'negate' type siege would be interesting.

This is what people are saying : why not just go up to the group and negate them? The old fashioned way?

People want siege to do literally everything for them it seems.

This with removed AoE caps on ATLEAST ultimates.

Imdrefan

I don't play in groups much anymore, but I'm terrified of the concept of these oil catapults, trying to get through a breach, or even just sieging the outer, I know I'm going to be peppered with oil catas and just a sitting duck for that stamblade waiting to kill me while I'm feared with no Stam.

Now on the other hand when im defending, I'm a forking siege sniper and back in the day with effective meatbags And fire trebs I would wreak havoc from the wall by myself. If we are going back down that road, and when people are at the receiving end of my oil cata, meatbag, coldharbour fire ballista combo I will enjoy the AP.