Upcoming siege changes in next major update

Joy_Division

If I were Wheeler, I'd quit and find a more rewarding job where his work would be better appreciated, like eith the Internal Revenue Service.

Half the community has yelled, begged, and pleaded with him to buff siege damage so that smaller groups could effectively fight zergs.

Now after acceding to the request, half the community is dubbing him zerg-lover because he has done what many people have asked him to do.

azoriangaming

Talcyndl wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

so you think the servers will handle the whole alliance taking a keep? they can't handle the minimal amount we've got on screen now.

In beta and early game, Cyrodiil ran fine with 100s of players on screen. Two things changed:

(1) The lighting patch (who know what kind of impact this still has).

(2) Players began stacking more and more while using spammable AoEs.

1, agree,

2. why did people start stacking? AoE caps

ZOS_BrianWheeler

Flaming oil can be purged as it's just a flame tick like the flame treb/ballista DoT. That being said... the feedback here and testing internally and on PTS may change that.

We will look at tool-tips when this goes in as well, however displaying the range won't be possible as it varies based on trajectory of the projectile and whether it will land uphill, downhill, even ground, etc. There may be a generic "about this range" added.

In terms of other side noted questions here about server performance, we have made changes today to various abilities which we will be monitoring their effects on the server. For reference, here's the patch note from today:

Adjusted several abilities to improve the performance in Cyrodiil. The following abilities or item set abilities will now only apply their buffs to allies who are in your group, rather than all nearby allies:

Exploitation
Hemorrhage
Illuminate
Meritorious Service
Mountain’s Blessing
Powerful Assault
Restoring Aura
Radiant Aura
Restoring Twilight

Kwivur

johan.danielsson1994b16_ESO wrote: »

Kwivur wrote: »

This thread is annoying.. It sounds like the ones complaining about more damage just refuse to adapt and the ones defending it want what they had in the beginning. To sum it up.. Some people are better at checkers than they are chess.

More damage on siege is not a problem, neither is the resource drain or whatever. The only thing i have a problem with is unpurgable meatbags. Why? Cus after seeing pvp in 1.6 after the siege buff and what that brought it should be obvious that this chnage is genocide for medium sized pvp groups or for people that prefer to use abbilities in PvP over shooting meatballs on eacother.

Joy_Division wrote: »

If I were Wheeler, I'd quit and find a more rewarding job where his work would be better appreciated, like eith the Internal Revenue Service.

Half the community has yelled, begged, and pleaded with him to buff siege damage so that smaller groups could effectively fight zergs.

Now after acceding to the request, half the community is dubbing him zerg-lover because he has done what many people have asked him to do.

It's be cause they like they're ball groups..

bowmanz607

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

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

this is just going to make the zergs more stronger, smaller groups won't have a chance to anything.

seriously who comes up with these ideas and thinks they'd be great because there is no thought into this at all you just haven't got a clue, you want to be splitting the zergs up not making them get bigger and win every time with a meatbag in this dumb down pvp because that's exactly what's going to happen.

the underpopulated side will never take a keep if this goes through.

what are you talking about. guess who uses seige when defending a keep. typically it is the smaller groups and the underpopulated groups. that means when you only have 10 people defending a keep and 30 running in the seige may actually flip the fight in the smaller groups favor. As it stands right now seige does not allow this.

bowmanz607 wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

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

this is just going to make the zergs more stronger, smaller groups won't have a chance to anything.

seriously who comes up with these ideas and thinks they'd be great because there is no thought into this at all you just haven't got a clue, you want to be splitting the zergs up not making them get bigger and win every time with a meatbag in this dumb down pvp because that's exactly what's going to happen.

the underpopulated side will never take a keep if this goes through.

what are you talking about. guess who uses seige when defending a keep. typically it is the smaller groups and the underpopulated groups. that means when you only have 10 people defending a keep and 30 running in the seige may actually flip the fight in the smaller groups favor. As it stands right now seige does not allow this.

Image that you fight a 24 man group as a 12 man group. 4 of these 24 put up a siege and you are still outnumbered 20 to 12 or even less if you've got some on siege as well, so who do you think will win the 24 people or the 12 with the healing reduction that is unpurgeable with the current aoe caps? I said take a keep not defend.

Yes taking a keep should be very difficult for a smaller group. As i stated in another comment, A keep is meant to be defended by small numbers against large numbers. This is how it was sold and how it works in real life. So, having more numbers on top of being in the defensive position should be a gimme win. I mean it is only logical.

so my point from my first comment is that the smaller number then have to turn into larger numbers which generates a zerg and where does it stop? does it not favor the zerg mentality?

Here is the thing taking a keep should be a task for the alliance. To properly take a keep you need numbers just like back in the days of cyrodill's prime. You have the players that like to run in large groups on siege. You have smaller groups doing things such as taking resources, watching the breach, defending choke holds such as bridges, messing around in the opponents backfield, and tagging other keeps as distractions. Then the solo players are fighting the reinforcements coming from other keeps. PLayers like Sypher and Fengrush can pull there 3 players and get thier 1vx which ultimately help the overall keep battle. That is pvp in cyrodill. That is what this game is. That is what this game was. This is what we bought. This is why many players have stuck around this long because we know that cyrodill can be that again!

so you think the servers will handle the whole alliance taking a keep? they can't handle the minimal amount we've got on screen now.

Your idea for taking of a keep seems different then mine. I am not talking about the whole alliance just piling into a keep. that is ridiculous. I am saying that it should take the effort of the entire alliance. The big picture is taking the keep. That big picture is made whole by the pieces of each play style be it large group or small group or solo. Currently it takes one ball group to take a keep. They run over seige and people like it is nothing and are only stopped by another ball group. It does not require any other alliance members help. The issue is the plethra of AoE abilities being spammed including healing, dmage abilities, and ultimate. This combined with the fights being dragged out because of AoE caps. This is where the seerver lags. It has nothing to do with the amount of players on screen but how small and dense the area is in which all of these abilities are going off. So by implementing this siege change along with other balances to AoE caps means ball groups will no longer be the way to survive but the way to get dead. This change is just one of many. Everyone needs to understand that. It is no them saying ok here is your fix, they are saying here is a little taste of things we are working on. When you spread out the ball groups you spread out the fighting which spreads out the abilities which balances the server.

Talcyndl

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

2. why did people start stacking? AoE caps

It's not that simple though.

Even removing AoE caps isn't a magic fix to Blobs. Those blobs take advantage not just of the AoE caps. They also have the advantage because:

(1) They can have a few people spamming purge to remove all dots.

(2) Heals prioritize low health allies while incoming damage is spread out among all players.

My personal fix is nerfing heals and damage based on how many allies are within the ability radius. It would basically be a pseudo-friendly fire system.

Merlight

johan.danielsson1994b16_ESO wrote: »

Merlight wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

Image that you fight a 24 man group as a 12 man group. 4 of these 24 put up a siege and you are still outnumbered 20 to 12 or even less if you've got some on siege as well, so who do you think will win the 24 people or the 12 with the healing reduction that is unpurgeable with the current aoe caps? I said take a keep not defend.

You're not supposed to be taking keeps defended by superior numbers, unless you outclass them by a large margin.

And here's whats wrong with this community. If people weren't stuck in number > everything maybe we'd have a better PvP enviorment and a hardcore crowd left in this game.

Twisting quotes is pretty bad, too. A keep is a defensive position, it's purpose is to protect the defenders. I don't care how good the 12-man group of the guy I quoted is, killing 24 defenders inside their keep should be more difficult than killing 24 people out in the wild. I mean, if 12 can successfully defend against 24 it's ok, but if 24 can defend against 12 it's not?

Turelus

Okay so now I am home I can make a more constructive post for feedback.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

[*] Damage across the board for all siege weapons has been increased roughly 30%, but we are considering increasing that more.

This is a good change for making sieges feel like they did before the 50% damage reduction patch. Just to confirm does this mean that if the value of battle spirit changes then these values will have to be adjusted again.
Has it been (or could you) confirm that the reason sieges seem weaker than previously is because of the battle spirit changes and if so would it be an easy change to omit them from that change so their damage values can be changed independently without having to take that into account.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

[*] Snares have been normalized on all siege weapons that apply that debuff (ice treb, lightning ballista, oil catapult) to be a 50% snare, and last 6 seconds.

This seems like a good change which simplifies things. Are these snares immune to effects which clear them (retreating menouvers) as that has always seemed to be the main reason for the snares being considered useless by many.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

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

Most questions about this you have already answered, it's going to be very interesting to see how behaves in a live situation.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

[*] Oil Catapults will now also have a "Stamina damage" value added, which takes away roughly 5000 Stamina from enemy targets.
[*] Lightning Ballista will now also have a "Magicka Damage" value added, which takes away roughly 5000 Magicka from enemy targets.

These are fantastic changes which add a new and interesting dynamic to siege weapon choice as well as bringing two of the more pointless sieges up as something useful.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

[*] Ballista now turn faster and have their "scatter" variable removed, making them 100% accurate to your aimed location.

Nothing to complain about here, will be nice to finally hit the location I was aiming at.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

[*] Scattershot now adds 20% damage taken from other siege weapons instead of 10%

Still feel this is kind of a pointless siege weapon which won't get much use, sure it's good if someone actually uses it but wouldn't another kind of debuff weapon still be a better choice than a damage increase when you're placing counter siege.

Additionally, the Ice Treb needs some love, nothing here changes the fact no one (who knows what they're doing) uses them. Any chance this could add some kind of AoE root/stun as a frozen effect. It still wouldn't be the greatest but at least would add another effect option from sieges.

Also I feel most of these changes will still only be worthwhile if the AoE cap is removed and these effects are hitting everyone for the same effect, then sieges would truly be devastating to bomb groups who are not guarding against them.

More of a question for @Wrobel but have you considered making the siege shield skill now offer additional protections vs the secondary effects so it has more of a use on the battlefield (and hopefully peoples bars).

timidobserver

ESO PvP after this change goes live(video also has Akaviri motif preview)
https://youtu.be/XCtuZ-fDL2E?t=2m21s

bowmanz607

Merlight wrote: »

johan.danielsson1994b16_ESO wrote: »

Merlight wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

Image that you fight a 24 man group as a 12 man group. 4 of these 24 put up a siege and you are still outnumbered 20 to 12 or even less if you've got some on siege as well, so who do you think will win the 24 people or the 12 with the healing reduction that is unpurgeable with the current aoe caps? I said take a keep not defend.

You're not supposed to be taking keeps defended by superior numbers, unless you outclass them by a large margin.

And here's whats wrong with this community. If people weren't stuck in number > everything maybe we'd have a better PvP enviorment and a hardcore crowd left in this game.

Twisting quotes is pretty bad, too. A keep is a defensive position, it's purpose is to protect the defenders. I don't care how good the 12-man group of the guy I quoted is, killing 24 defenders inside their keep should be more difficult than killing 24 people out in the wild. I mean, if 12 can successfully defend against 24 it's ok, but if 24 can defend against 12 it's not?

one agree was not enough here is another one "agree."

bowmanz607

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Flaming oil can be purged as it's just a flame tick like the flame treb/ballista DoT. That being said... the feedback here and testing internally and on PTS may change that.

We will look at tool-tips when this goes in as well, however displaying the range won't be possible as it varies based on trajectory of the projectile and whether it will land uphill, downhill, even ground, etc. There may be a generic "about this range" added.

In terms of other side noted questions here about server performance, we have made changes today to various abilities which we will be monitoring their effects on the server. For reference, here's the patch note from today:

Adjusted several abilities to improve the performance in Cyrodiil. The following abilities or item set abilities will now only apply their buffs to allies who are in your group, rather than all nearby allies:

Exploitation
Hemorrhage
Illuminate
Meritorious Service
Mountain’s Blessing
Powerful Assault
Restoring Aura
Radiant Aura
Restoring Twilight

Keep flame ticks purgeable just cap purge to 12 people that have to be in your group or something like that.

AbraXuSeXile

This is the most awful change ever.

ClockworkArc

I think these proposed changes are huge and have real potential to make for interesting small group defense of keeps. Props to those people who worked on them.

There seems to be a lot of QQ going on in regards to the nonpurgable healing debuff. Pretty sure the idea is that people are supposed to use shields to counter act this, thus forcing zergs to react to the type of damage being done with heals or shields, or manage their stamina efficiently enough so they can dodgeroll. All things that force the zerg to split up into more manageable bite-sized meals and provide a higher skill-cap for play.

I think this is a really positive change.

Kwivur

timidobserver wrote: »

ESO PvP after this change goes live(video also has Akaviri motif preview)
https://youtu.be/XCtuZ-fDL2E?t=2m21s

LMFAO

Artis

Good stuff. Sieges should have a greater impact on the battlefield than right now. And these changes look very interesting. DOT should stay purgeable, not sure it's a good idea that other side effects can't be purged, but we'll see how it works

Islyn

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Just to clarify, the DOT on Flame Trebs and Flame Ballista can still be purged....for now.

But not meatbag?

I love the rest to be honest!

jim_mau

i think that non purgeable meatbag is nice, it should make a nice counter measure for the ones that plays in a ball / zerg / batswarm

bowmanz607

Rugz_Maulgoth wrote: »

I think these proposed changes are huge and have real potential to make for interesting small group defense of keeps. Props to those people who worked on them.

There seems to be a lot of QQ going on in regards to the nonpurgable healing debuff. Pretty sure the idea is that people are supposed to use shields to counter act this, thus forcing zergs to react to the type of damage being done with heals or shields, or manage their stamina efficiently enough so they can dodgeroll. All things that force the zerg to split up into more manageable bite-sized meals and provide a higher skill-cap for play.

I think this is a really positive change.

Solid point about the healing debuff.

Xiphyla

Rugz_Maulgoth wrote: »

I think these proposed changes are huge and have real potential to make for interesting small group defense of keeps. Props to those people who worked on them.

There seems to be a lot of QQ going on in regards to the nonpurgable healing debuff. Pretty sure the idea is that people are supposed to use shields to counter act this, thus forcing zergs to react to the type of damage being done with heals or shields, or manage their stamina efficiently enough so they can dodgeroll. All things that force the zerg to split up into more manageable bite-sized meals and provide a higher skill-cap for play.

I think this is a really positive change.

You must be joking right ? When a 24man fights a 8 or 10man , the 24man just need 2 people put down 2 meatbag and aim at the 10man , so the other 22man will keep chasing the 10man and hit them if the 10man push to the meatbag. So can you tell me whose going to benefit from the non-purgeable healing debuff more ?

To be honest , this non-purgeable healing debuff = the most stupid changes ever if it goes through.

Conclusion : Big group will benefit more than small group.

ZOS_BrianWheeler

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

azoriangaming

bowmanz607 wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

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

this is just going to make the zergs more stronger, smaller groups won't have a chance to anything.

seriously who comes up with these ideas and thinks they'd be great because there is no thought into this at all you just haven't got a clue, you want to be splitting the zergs up not making them get bigger and win every time with a meatbag in this dumb down pvp because that's exactly what's going to happen.

the underpopulated side will never take a keep if this goes through.

what are you talking about. guess who uses seige when defending a keep. typically it is the smaller groups and the underpopulated groups. that means when you only have 10 people defending a keep and 30 running in the seige may actually flip the fight in the smaller groups favor. As it stands right now seige does not allow this.

bowmanz607 wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

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

this is just going to make the zergs more stronger, smaller groups won't have a chance to anything.

seriously who comes up with these ideas and thinks they'd be great because there is no thought into this at all you just haven't got a clue, you want to be splitting the zergs up not making them get bigger and win every time with a meatbag in this dumb down pvp because that's exactly what's going to happen.

the underpopulated side will never take a keep if this goes through.

what are you talking about. guess who uses seige when defending a keep. typically it is the smaller groups and the underpopulated groups. that means when you only have 10 people defending a keep and 30 running in the seige may actually flip the fight in the smaller groups favor. As it stands right now seige does not allow this.

Image that you fight a 24 man group as a 12 man group. 4 of these 24 put up a siege and you are still outnumbered 20 to 12 or even less if you've got some on siege as well, so who do you think will win the 24 people or the 12 with the healing reduction that is unpurgeable with the current aoe caps? I said take a keep not defend.

Yes taking a keep should be very difficult for a smaller group. As i stated in another comment, A keep is meant to be defended by small numbers against large numbers. This is how it was sold and how it works in real life. So, having more numbers on top of being in the defensive position should be a gimme win. I mean it is only logical.

so my point from my first comment is that the smaller number then have to turn into larger numbers which generates a zerg and where does it stop? does it not favor the zerg mentality?

Here is the thing taking a keep should be a task for the alliance. To properly take a keep you need numbers just like back in the days of cyrodill's prime. You have the players that like to run in large groups on siege. You have smaller groups doing things such as taking resources, watching the breach, defending choke holds such as bridges, messing around in the opponents backfield, and tagging other keeps as distractions. Then the solo players are fighting the reinforcements coming from other keeps. PLayers like Sypher and Fengrush can pull there 3 players and get thier 1vx which ultimately help the overall keep battle. That is pvp in cyrodill. That is what this game is. That is what this game was. This is what we bought. This is why many players have stuck around this long because we know that cyrodill can be that again!

so you think the servers will handle the whole alliance taking a keep? they can't handle the minimal amount we've got on screen now.

Your idea for taking of a keep seems different then mine. I am not talking about the whole alliance just piling into a keep. that is ridiculous. I am saying that it should take the effort of the entire alliance. The big picture is taking the keep. That big picture is made whole by the pieces of each play style be it large group or small group or solo. Currently it takes one ball group to take a keep. They run over seige and people like it is nothing and are only stopped by another ball group. It does not require any other alliance members help. The issue is the plethra of AoE abilities being spammed including healing, dmage abilities, and ultimate. This combined with the fights being dragged out because of AoE caps. This is where the seerver lags. It has nothing to do with the amount of players on screen but how small and dense the area is in which all of these abilities are going off. So by implementing this siege change along with other balances to AoE caps means ball groups will no longer be the way to survive but the way to get dead. This change is just one of many. Everyone needs to understand that. It is no them saying ok here is your fix, they are saying here is a little taste of things we are working on. When you spread out the ball groups you spread out the fighting which spreads out the abilities which balances the server.

sorry stopped reading after a bit too much text clumped together and i'm tired i'll read it tomorrow properly,

I'm just confused because you said and i'll quote: here is the thing taking keep should be a task for the alliance.

Cinbri

Nice change. Maybe then 50-men trains will stop facerolling every keep on their way.

themdogesbite

Xiphyla wrote: »

Rugz_Maulgoth wrote: »

I think these proposed changes are huge and have real potential to make for interesting small group defense of keeps. Props to those people who worked on them.

There seems to be a lot of QQ going on in regards to the nonpurgable healing debuff. Pretty sure the idea is that people are supposed to use shields to counter act this, thus forcing zergs to react to the type of damage being done with heals or shields, or manage their stamina efficiently enough so they can dodgeroll. All things that force the zerg to split up into more manageable bite-sized meals and provide a higher skill-cap for play.

I think this is a really positive change.

You must be joking right ? When a 24man fights a 8 or 10man , the 24man just need 2 people put down 2 meatbag and aim at the 10man , so the other 22man will keep chasing the 10man and hit them if the 10man push to the meatbag. So can you tell me whose going to benefit from the non-purgeable healing debuff more ?

To be honest , this non-purgeable healing debuff = the most stupid changes ever if it goes through.

Conclusion : Big group will benefit more than small group.

People dont understand because they dont play in medium sized groups. Its the same kind of players that would snipe scales and kill themselfs.

Catblade

This sounds ridiculously awful. Cheaters allowed to run rampant, No purging seize snares and meatbags, Seize robbing magika and stam. Don't be surprised when you see another mass exodus. More knee jerk reaction changes whoo hoo over the top much? I see a lot of people saying "yay anti zerg!" what makes you think zergs won't use this to their advantage too?

tinythinker

usmcjdking wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler

DO NOT FORGET ICE TREBUCHET

Also, hard values that like are pretty useless. Should be a % of max magicka and max stamina lost.

Oh, hmm, yes, very good. *hits AGREE*

bowmanz607

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

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

this is just going to make the zergs more stronger, smaller groups won't have a chance to anything.

seriously who comes up with these ideas and thinks they'd be great because there is no thought into this at all you just haven't got a clue, you want to be splitting the zergs up not making them get bigger and win every time with a meatbag in this dumb down pvp because that's exactly what's going to happen.

the underpopulated side will never take a keep if this goes through.

what are you talking about. guess who uses seige when defending a keep. typically it is the smaller groups and the underpopulated groups. that means when you only have 10 people defending a keep and 30 running in the seige may actually flip the fight in the smaller groups favor. As it stands right now seige does not allow this.

bowmanz607 wrote: »

rdbrown1987 wrote: »

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

this is just going to make the zergs more stronger, smaller groups won't have a chance to anything.

seriously who comes up with these ideas and thinks they'd be great because there is no thought into this at all you just haven't got a clue, you want to be splitting the zergs up not making them get bigger and win every time with a meatbag in this dumb down pvp because that's exactly what's going to happen.

the underpopulated side will never take a keep if this goes through.

what are you talking about. guess who uses seige when defending a keep. typically it is the smaller groups and the underpopulated groups. that means when you only have 10 people defending a keep and 30 running in the seige may actually flip the fight in the smaller groups favor. As it stands right now seige does not allow this.

Image that you fight a 24 man group as a 12 man group. 4 of these 24 put up a siege and you are still outnumbered 20 to 12 or even less if you've got some on siege as well, so who do you think will win the 24 people or the 12 with the healing reduction that is unpurgeable with the current aoe caps? I said take a keep not defend.

Yes taking a keep should be very difficult for a smaller group. As i stated in another comment, A keep is meant to be defended by small numbers against large numbers. This is how it was sold and how it works in real life. So, having more numbers on top of being in the defensive position should be a gimme win. I mean it is only logical.

so my point from my first comment is that the smaller number then have to turn into larger numbers which generates a zerg and where does it stop? does it not favor the zerg mentality?

Here is the thing taking a keep should be a task for the alliance. To properly take a keep you need numbers just like back in the days of cyrodill's prime. You have the players that like to run in large groups on siege. You have smaller groups doing things such as taking resources, watching the breach, defending choke holds such as bridges, messing around in the opponents backfield, and tagging other keeps as distractions. Then the solo players are fighting the reinforcements coming from other keeps. PLayers like Sypher and Fengrush can pull there 3 players and get thier 1vx which ultimately help the overall keep battle. That is pvp in cyrodill. That is what this game is. That is what this game was. This is what we bought. This is why many players have stuck around this long because we know that cyrodill can be that again!

so you think the servers will handle the whole alliance taking a keep? they can't handle the minimal amount we've got on screen now.

Your idea for taking of a keep seems different then mine. I am not talking about the whole alliance just piling into a keep. that is ridiculous. I am saying that it should take the effort of the entire alliance. The big picture is taking the keep. That big picture is made whole by the pieces of each play style be it large group or small group or solo. Currently it takes one ball group to take a keep. They run over seige and people like it is nothing and are only stopped by another ball group. It does not require any other alliance members help. The issue is the plethra of AoE abilities being spammed including healing, dmage abilities, and ultimate. This combined with the fights being dragged out because of AoE caps. This is where the seerver lags. It has nothing to do with the amount of players on screen but how small and dense the area is in which all of these abilities are going off. So by implementing this siege change along with other balances to AoE caps means ball groups will no longer be the way to survive but the way to get dead. This change is just one of many. Everyone needs to understand that. It is no them saying ok here is your fix, they are saying here is a little taste of things we are working on. When you spread out the ball groups you spread out the fighting which spreads out the abilities which balances the server.

sorry stopped reading after a bit too much text clumped together and i'm tired i'll read it tomorrow properly,

I'm just confused because you said and i'll quote: here is the thing taking keep should be a task for the alliance.

Yes, meaning that everyone must contribute to taking a keep. Some people are in the front lines sieging. Some people are flipping the resources around the keep, some people are stopping reinforcements to the keep. Some are disrupting transit that is the closest to the keep we are trying to take. I am not saying that the whole alliance should be standing on the siege waiting for walls to fall and then bum rushing it like how it is for the most part now. The siege issue will help to alleviate the issue.

Sanct16

Cinbri wrote: »

Nice change. Maybe then 50-men trains will stop facerolling every keep on their way.

Haha @Cinbri good one.

tinythinker

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Flaming oil can be purged as it's just a flame tick like the flame treb/ballista DoT. That being said... the feedback here and testing internally and on PTS may change that.

Ahh, good. Right now if I am in a group ramming a gate I just use Purge or Cleansing Ritual as needed with a HoT tossed in for good measure. Same on the part of siegers when I try to oil them for standing on the porch with a ram or to fight players or NPC guards. I guess it's good if you are going for that Alliance War damage dealing achievement, but that's about it.

bowmanz607

Xiphyla wrote: »

Rugz_Maulgoth wrote: »

I think these proposed changes are huge and have real potential to make for interesting small group defense of keeps. Props to those people who worked on them.

There seems to be a lot of QQ going on in regards to the nonpurgable healing debuff. Pretty sure the idea is that people are supposed to use shields to counter act this, thus forcing zergs to react to the type of damage being done with heals or shields, or manage their stamina efficiently enough so they can dodgeroll. All things that force the zerg to split up into more manageable bite-sized meals and provide a higher skill-cap for play.

I think this is a really positive change.

You must be joking right ? When a 24man fights a 8 or 10man , the 24man just need 2 people put down 2 meatbag and aim at the 10man , so the other 22man will keep chasing the 10man and hit them if the 10man push to the meatbag. So can you tell me whose going to benefit from the non-purgeable healing debuff more ?

To be honest , this non-purgeable healing debuff = the most stupid changes ever if it goes through.

Conclusion : Big group will benefit more than small group.

When does this occur? It occurs after they have stormed the keep with numbers. These changes will help defend against the initial storming of players which will widdle down numbers and resources while apply debuffs to the large mobs. This makes them fight able and killable especially combined with aoe adjustments. Unlike now where they storm the top with taking little damage no debuts and full resources.

Desommettor

This sounds like a good change it will add new strategies and difficulty to pvp