Siege Damage Should Be Temporarily Lowered For No-CP Week: Will Make Tests More Accurate

Recremen · February 2017

So I'm really liking the No-CP week idea inasmuch as it accomplishes the following goals/meets the following requirements:

Gives you great live performance metrics on the base game code so you can make sure that's not the weak link
Helps you figure out which situations would cause the most bottlenecks in a CP-Enabled campaign, allowing you to focus streamlining the CP calculations in the most critical areas
Doesn't get used as a justification to make all campaigns No-CP campaigns

With that said, Fantasia has spent a couple days testing on Azura's Star (and will keep doing so for most nights this week), and have found that the behaviors you need to take on in a No-CP campaign can differ quite significantly from those that you see on Trueflame with CP enabled. Assuming that you are running this test to help optimize the code for when you turn the CP back on, it stands to reason that you would want the fighting conditions and behaviors to resemble what we do with the CP enabled as closely as possible.

Proc sets seem much more powerful in the No-CP campaign compared to the CP campaign, but I did not personally find this to alter the behavior significantly enough because we're still getting into some AoE situations, despite high single-target potential. Thus I do not currently feel proc sets need any temporary adjustment.

Regen/skill cost/resource pools are such that skill cannot be used quite as often and as rapidly as on the CP-Enabled campaigns. This might significantly effect combat behaviors, but only in terms of the length of AoE spam. We are still getting into situations where we're using a lot of our AoE skills, so while it's not a perfect cognate for CP-Enabled campaigns it's not dreadful. With that said, temporarily adjusting skill costs may help create a more similar testing environment. Probably not strictly necessary, but if you're doing this to get good testing then I would strongly recommend something along this avenue.

The most glaring difference between No-CP and CP-Enabled campaigns is the role of siege, by far. On Trueflame you generally can't just stand around in siege, but it's not so OP that people have come to rely on it as their primary damage. This is absolutely not the case on Azura's Star. Getting hit by even one regular fire ballista bolt is remarkably dangerous. Guilds I've seen fight well in the past who moved to Azura's have become entirely dependent on it as a damage source while their regular combat skills have suffered. Unless the damage is temporarily adjusted for the test week, fights are going to devolve into mostly siege warfare, which is incredibly divergent from the kind of fighting we do on CP-Enabled campaigns.

Now I'm sure we'd all like to say that we can just tough it out and make an honor pact not to drop a ton of siege every fight, but not everyone has scruples and we all would much rather win than pretend that we're in the top 10 of the Personal Honor leaderboard. I strongly believe that the best way to get players testing the way (I presume) you would like us to test is with engineering controls, and that means temporarily lowering siege weapon damage to more-similarly reflect its damage potential on CP-Enabled campaigns. That means adjusting both raw damage and accounting for the fact that people won't be able to cast purges as frequently. If you double-dip into the above suggestion about ability cost reduction (maybe as a temporary change to battle spirit so it only affects PvP?) then I think you will wind up with a full week of solid testing that very accurately translates into how we fights on CP-Enabled campaigns.

I believe in this test week and I believe in your coders, let's do everything we can to make sure you're getting the most out of the effort!

LadyLavina · February 2017

If they do a no-cp week on tf/haddy , a lotttt of people are going to lose their sh*t and say f*** it for a week lol , the population will plummet.

but if such an event does happen, while i'd be against it happening at all, yes the siege dmg should be lowered.

DeadlyRecluse · February 2017

Siege and NPC damage should be slightly lowered in no-CP environments in general, permanently.

LadyLavina wrote: »

If they do a no-cp week on tf/haddy , a lotttt of people are going to lose their sh*t and say f*** it for a week lol , the population will plummet.

but if such an event does happen, while i'd be against it happening at all, yes the siege dmg should be lowered.

The event is happening, but it comes with double AP to keep pops high.

arkansas_ESO · February 2017

DeadlyRecluse wrote: »

Siege and NPC damage should be slightly lowered in no-CP environments in general, permanently.
show previous quotes

LadyLavina wrote: »

If they do a no-cp week on tf/haddy , a lotttt of people are going to lose their sh*t and say f*** it for a week lol , the population will plummet.

but if such an event does happen, while i'd be against it happening at all, yes the siege dmg should be lowered.

The event is happening, but it comes with double AP to keep pops high.

Will double AP be enough, though? I mean AP by itself has already been worthless for a while now, there's nothing good from AP that you can sell now with the Desert Rose nerf, and the monster helm vendor very rarely has something actually worth buying. This event seems like it'll scare off older players for a week while newbies and PVEers jump in to quickly get their Vigor and then never return.

dotme · February 2017

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

Subversus · February 2017

arkansas_ESO wrote: »

show previous quotes

DeadlyRecluse wrote: »

Siege and NPC damage should be slightly lowered in no-CP environments in general, permanently.

LadyLavina wrote: »

If they do a no-cp week on tf/haddy , a lotttt of people are going to lose their sh*t and say f*** it for a week lol , the population will plummet.

but if such an event does happen, while i'd be against it happening at all, yes the siege dmg should be lowered.

The event is happening, but it comes with double AP to keep pops high.

Will double AP be enough, though? I mean AP by itself has already been worthless for a while now, there's nothing good from AP that you can sell now with the Desert Rose nerf, and the monster helm vendor very rarely has something actually worth buying. This event seems like it'll scare off older players for a week while newbies and PVEers jump in to quickly get their Vigor and then never return.

Zone boxes, albeit the win chance is outrageously low. 4m ap and haven't gotten a single spinner fire staff (countless of useless ice and lightning though

), not even *** traits.

Recremen · February 2017

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

@dotme

I think you've misunderstood. If the point of the test is to gather info in similar circumstances to CP-enabled campaigns then it's not a good time to suddenly change the combat meta, which is what you are suggesting. Whether or not you think siege damage should be increased in general does not matter for that week, it is detrimental to what (I assume) is the point of the test.

As far as your point in general stands, no, siege damage should not be increased on CP-enabled campaigns. You should be able to heal and purge through siege if you have the resources. Siege should not be so powerful that you and one other person can wipe a well-prepared group with that alone. You should actually have to use skills and, you know, call for help from your faction if you are outnumbered. Siege damage is exactly where it needs to be on Trueflame. It's still relevant (even good groups have to pull off the front door if there's too much countersiege, for instance), but it's not so vital to a fight that top-tier guilds are dropping it in the middle of a field to try and secure a win.

IcyDeadPeople · February 2017

Understand the desire some have to lower or raise siege damage for balance purposes, but don't quite see how it would improve this particular test.

Are you suggesting people will be tightly clumped in ball groups less often, or using different abilities?

I gather they are trying to examine what happens when CP is removed, including how it changes player behavior.

kkravaritieb17_ESO · February 2017

It's mostly the cold fire sieges that need to be adjusted but an overall reduction of siege damage for no cp would be quite welcome. And I am suggesting that because people would rather siege you than actually fight you since siege is much more effective way of killing players that dont have purge or heals.

Recremen · February 2017

IcyDeadPeople wrote: »

Understand the desire some have to lower or raise siege damage for balance purposes, but don't quite see how it would affect this particular test.

Are you suggesting people will be tightly clumped in ball groups less often, or using different abilities?

@IcyDeadPeople

Yes, precisely. It looks like we will almost instantly see people return to the days of dropping 20 siege in the middle of a field with only a few actual AoE pushes using skills. I don't know if you ever fought folks in that meta but it was not only extremely unpleasant, it was also categorically different from how fights go now. So assuming that they're trying to gather data to help streamline combat with current fighting conditions, the siege damage is one of the first things that should be changed. I would hope that it's also a trivial change to make, so that it could be accomplished in time for the test.

heystreethawk · February 2017

Yarr; sentiments echoed in full.

Kartalin · February 2017

@Recremen

Playing on Azura's on a regular basis, we (Tertiary Meat) have frequently noticed the reliance on siege on all sides. We are constantly beset by it ourselves anytime we show up to a defended keep or even in the middle of an open field. Our own pugs are no better. We'll hear a report of 10 enemies at a keep/outpost and soon see 15+ defensive siege at the location rather than take superior numbers to go out and fight while the keep is unflagged.

Siege does not promote skillful play in Azura's because of its effectiveness.

arkansas_ESO wrote: »

This event seems like it'll scare off older players for a week while newbies and PVEers jump in to quickly get their Vigor and then never return.

Right so let's farm the *** out of them.

Minno · February 2017

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

Agreed. Lowering seige damage promotes unhealthy zerging and dumb-ball group play because you'll just outheal and don't need to run purge.

There are counters available (seige seige, avoid red circles, and group purge and healing). Use them and let's get back to playing.

IcyDeadPeople · February 2017

Recremen wrote: »

show previous quotes

IcyDeadPeople wrote: »

Understand the desire some have to lower or raise siege damage for balance purposes, but don't quite see how it would affect this particular test.

Are you suggesting people will be tightly clumped in ball groups less often, or using different abilities?

Yes, precisely. It looks like we will almost instantly see people return to the days of dropping 20 siege in the middle of a field with only a few actual AoE pushes using skills. I don't know if you ever fought folks in that meta but it was not only extremely unpleasant, it was also categorically different from how fights go now. So assuming that they're trying to gather data to help streamline combat with current fighting conditions, the siege damage is one of the first things that should be changed. I would hope that it's also a trivial change to make, so that it could be accomplished in time for the test.

I suspect they are trying to look at exactly what happens if CP is removed, including how it changes player behavior.

For example, maybe they find that more deadly siege without CP causes players to spread apart more, resulting in fewer AoE calculations or something. Or maybe they determine that removing CP doesn't even reduce the latency issue.

If they verify that changing certain champion passives or removing them altogether would improve overall performance, I imagine there will also be tons of player feedback following this test on how to improve balance for non-CP campaign, especially with siege and poisons having such a strong impact.

Minno · February 2017

IcyDeadPeople wrote: »

show previous quotes

Recremen wrote: »

IcyDeadPeople wrote: »

Understand the desire some have to lower or raise siege damage for balance purposes, but don't quite see how it would affect this particular test.

Are you suggesting people will be tightly clumped in ball groups less often, or using different abilities?

Yes, precisely. It looks like we will almost instantly see people return to the days of dropping 20 siege in the middle of a field with only a few actual AoE pushes using skills. I don't know if you ever fought folks in that meta but it was not only extremely unpleasant, it was also categorically different from how fights go now. So assuming that they're trying to gather data to help streamline combat with current fighting conditions, the siege damage is one of the first things that should be changed. I would hope that it's also a trivial change to make, so that it could be accomplished in time for the test.

I suspect they are trying to look at exactly what happens if CP is removed, including how it changes player behavior.

For example, maybe they find that more deadly siege without CP causes players to spread apart more, resulting in fewer AoE calculations or something. Or maybe they determine that removing CP doesn't even reduce the latency issue.

If they verify that changing certain champion passives or removing them altogether would improve overall performance, I imagine there will also be tons of player feedback following this test on how to improve balance for non-CP campaign, especially with siege and poisons having such a strong impact.

Yea that's my opinion too on the intent. The forced nCP is giving them a better test than only AZ is giving. They want to see the experienced players/guilds fight under nCP in primetime numbers. And previously the prevailing thought was that TF CP is the only competitive server so most of the population won't shift to AZ to let them test if CP is intend the culprit for many issues (lag or how players react to each other).

heystreethawk · February 2017

Minno wrote: »

show previous quotes

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

Agreed. Lowering seige damage promotes unhealthy zerging and dumb-ball group play because you'll just outheal and don't need to run purge.

There are counters available (seige seige, avoid red circles, and group purge and healing). Use them and let's get back to playing.

That's not the case without CP, in part from a lack of mitigation against the unchanged base damage of a ballista, and in part because you just can't purge or heal enough to get through it. You think we don't drop already drop siege shield on a regular CP-enabled day? And what's this about purge; what does purging mean? This isn't an l2p lesson; these intimately familiar counter measures are not enough in a no-CP ballgame.

People overuse the siege on AZ, because they can lob off ridiculous amounts of damage at absolute minimal risk. It winds up promoting bad practices like zerging, because how else are you going to make it into a keep? And more dangerously, it makes for bad soldiers; people who can't handle themselves in Actual Big Boy Combat because they've learned that siege is the most effective way to deal damage, so they get really good at clicking on the ground at the right moment from inside of the keep. I don't want my children to inherit a Cyrodiil populated entirely by people RPing as drone pilots.

Minno · February 2017

heystreethawk wrote: »

show previous quotes

Minno wrote: »

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

Agreed. Lowering seige damage promotes unhealthy zerging and dumb-ball group play because you'll just outheal and don't need to run purge.

There are counters available (seige seige, avoid red circles, and group purge and healing). Use them and let's get back to playing.

That's not the case without CP, in part from a lack of mitigation against the unchanged base damage of a ballista, and in part because you just can't purge or heal enough to get through it. You think we don't drop already drop siege shield on a regular CP-enabled day? And what's this about purge; what does purging mean? This isn't an l2p lesson; these intimately familiar counter measures are not enough in a no-CP ballgame.

People overuse the siege on AZ, because they can lob off ridiculous amounts of damage at absolute minimal risk. It winds up promoting bad practices like zerging, because how else are you going to make it into a keep? And more dangerously, it makes for bad soldiers; people who can't handle themselves in Actual Big Boy Combat because they've learned that siege is the most effective way to deal damage, so they get really good at clicking on the ground at the right moment from inside of the keep. I don't want my children to inherit a Cyrodiil populated entirely by people RPing as drone pilots.

Spread out? If this was a trial, you'd learn to not stack if the mob was dishing out extra dmg the more players they hit.

They only use seige because you are letting them think it can work. I only died to seige last night once in AZ and it was because I didn't realize I got hit and let it do full dmg on me. That's not a seige problem, that's a player mistake which rewarded the enemy.

kkravaritieb17_ESO · February 2017

heystreethawk wrote: »

show previous quotes

Minno wrote: »

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

Agreed. Lowering seige damage promotes unhealthy zerging and dumb-ball group play because you'll just outheal and don't need to run purge.

There are counters available (seige seige, avoid red circles, and group purge and healing). Use them and let's get back to playing.

That's not the case without CP, in part from a lack of mitigation against the unchanged base damage of a ballista, and in part because you just can't purge or heal enough to get through it. You think we don't drop already drop siege shield on a regular CP-enabled day? And what's this about purge; what does purging mean? This isn't an l2p lesson; these intimately familiar counter measures are not enough in a no-CP ballgame.

People overuse the siege on AZ, because they can lob off ridiculous amounts of damage at absolute minimal risk. It winds up promoting bad practices like zerging, because how else are you going to make it into a keep? And more dangerously, it makes for bad soldiers; people who can't handle themselves in Actual Big Boy Combat because they've learned that siege is the most effective way to deal damage, so they get really good at clicking on the ground at the right moment from inside of the keep. I don't want my children to inherit a Cyrodiil populated entirely by people RPing as drone pilots.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Recremen · February 2017

IcyDeadPeople wrote: »

show previous quotes

Recremen wrote: »

IcyDeadPeople wrote: »

Understand the desire some have to lower or raise siege damage for balance purposes, but don't quite see how it would affect this particular test.

Are you suggesting people will be tightly clumped in ball groups less often, or using different abilities?

Yes, precisely. It looks like we will almost instantly see people return to the days of dropping 20 siege in the middle of a field with only a few actual AoE pushes using skills. I don't know if you ever fought folks in that meta but it was not only extremely unpleasant, it was also categorically different from how fights go now. So assuming that they're trying to gather data to help streamline combat with current fighting conditions, the siege damage is one of the first things that should be changed. I would hope that it's also a trivial change to make, so that it could be accomplished in time for the test.

I suspect they are trying to look at exactly what happens if CP is removed, including how it changes player behavior.

For example, maybe they find that more deadly siege without CP causes players to spread apart more, resulting in fewer AoE calculations or something. Or maybe they determine that removing CP doesn't even reduce the latency issue.

If they verify that changing certain champion passives or removing them altogether would improve overall performance, I imagine there will also be tons of player feedback following this test on how to improve balance for non-CP campaign, especially with siege and poisons having such a strong impact.

I sincerely hope that's not why they're doing this test, as we've already played in that meta once and it was overwhelmingly determined to be Not Fun. Obviously a handful of people thought it was the bee's knees to be a point-and-click hero, but most of us were livid. I hope that it really is a week-long data-gathering initiative intended toward helping to refine the code, I do not want all of Cyro to be No-CP.

heystreethawk · February 2017

Minno wrote: »

show previous quotes

heystreethawk wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

Agreed. Lowering seige damage promotes unhealthy zerging and dumb-ball group play because you'll just outheal and don't need to run purge.

There are counters available (seige seige, avoid red circles, and group purge and healing). Use them and let's get back to playing.

That's not the case without CP, in part from a lack of mitigation against the unchanged base damage of a ballista, and in part because you just can't purge or heal enough to get through it. You think we don't drop already drop siege shield on a regular CP-enabled day? And what's this about purge; what does purging mean? This isn't an l2p lesson; these intimately familiar counter measures are not enough in a no-CP ballgame.

People overuse the siege on AZ, because they can lob off ridiculous amounts of damage at absolute minimal risk. It winds up promoting bad practices like zerging, because how else are you going to make it into a keep? And more dangerously, it makes for bad soldiers; people who can't handle themselves in Actual Big Boy Combat because they've learned that siege is the most effective way to deal damage, so they get really good at clicking on the ground at the right moment from inside of the keep. I don't want my children to inherit a Cyrodiil populated entirely by people RPing as drone pilots.

Spread out? If this was a trial, you'd learn to not stack if the mob was dishing out extra dmg the more players they hit.

They only use seige because you are letting them think it can work. I only died to seige last night once in AZ and it was because I didn't realize I got hit and let it do full dmg on me. That's not a seige problem, that's a player mistake which rewarded the enemy.

Good call.

Alright gang, huddle up; we're gonna be doing the "Swiss Miss" maneuver on the keep. I want every one of you manning 3 ballistae each on every single wall on the west and east sides, and then in 10 minutes time we're going to be darting through each of them breaches, one at a time, to "spread out" and make sure the enemies don't think their siege is gonna work. We'll meet up on the front door to high five and drop a siege shield on the tank, who's going to be one-man-ramming it; I think his pointy helm will give him a buff when he butts it into the door.

You're probably wondering why we've spent so much time watching Busby Berkeley films on raid night, and I'd be remiss if I didn't thank Men'Do at this juncture for the use of his personal screening room; call me crazy, but I don't think the classics pack the same visual "wallop" when translated to digital media. Anyhoo, I asked you to take notes on all the climactic synchronized swimming numbers, and we're going to put your storyboard breakdowns to good use on this next maneuver, which I call "Gilding the Lily Pad". We're gonna be pirouetting into the keep in unison, but again: one at a time, mirroring one another's movements on opposite sides, coalescing at the end to dodge roll through the flag. I reckon it will take the tank six minutes to solo ram through the FD, and he should be able to cast Guard on the other tank to brute force the flags.

Thank you for the advice on group play, Minno; the trials analogy helped me to remember the time I ran AA. Please drop me a line if you ever want to try out a blazing shield build.

Minno · February 2017

heystreethawk wrote: »

show previous quotes

Minno wrote: »

heystreethawk wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

Agreed. Lowering seige damage promotes unhealthy zerging and dumb-ball group play because you'll just outheal and don't need to run purge.

There are counters available (seige seige, avoid red circles, and group purge and healing). Use them and let's get back to playing.

That's not the case without CP, in part from a lack of mitigation against the unchanged base damage of a ballista, and in part because you just can't purge or heal enough to get through it. You think we don't drop already drop siege shield on a regular CP-enabled day? And what's this about purge; what does purging mean? This isn't an l2p lesson; these intimately familiar counter measures are not enough in a no-CP ballgame.

People overuse the siege on AZ, because they can lob off ridiculous amounts of damage at absolute minimal risk. It winds up promoting bad practices like zerging, because how else are you going to make it into a keep? And more dangerously, it makes for bad soldiers; people who can't handle themselves in Actual Big Boy Combat because they've learned that siege is the most effective way to deal damage, so they get really good at clicking on the ground at the right moment from inside of the keep. I don't want my children to inherit a Cyrodiil populated entirely by people RPing as drone pilots.

Spread out? If this was a trial, you'd learn to not stack if the mob was dishing out extra dmg the more players they hit.

They only use seige because you are letting them think it can work. I only died to seige last night once in AZ and it was because I didn't realize I got hit and let it do full dmg on me. That's not a seige problem, that's a player mistake which rewarded the enemy.

show previous quotes

Minno wrote: »

heystreethawk wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

Agreed. Lowering seige damage promotes unhealthy zerging and dumb-ball group play because you'll just outheal and don't need to run purge.

There are counters available (seige seige, avoid red circles, and group purge and healing). Use them and let's get back to playing.

That's not the case without CP, in part from a lack of mitigation against the unchanged base damage of a ballista, and in part because you just can't purge or heal enough to get through it. You think we don't drop already drop siege shield on a regular CP-enabled day? And what's this about purge; what does purging mean? This isn't an l2p lesson; these intimately familiar counter measures are not enough in a no-CP ballgame.

People overuse the siege on AZ, because they can lob off ridiculous amounts of damage at absolute minimal risk. It winds up promoting bad practices like zerging, because how else are you going to make it into a keep? And more dangerously, it makes for bad soldiers; people who can't handle themselves in Actual Big Boy Combat because they've learned that siege is the most effective way to deal damage, so they get really good at clicking on the ground at the right moment from inside of the keep. I don't want my children to inherit a Cyrodiil populated entirely by people RPing as drone pilots.

Spread out? If this was a trial, you'd learn to not stack if the mob was dishing out extra dmg the more players they hit.

They only use seige because you are letting them think it can work. I only died to seige last night once in AZ and it was because I didn't realize I got hit and let it do full dmg on me. That's not a seige problem, that's a player mistake which rewarded the enemy.

Good call.

Alright gang, huddle up; we're gonna be doing the "Swiss Miss" maneuver on the keep. I want every one of you manning 3 ballistae each on every single wall on the west and east sides, and then in 10 minutes time we're going to be darting through each of them breaches, one at a time, to "spread out" and make sure the enemies don't think their siege is gonna work. We'll meet up on the front door to high five and drop a siege shield on the tank, who's going to be one-man-ramming it; I think his pointy helm will give him a buff when he butts it into the door.

You're probably wondering why we've spent so much time watching Busby Berkeley films on raid night, and I'd be remiss if I didn't thank Men'Do at this juncture for the use of his personal screening room; call me crazy, but I don't think the classics pack the same visual "wallop" when translated to digital media. Anyhoo, I asked you to take notes on all the climactic synchronized swimming numbers, and we're going to put your storyboard breakdowns to good use on this next maneuver, which I call "Gilding the Lily Pad". We're gonna be pirouetting into the keep in unison, but again: one at a time, mirroring one another's movements on opposite sides, coalescing at the end to dodge roll through the flag. I reckon it will take the tank six minutes to solo ram through the FD, and he should be able to cast Guard on the other tank to brute force the flags.

Thank you for the advice on group play, Minno; the trials analogy helped me to remember the time I ran AA. Please drop me a line if you ever want to try out a blazing shield build.

It's not hard. Distract the enemy, purge/heal. A smaller group runs on the less crowded side and start seiging another hole. Once that wall breaks, reform the group at breach. This is keep taking 101...

Trials analogy was an insult. "Actors" playing a script event know the mechanics of avoiding red circles better than anyone that dies to seige. Trying to get the game to change to suit your mistakes, is not the right choice for balance.

For why nCP seige is better:

- gives smaller groups chance to funnel zergs to avoid the AOE caps. Seige, if I understand, ignores this. So if a 14 player group is defending a keep against two raids, they should have a chance to kill you.
- currently in TF, seige does nothing. Even against unorganized zergs its terrible. And it masks terrible groups from organized ones.
- rapids/mist form still let you ignore snares for entering keep breaches. The best counter to seige, and it's invincible in TF. I can ignore everything hitting me in mist form but the skill is performing as intended. It's because seige is underperforming in CP campaigns due to the dmg mitigation.

caeliusstarbreaker · February 2017

The only thing I'm doing in no-cp week is tossing out caltrops and shooting fire ballistas

Recremen · February 2017

Minno wrote: »

show previous quotes

heystreethawk wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

heystreethawk wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

Agreed. Lowering seige damage promotes unhealthy zerging and dumb-ball group play because you'll just outheal and don't need to run purge.

There are counters available (seige seige, avoid red circles, and group purge and healing). Use them and let's get back to playing.

That's not the case without CP, in part from a lack of mitigation against the unchanged base damage of a ballista, and in part because you just can't purge or heal enough to get through it. You think we don't drop already drop siege shield on a regular CP-enabled day? And what's this about purge; what does purging mean? This isn't an l2p lesson; these intimately familiar counter measures are not enough in a no-CP ballgame.

People overuse the siege on AZ, because they can lob off ridiculous amounts of damage at absolute minimal risk. It winds up promoting bad practices like zerging, because how else are you going to make it into a keep? And more dangerously, it makes for bad soldiers; people who can't handle themselves in Actual Big Boy Combat because they've learned that siege is the most effective way to deal damage, so they get really good at clicking on the ground at the right moment from inside of the keep. I don't want my children to inherit a Cyrodiil populated entirely by people RPing as drone pilots.

Spread out? If this was a trial, you'd learn to not stack if the mob was dishing out extra dmg the more players they hit.

They only use seige because you are letting them think it can work. I only died to seige last night once in AZ and it was because I didn't realize I got hit and let it do full dmg on me. That's not a seige problem, that's a player mistake which rewarded the enemy.

Minno wrote: »

heystreethawk wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

Agreed. Lowering seige damage promotes unhealthy zerging and dumb-ball group play because you'll just outheal and don't need to run purge.

There are counters available (seige seige, avoid red circles, and group purge and healing). Use them and let's get back to playing.

That's not the case without CP, in part from a lack of mitigation against the unchanged base damage of a ballista, and in part because you just can't purge or heal enough to get through it. You think we don't drop already drop siege shield on a regular CP-enabled day? And what's this about purge; what does purging mean? This isn't an l2p lesson; these intimately familiar counter measures are not enough in a no-CP ballgame.

People overuse the siege on AZ, because they can lob off ridiculous amounts of damage at absolute minimal risk. It winds up promoting bad practices like zerging, because how else are you going to make it into a keep? And more dangerously, it makes for bad soldiers; people who can't handle themselves in Actual Big Boy Combat because they've learned that siege is the most effective way to deal damage, so they get really good at clicking on the ground at the right moment from inside of the keep. I don't want my children to inherit a Cyrodiil populated entirely by people RPing as drone pilots.

Spread out? If this was a trial, you'd learn to not stack if the mob was dishing out extra dmg the more players they hit.

They only use seige because you are letting them think it can work. I only died to seige last night once in AZ and it was because I didn't realize I got hit and let it do full dmg on me. That's not a seige problem, that's a player mistake which rewarded the enemy.

Good call.

Alright gang, huddle up; we're gonna be doing the "Swiss Miss" maneuver on the keep. I want every one of you manning 3 ballistae each on every single wall on the west and east sides, and then in 10 minutes time we're going to be darting through each of them breaches, one at a time, to "spread out" and make sure the enemies don't think their siege is gonna work. We'll meet up on the front door to high five and drop a siege shield on the tank, who's going to be one-man-ramming it; I think his pointy helm will give him a buff when he butts it into the door.

You're probably wondering why we've spent so much time watching Busby Berkeley films on raid night, and I'd be remiss if I didn't thank Men'Do at this juncture for the use of his personal screening room; call me crazy, but I don't think the classics pack the same visual "wallop" when translated to digital media. Anyhoo, I asked you to take notes on all the climactic synchronized swimming numbers, and we're going to put your storyboard breakdowns to good use on this next maneuver, which I call "Gilding the Lily Pad". We're gonna be pirouetting into the keep in unison, but again: one at a time, mirroring one another's movements on opposite sides, coalescing at the end to dodge roll through the flag. I reckon it will take the tank six minutes to solo ram through the FD, and he should be able to cast Guard on the other tank to brute force the flags.

Thank you for the advice on group play, Minno; the trials analogy helped me to remember the time I ran AA. Please drop me a line if you ever want to try out a blazing shield build.

It's not hard. Distract the enemy, purge/heal. A smaller group runs on the less crowded side and start seiging another hole. Once that wall breaks, reform the group at breach. This is keep taking 101...

Trials analogy was an insult. "Actors" playing a script event know the mechanics of avoiding red circles better than anyone that dies to seige. Trying to get the game to change to suit your mistakes, is not the right choice for balance.

For why nCP seige is better:

- gives smaller groups chance to funnel zergs to avoid the AOE caps. Seige, if I understand, ignores this. So if a 14 player group is defending a keep against two raids, they should have a chance to kill you.
- currently in TF, seige does nothing. Even against unorganized zergs its terrible. And it masks terrible groups from organized ones.
- rapids/mist form still let you ignore snares for entering keep breaches. The best counter to seige, and it's invincible in TF. I can ignore everything hitting me in mist form but the skill is performing as intended. It's because seige is underperforming in CP campaigns due to the dmg mitigation.

@Minno

I think you're missing the part where we're experienced siegers and keep-takers/defenders who have already played through the massive siege damage meta and know exactly how to handle it. You are also missing the part where it was a complete disaster that was not fun for the vast majority of players and saw some of the worst fights in the game's history. You are, even further, missing the part where they seem to be trying to stress-test the servers in more or less the same combat situations that we're typically facing, and that how you feel about siege damage doesn't matter in the slightest because it objectively changes fighting strategy in a fundamental way.

From the official announcement :

Because of this, we are going to run a series of PvP performance tests, and because it is impossible to simulate PvP load on our internal test servers (or on PTS), we will do this on all live servers on the dates of February 27 – March 6. This is not something we take lightly, and it is important that we evaluate performance when the server is under real-world load situations.

It is imperative for the integrity of the tests being performed that the servers are under "real-world load situations", and we just aren't going to get that with siege damage the way it is. So I'll repeat, it doesn't matter even a little bit how much damage you think siege should do, you've already admitted that it drastically changes the dynamics of keep fights and that is something that should be avoided for these tests.

heystreethawk · February 2017

Minno wrote: »

show previous quotes

heystreethawk wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

heystreethawk wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

Agreed. Lowering seige damage promotes unhealthy zerging and dumb-ball group play because you'll just outheal and don't need to run purge.

There are counters available (seige seige, avoid red circles, and group purge and healing). Use them and let's get back to playing.

That's not the case without CP, in part from a lack of mitigation against the unchanged base damage of a ballista, and in part because you just can't purge or heal enough to get through it. You think we don't drop already drop siege shield on a regular CP-enabled day? And what's this about purge; what does purging mean? This isn't an l2p lesson; these intimately familiar counter measures are not enough in a no-CP ballgame.

People overuse the siege on AZ, because they can lob off ridiculous amounts of damage at absolute minimal risk. It winds up promoting bad practices like zerging, because how else are you going to make it into a keep? And more dangerously, it makes for bad soldiers; people who can't handle themselves in Actual Big Boy Combat because they've learned that siege is the most effective way to deal damage, so they get really good at clicking on the ground at the right moment from inside of the keep. I don't want my children to inherit a Cyrodiil populated entirely by people RPing as drone pilots.

Spread out? If this was a trial, you'd learn to not stack if the mob was dishing out extra dmg the more players they hit.

They only use seige because you are letting them think it can work. I only died to seige last night once in AZ and it was because I didn't realize I got hit and let it do full dmg on me. That's not a seige problem, that's a player mistake which rewarded the enemy.

Minno wrote: »

heystreethawk wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

Agreed. Lowering seige damage promotes unhealthy zerging and dumb-ball group play because you'll just outheal and don't need to run purge.

There are counters available (seige seige, avoid red circles, and group purge and healing). Use them and let's get back to playing.

That's not the case without CP, in part from a lack of mitigation against the unchanged base damage of a ballista, and in part because you just can't purge or heal enough to get through it. You think we don't drop already drop siege shield on a regular CP-enabled day? And what's this about purge; what does purging mean? This isn't an l2p lesson; these intimately familiar counter measures are not enough in a no-CP ballgame.

People overuse the siege on AZ, because they can lob off ridiculous amounts of damage at absolute minimal risk. It winds up promoting bad practices like zerging, because how else are you going to make it into a keep? And more dangerously, it makes for bad soldiers; people who can't handle themselves in Actual Big Boy Combat because they've learned that siege is the most effective way to deal damage, so they get really good at clicking on the ground at the right moment from inside of the keep. I don't want my children to inherit a Cyrodiil populated entirely by people RPing as drone pilots.

Spread out? If this was a trial, you'd learn to not stack if the mob was dishing out extra dmg the more players they hit.

They only use seige because you are letting them think it can work. I only died to seige last night once in AZ and it was because I didn't realize I got hit and let it do full dmg on me. That's not a seige problem, that's a player mistake which rewarded the enemy.

Good call.

Alright gang, huddle up; we're gonna be doing the "Swiss Miss" maneuver on the keep. I want every one of you manning 3 ballistae each on every single wall on the west and east sides, and then in 10 minutes time we're going to be darting through each of them breaches, one at a time, to "spread out" and make sure the enemies don't think their siege is gonna work. We'll meet up on the front door to high five and drop a siege shield on the tank, who's going to be one-man-ramming it; I think his pointy helm will give him a buff when he butts it into the door.

You're probably wondering why we've spent so much time watching Busby Berkeley films on raid night, and I'd be remiss if I didn't thank Men'Do at this juncture for the use of his personal screening room; call me crazy, but I don't think the classics pack the same visual "wallop" when translated to digital media. Anyhoo, I asked you to take notes on all the climactic synchronized swimming numbers, and we're going to put your storyboard breakdowns to good use on this next maneuver, which I call "Gilding the Lily Pad". We're gonna be pirouetting into the keep in unison, but again: one at a time, mirroring one another's movements on opposite sides, coalescing at the end to dodge roll through the flag. I reckon it will take the tank six minutes to solo ram through the FD, and he should be able to cast Guard on the other tank to brute force the flags.

Thank you for the advice on group play, Minno; the trials analogy helped me to remember the time I ran AA. Please drop me a line if you ever want to try out a blazing shield build.

It's not hard. Distract the enemy, purge/heal. A smaller group runs on the less crowded side and start seiging another hole. Once that wall breaks, reform the group at breach. This is keep taking 101...

No, it's not keep taking 101. It's fan fiction for armchair generals, the kind of stuff that sounds super clever on the page, but falls apart in practice 90% of the time. The people who talk about these tactics as if they offer an answer to anything either 1) play primarily in the daytime / on servers with small or inexperienced populations, or 2) do not substantially contribute to keep captures, ever. Perhaps you are both; I don't often play during the day.

If I have enough people in my group (let's say 16) to comfortably setup a second siege line, the enemies inside (who, unlike me, are immune to any substantial threat at this juncture) have enough people to set up a second counter-siege line while sipping margaritas. Maybe they don't even need to do that; one man can comfortably run several, because counter-siege pointed at the opposite side of the keep only needs to be about a foot away from the siege pointed at the other breach. Meanwhile, I have split my forces in half (8 on each side, in this example), so if a group of 16 shows up with enough hair on their chest to hop off the wall and use their abilities, my best bet is to reconvene my two groups at a third, equidistant location to fight them. Now, I either keep a few people behind at each siege line, in the hopes that they won't be run down by the larger group that is amassing at the keep-- pugs are spilling in by now, don't kid yourself-- or I abandon the siege altogether. Either way, I am at a severe disadvantage. I am sieged down, I am split up, and the walls are being repaired. If we beat the enemies, we start over, and the best case scenario is that the keep is still flagged and the wall that isn't fully repaired is at 80%. Your awesome tactic doesn't work, no matter how confidently you assert that it does.

Trials analogy was an insult. "Actors" playing a script event know the mechanics of avoiding red circles better than anyone that dies to seige. Trying to get the game to change to suit your mistakes, is not the right choice for balance.

I am aware that it was an insult, and I assure you that if it came from anyone who actually leads groups and takes keeps in the modern era of Trueflame, I would probably take offense. Why are you talking to me like you're my sensei?

For why nCP seige is better:

- gives smaller groups chance to funnel zergs to avoid the AOE caps. Seige, if I understand, ignores this. So if a 14 player group is defending a keep against two raids, they should have a chance to kill you.

They're not going to kill two raids. They will kill a few, who will be rezzed by the time the rest of the hydra arrives at the top. Siege does nothing against two raids, but it does a lot against a medium sized group (8-16). Siege is favored by large groups, who can spare the bodies to run it. Small and medium groups cannot.

- currently in TF, seige does nothing. Even against unorganized zergs its terrible. And it masks terrible groups from organized ones.

There is nothing I can say to this other than "no". I don't understand the part about the masks, though. Do you believe that you should be able to kill people with siege without having anyone else fighting them? Do you think you should just be able to one shot people from range? Is this the fundamental disagreement?

- rapids/mist form still let you ignore snares for entering keep breaches. The best counter to seige, and it's invincible in TF. I can ignore everything hitting me in mist form but the skill is performing as intended. It's because seige is underperforming in CP campaigns due to the dmg mitigation.

You can't exactly mist around forever though, can you? Not if you want to get anything done. Without CP, WHICH IS THE TOPIC AT HAND, you can mist once in a while. You can't just keep misting. However, the guys inside can keep clicking their mouse button until their ballista runs out. I don't think there's even a point here.

You're acting like you have something to teach me about group play, and I'm not sure what gave you that impression. Acting confident about what you're saying, and acting like I just finished the tutorial quest, does not make your words real.

danno8 · February 2017

IcyDeadPeople wrote: »

show previous quotes

Recremen wrote: »

IcyDeadPeople wrote: »

Understand the desire some have to lower or raise siege damage for balance purposes, but don't quite see how it would affect this particular test.

Are you suggesting people will be tightly clumped in ball groups less often, or using different abilities?

Yes, precisely. It looks like we will almost instantly see people return to the days of dropping 20 siege in the middle of a field with only a few actual AoE pushes using skills. I don't know if you ever fought folks in that meta but it was not only extremely unpleasant, it was also categorically different from how fights go now. So assuming that they're trying to gather data to help streamline combat with current fighting conditions, the siege damage is one of the first things that should be changed. I would hope that it's also a trivial change to make, so that it could be accomplished in time for the test.

I suspect they are trying to look at exactly what happens if CP is removed, including how it changes player behavior.

For example, maybe they find that more deadly siege without CP causes players to spread apart more, resulting in fewer AoE calculations or something. Or maybe they determine that removing CP doesn't even reduce the latency issue.

If they verify that changing certain champion passives or removing them altogether would improve overall performance, I imagine there will also be tons of player feedback following this test on how to improve balance for non-CP campaign, especially with siege and poisons having such a strong impact.

The behavior part is obvious though. Less regeneration and more cost means less skill spam. I hope that's not the test they are looking for.

In fact I plan to run far more regen and cost reduction just so I still can spam skills similarly to normal TF. I would prefer to know if it is server calculations with CP that are the problem and not just AOE spam (which we already know is a problem.)

Anazasi · February 2017

I find this to be silly at best. Here's my take on this and yes I have not tested it but I already knew this was coming. Every player and his mother has opted to become a Vamp if they use magic. They do this knowing full well that CP elemental reduction is working in their favor. This has created a false sense of security for those vamp players. The reap the most benefit from the condition without suffering the penalty for it. Well I for one say light their Arses up. Siege was always meant to hurt why do you think they included it in the game. Heck for the first year of release the oil pots on the ground was deadly and we know how that went. So I say this. First off you know all that ZOS is going to do is flip a button. They are not going to adjust anything. All they intend to do is turn off CP and let the players play. Second if you are a vamp you better feed and reduce the penalty for fire damage. Yeah you loose out on regens and the mist speed I think, but that's the risk you chose when you were bitten. Third, well I can hear the anvils banging as players transition back to Willow's Path, and Seducer so they can handle the sustain. Ha ha I'm even thinking Spectors might see a short comeback.

This is a test, of The One-T Emergency Broadcasting System, All you Vamps better get out of the Sun, that shittt burns.

Minno · February 2017

heystreethawk wrote: »

show previous quotes

Minno wrote: »

heystreethawk wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

heystreethawk wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

Agreed. Lowering seige damage promotes unhealthy zerging and dumb-ball group play because you'll just outheal and don't need to run purge.

There are counters available (seige seige, avoid red circles, and group purge and healing). Use them and let's get back to playing.

That's not the case without CP, in part from a lack of mitigation against the unchanged base damage of a ballista, and in part because you just can't purge or heal enough to get through it. You think we don't drop already drop siege shield on a regular CP-enabled day? And what's this about purge; what does purging mean? This isn't an l2p lesson; these intimately familiar counter measures are not enough in a no-CP ballgame.

People overuse the siege on AZ, because they can lob off ridiculous amounts of damage at absolute minimal risk. It winds up promoting bad practices like zerging, because how else are you going to make it into a keep? And more dangerously, it makes for bad soldiers; people who can't handle themselves in Actual Big Boy Combat because they've learned that siege is the most effective way to deal damage, so they get really good at clicking on the ground at the right moment from inside of the keep. I don't want my children to inherit a Cyrodiil populated entirely by people RPing as drone pilots.

Spread out? If this was a trial, you'd learn to not stack if the mob was dishing out extra dmg the more players they hit.

They only use seige because you are letting them think it can work. I only died to seige last night once in AZ and it was because I didn't realize I got hit and let it do full dmg on me. That's not a seige problem, that's a player mistake which rewarded the enemy.

Minno wrote: »

heystreethawk wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

Agreed. Lowering seige damage promotes unhealthy zerging and dumb-ball group play because you'll just outheal and don't need to run purge.

There are counters available (seige seige, avoid red circles, and group purge and healing). Use them and let's get back to playing.

That's not the case without CP, in part from a lack of mitigation against the unchanged base damage of a ballista, and in part because you just can't purge or heal enough to get through it. You think we don't drop already drop siege shield on a regular CP-enabled day? And what's this about purge; what does purging mean? This isn't an l2p lesson; these intimately familiar counter measures are not enough in a no-CP ballgame.

People overuse the siege on AZ, because they can lob off ridiculous amounts of damage at absolute minimal risk. It winds up promoting bad practices like zerging, because how else are you going to make it into a keep? And more dangerously, it makes for bad soldiers; people who can't handle themselves in Actual Big Boy Combat because they've learned that siege is the most effective way to deal damage, so they get really good at clicking on the ground at the right moment from inside of the keep. I don't want my children to inherit a Cyrodiil populated entirely by people RPing as drone pilots.

Spread out? If this was a trial, you'd learn to not stack if the mob was dishing out extra dmg the more players they hit.

They only use seige because you are letting them think it can work. I only died to seige last night once in AZ and it was because I didn't realize I got hit and let it do full dmg on me. That's not a seige problem, that's a player mistake which rewarded the enemy.

Good call.

Alright gang, huddle up; we're gonna be doing the "Swiss Miss" maneuver on the keep. I want every one of you manning 3 ballistae each on every single wall on the west and east sides, and then in 10 minutes time we're going to be darting through each of them breaches, one at a time, to "spread out" and make sure the enemies don't think their siege is gonna work. We'll meet up on the front door to high five and drop a siege shield on the tank, who's going to be one-man-ramming it; I think his pointy helm will give him a buff when he butts it into the door.

You're probably wondering why we've spent so much time watching Busby Berkeley films on raid night, and I'd be remiss if I didn't thank Men'Do at this juncture for the use of his personal screening room; call me crazy, but I don't think the classics pack the same visual "wallop" when translated to digital media. Anyhoo, I asked you to take notes on all the climactic synchronized swimming numbers, and we're going to put your storyboard breakdowns to good use on this next maneuver, which I call "Gilding the Lily Pad". We're gonna be pirouetting into the keep in unison, but again: one at a time, mirroring one another's movements on opposite sides, coalescing at the end to dodge roll through the flag. I reckon it will take the tank six minutes to solo ram through the FD, and he should be able to cast Guard on the other tank to brute force the flags.

Thank you for the advice on group play, Minno; the trials analogy helped me to remember the time I ran AA. Please drop me a line if you ever want to try out a blazing shield build.

It's not hard. Distract the enemy, purge/heal. A smaller group runs on the less crowded side and start seiging another hole. Once that wall breaks, reform the group at breach. This is keep taking 101...

No, it's not keep taking 101. It's fan fiction for armchair generals, the kind of stuff that sounds super clever on the page, but falls apart in practice 90% of the time. The people who talk about these tactics as if they offer an answer to anything either 1) play primarily in the daytime / on servers with small or inexperienced populations, or 2) do not substantially contribute to keep captures, ever. Perhaps you are both; I don't often play during the day.

If I have enough people in my group (let's say 16) to comfortably setup a second siege line, the enemies inside (who, unlike me, are immune to any substantial threat at this juncture) have enough people to set up a second counter-siege line while sipping margaritas. Maybe they don't even need to do that; one man can comfortably run several, because counter-siege pointed at the opposite side of the keep only needs to be about a foot away from the siege pointed at the other breach. Meanwhile, I have split my forces in half (8 on each side, in this example), so if a group of 16 shows up with enough hair on their chest to hop off the wall and use their abilities, my best bet is to reconvene my two groups at a third, equidistant location to fight them. Now, I either keep a few people behind at each siege line, in the hopes that they won't be run down by the larger group that is amassing at the keep-- pugs are spilling in by now, don't kid yourself-- or I abandon the siege altogether. Either way, I am at a severe disadvantage. I am sieged down, I am split up, and the walls are being repaired. If we beat the enemies, we start over, and the best case scenario is that the keep is still flagged and the wall that isn't fully repaired is at 80%. Your awesome tactic doesn't work, no matter how confidently you assert that it does.
show previous quotes

Trials analogy was an insult. "Actors" playing a script event know the mechanics of avoiding red circles better than anyone that dies to seige. Trying to get the game to change to suit your mistakes, is not the right choice for balance.

I am aware that it was an insult, and I assure you that if it came from anyone who actually leads groups and takes keeps in the modern era of Trueflame, I would probably take offense. Why are you talking to me like you're my sensei?
show previous quotes

For why nCP seige is better:

- gives smaller groups chance to funnel zergs to avoid the AOE caps. Seige, if I understand, ignores this. So if a 14 player group is defending a keep against two raids, they should have a chance to kill you.

They're not going to kill two raids. They will kill a few, who will be rezzed by the time the rest of the hydra arrives at the top. Siege does nothing against two raids, but it does a lot against a medium sized group (8-16). Siege is favored by large groups, who can spare the bodies to run it. Small and medium groups cannot.
show previous quotes

- currently in TF, seige does nothing. Even against unorganized zergs its terrible. And it masks terrible groups from organized ones.

There is nothing I can say to this other than "no". I don't understand the part about the masks, though. Do you believe that you should be able to kill people with siege without having anyone else fighting them? Do you think you should just be able to one shot people from range? Is this the fundamental disagreement?
show previous quotes

- rapids/mist form still let you ignore snares for entering keep breaches. The best counter to seige, and it's invincible in TF. I can ignore everything hitting me in mist form but the skill is performing as intended. It's because seige is underperforming in CP campaigns due to the dmg mitigation.

You can't exactly mist around forever though, can you? Not if you want to get anything done. Without CP, WHICH IS THE TOPIC AT HAND, you can mist once in a while. You can't just keep misting. However, the guys inside can keep clicking their mouse button until their ballista runs out. I don't think there's even a point here.

You're acting like you have something to teach me about group play, and I'm not sure what gave you that impression. Acting confident about what you're saying, and acting like I just finished the tutorial quest, does not make your words real.

I'll be happy knowing that ZoS removed your CP crutch for a week

. I stopped running groups after Daniel turned NPK into CN. Idk why we are taking about this, or writing novels.

I can mist form fine in AZ, enough to go past a tough breach or use as a "fake block" but the reduced Regen will kill me if that is all I'm casting. But this is good because you want the action to represent meaning and that decision to have a setback if it's wrong. In TF can mist form from Arrius to Ales using channeled focus and pots on 1400 mag recovery. You only need mist form anyway to go thru a breach, not stand there soaking up dmg.

I'm not teaching you anything. Except that seige in AZ/nCP is not the seige buff a few DLC updates ago and that nCP might actually be great for pvp.

Anazasi · February 2017

heystreethawk wrote: »

show previous quotes

Minno wrote: »

heystreethawk wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

heystreethawk wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

Agreed. Lowering seige damage promotes unhealthy zerging and dumb-ball group play because you'll just outheal and don't need to run purge.

There are counters available (seige seige, avoid red circles, and group purge and healing). Use them and let's get back to playing.

That's not the case without CP, in part from a lack of mitigation against the unchanged base damage of a ballista, and in part because you just can't purge or heal enough to get through it. You think we don't drop already drop siege shield on a regular CP-enabled day? And what's this about purge; what does purging mean? This isn't an l2p lesson; these intimately familiar counter measures are not enough in a no-CP ballgame.

People overuse the siege on AZ, because they can lob off ridiculous amounts of damage at absolute minimal risk. It winds up promoting bad practices like zerging, because how else are you going to make it into a keep? And more dangerously, it makes for bad soldiers; people who can't handle themselves in Actual Big Boy Combat because they've learned that siege is the most effective way to deal damage, so they get really good at clicking on the ground at the right moment from inside of the keep. I don't want my children to inherit a Cyrodiil populated entirely by people RPing as drone pilots.

Spread out? If this was a trial, you'd learn to not stack if the mob was dishing out extra dmg the more players they hit.

They only use seige because you are letting them think it can work. I only died to seige last night once in AZ and it was because I didn't realize I got hit and let it do full dmg on me. That's not a seige problem, that's a player mistake which rewarded the enemy.

Minno wrote: »

heystreethawk wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

Agreed. Lowering seige damage promotes unhealthy zerging and dumb-ball group play because you'll just outheal and don't need to run purge.

There are counters available (seige seige, avoid red circles, and group purge and healing). Use them and let's get back to playing.

That's not the case without CP, in part from a lack of mitigation against the unchanged base damage of a ballista, and in part because you just can't purge or heal enough to get through it. You think we don't drop already drop siege shield on a regular CP-enabled day? And what's this about purge; what does purging mean? This isn't an l2p lesson; these intimately familiar counter measures are not enough in a no-CP ballgame.

People overuse the siege on AZ, because they can lob off ridiculous amounts of damage at absolute minimal risk. It winds up promoting bad practices like zerging, because how else are you going to make it into a keep? And more dangerously, it makes for bad soldiers; people who can't handle themselves in Actual Big Boy Combat because they've learned that siege is the most effective way to deal damage, so they get really good at clicking on the ground at the right moment from inside of the keep. I don't want my children to inherit a Cyrodiil populated entirely by people RPing as drone pilots.

Spread out? If this was a trial, you'd learn to not stack if the mob was dishing out extra dmg the more players they hit.

They only use seige because you are letting them think it can work. I only died to seige last night once in AZ and it was because I didn't realize I got hit and let it do full dmg on me. That's not a seige problem, that's a player mistake which rewarded the enemy.

Good call.

Alright gang, huddle up; we're gonna be doing the "Swiss Miss" maneuver on the keep. I want every one of you manning 3 ballistae each on every single wall on the west and east sides, and then in 10 minutes time we're going to be darting through each of them breaches, one at a time, to "spread out" and make sure the enemies don't think their siege is gonna work. We'll meet up on the front door to high five and drop a siege shield on the tank, who's going to be one-man-ramming it; I think his pointy helm will give him a buff when he butts it into the door.

You're probably wondering why we've spent so much time watching Busby Berkeley films on raid night, and I'd be remiss if I didn't thank Men'Do at this juncture for the use of his personal screening room; call me crazy, but I don't think the classics pack the same visual "wallop" when translated to digital media. Anyhoo, I asked you to take notes on all the climactic synchronized swimming numbers, and we're going to put your storyboard breakdowns to good use on this next maneuver, which I call "Gilding the Lily Pad". We're gonna be pirouetting into the keep in unison, but again: one at a time, mirroring one another's movements on opposite sides, coalescing at the end to dodge roll through the flag. I reckon it will take the tank six minutes to solo ram through the FD, and he should be able to cast Guard on the other tank to brute force the flags.

Thank you for the advice on group play, Minno; the trials analogy helped me to remember the time I ran AA. Please drop me a line if you ever want to try out a blazing shield build.

It's not hard. Distract the enemy, purge/heal. A smaller group runs on the less crowded side and start seiging another hole. Once that wall breaks, reform the group at breach. This is keep taking 101...

No, it's not keep taking 101. It's fan fiction for armchair generals, the kind of stuff that sounds super clever on the page, but falls apart in practice 90% of the time. The people who talk about these tactics as if they offer an answer to anything either 1) play primarily in the daytime / on servers with small or inexperienced populations, or 2) do not substantially contribute to keep captures, ever. Perhaps you are both; I don't often play during the day.

If I have enough people in my group (let's say 16) to comfortably setup a second siege line, the enemies inside (who, unlike me, are immune to any substantial threat at this juncture) have enough people to set up a second counter-siege line while sipping margaritas. Maybe they don't even need to do that; one man can comfortably run several, because counter-siege pointed at the opposite side of the keep only needs to be about a foot away from the siege pointed at the other breach. Meanwhile, I have split my forces in half (8 on each side, in this example), so if a group of 16 shows up with enough hair on their chest to hop off the wall and use their abilities, my best bet is to reconvene my two groups at a third, equidistant location to fight them. Now, I either keep a few people behind at each siege line, in the hopes that they won't be run down by the larger group that is amassing at the keep-- pugs are spilling in by now, don't kid yourself-- or I abandon the siege altogether. Either way, I am at a severe disadvantage. I am sieged down, I am split up, and the walls are being repaired. If we beat the enemies, we start over, and the best case scenario is that the keep is still flagged and the wall that isn't fully repaired is at 80%. Your awesome tactic doesn't work, no matter how confidently you assert that it does.
show previous quotes

Trials analogy was an insult. "Actors" playing a script event know the mechanics of avoiding red circles better than anyone that dies to seige. Trying to get the game to change to suit your mistakes, is not the right choice for balance.

I am aware that it was an insult, and I assure you that if it came from anyone who actually leads groups and takes keeps in the modern era of Trueflame, I would probably take offense. Why are you talking to me like you're my sensei?
show previous quotes

For why nCP seige is better:

- gives smaller groups chance to funnel zergs to avoid the AOE caps. Seige, if I understand, ignores this. So if a 14 player group is defending a keep against two raids, they should have a chance to kill you.

They're not going to kill two raids. They will kill a few, who will be rezzed by the time the rest of the hydra arrives at the top. Siege does nothing against two raids, but it does a lot against a medium sized group (8-16). Siege is favored by large groups, who can spare the bodies to run it. Small and medium groups cannot.
show previous quotes

- currently in TF, seige does nothing. Even against unorganized zergs its terrible. And it masks terrible groups from organized ones.

There is nothing I can say to this other than "no". I don't understand the part about the masks, though. Do you believe that you should be able to kill people with siege without having anyone else fighting them? Do you think you should just be able to one shot people from range? Is this the fundamental disagreement?
show previous quotes

- rapids/mist form still let you ignore snares for entering keep breaches. The best counter to seige, and it's invincible in TF. I can ignore everything hitting me in mist form but the skill is performing as intended. It's because seige is underperforming in CP campaigns due to the dmg mitigation.

You can't exactly mist around forever though, can you? Not if you want to get anything done. Without CP, WHICH IS THE TOPIC AT HAND, you can mist once in a while. You can't just keep misting. However, the guys inside can keep clicking their mouse button until their ballista runs out. I don't think there's even a point here.

You're acting like you have something to teach me about group play, and I'm not sure what gave you that impression. Acting confident about what you're saying, and acting like I just finished the tutorial quest, does not make your words real.

Josh this is going to be fun...I'm thinking we gather the old Campaign 1 generation here and play just like the good old days.....

Talcyndl · February 2017

dotme wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. On CP-enabled campaigns, I can hurl cold-fire bolts running TWO ballistas at once towards a group attacking the front door of a keep, and they heal right through the hits. Counter-siege is supposed to hurt. If there are only two of you defending a keep against a large group of attackers, oil and ballistas are often the best option and IMHO they should be doing damage comparable to a destro-ult (except, of course, you can always purge and dodge counter-siege more easily than a destro-ult, where half the time you don't even see the animation and just die)

TLDR - Increase siege damage in normal CP-enabled campaigns, don't lower damage for the test week.

This. While siege is more powerful on Azuras, it's not close to an insta-kill that should be changed. To the extent it alters behavior, the impact is mostly positive since it makes it harder for zergy ball groups to pack tight and run over any opposition.

Rohamad_Ali · February 2017

Proc suits are just stupid OP on the no cp campaign . There's still people just spamming light attacks and getting insane amount of procs with no real effort involved . Without the cp damage mitigation to counter my Magblade is Piggieon holed into running a blanket sap tank build or going full gank and escape . Neither playstyle is my cup of tea even though I have sets ready for both .

I wish they would just junk those easy mode sets in PVP . That would reduce the lag too and make people actually think in combat .

Recremen · February 2017

@Talcyndl

Except that's not the point of the test from everything I can gather, and also your supposition has already been tested in the past and found to be completely unfounded. High siege damage gives advantage to zergs because they can place more of it down and faster. It is encourages the opposite of productive combat. I feel like nobody who wants high siege damage even played through the high siege meta, these arguments simply don't reflect the reality we faced when that was a thing.