Cyrodiil and Siege mechanics

TreeHugger1

As you all know cyro is really boring, there aren't enough siege weapons and siege mechanics are far too simple.
Cyro's surface is identical, monotonous and very boring, even all of the castles are designed in the same way.
I want a game with siege towers, ladders,tunnels and siege ramps.
A siege should be an exciting and challenging experience, that should involve skill, creativity, deception, logic and team work.
Today a single player can buy 10 siege weapons and take down a wall in a few min, I don't think it's rational that you can conquer all of cyro in such a shot time.
I think it would also be great if certain player could fortify castles add ramparts and dig tunnels to protect a castle from incoming attack.
I guess that my suggestion sounds weird or unclear so I'll 2 sources that contain interesting info about roman warfare:

http://www.ancient.eu/Roman_Siege_Warfare/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_siege_engines

davey1107

I think Cyrodiil could use a refresh at some point, and certainly some of your ideas could add color to the game.

SHADOW2KK

I hear what you are saying OP, and agree, most of the keeps would never be designed using military common sense, said this a few years ago.

The reason the keeps etc are laid out the way they are is so they can be more easily flipped, so the arcadey feel to pvp is catered to the playerbase instead of a small number who know how it should be done hehe.

TreeHugger1

SHADOW2KK wrote: »

I hear what you are saying OP, and agree, most of the keeps would never be designed using military common sense, said this a few years ago.

The reason the keeps etc are laid out the way they are is so they can be more easily flipped, so the arcadey feel to pvp is catered to the playerbase instead of a small number who know how it should be done hehe.

davey1107 wrote: »

I think Cyrodiil could use a refresh at some point, and certainly some of your ideas could add color to the game.

Thank you guys for your supporting.
It's quite ironic because the purpose of a castle is not to be conquered fast and easily.
Just to be clear I am not asking ZoS to stick to roman or any kind of warfare(it's tamriel after all), but to give us siege mechanics that require the traits I described above and above all should give an "awesome" experience.
@ZOS_RichLambert

TreeHugger1

hmm anyone?

FluffyReachWitch

I can imagine a tower working something like a battering ram, where you'd need a decent force to get it moving. The other side would be able to counter it with catapult and ballista attacks. That could be fun.

Morgul667

True, but on the other side, what would happen to small group of players if everything needs a big group ? I already feel that with latest update non CP campaign, alone or small group players during low population time have not much to do until they make a big enough group to create the action

azfardajiwang

I like the idea. But, can you imagine how messy it'll become during primetime when faction stacks.. Might be playing on 1fps

TreeHugger1

You are right, you can't consider this idea without considering the overall balance between big groups and small group, the performance of cyrodiil and the difficulty of taking keeps.
Well I don't understand neither :P

Anyway the obvious question is what the future role of solo players,small groups and zergs in cyro?
Whether small groups should only play a role of a support team that takes resources and small fortresses and cooperate with bigger groups or a role of a solid group,it's not my job to decide. As far as I see there are many veteran players who hang around with their friends in small groups, communicate with each other, doing bold and creative actions and would love to fully express their capabilities.

How to do that? give them more tools to fight bigger groups or create other places for them to fight (in cyro) that will affect the campaign.

What I am trying to do in this thread is to reconsider the things we got used to in cyrodiil.

The siege weapons, the castles, their location, the distances between the castles, the topographia of cyro, the transitus links, it's been so long since the game has been released and it's the time to redesign cyrodiil.

Every castle should have different surroundings, fortifications and should posses a control over an important road/town/holy place in the area.
In another words, there should be more variables to the decision of sieging a keep apart from transitus links, emp keeps etc..

(About the siege tower you can put forces and siege weapons on it, move it to the wall and the players will jump to the wall and fight against the enemies).
@azfardajiwang @Morgul667 @FluffyReachWitch

Qbiken

Underground tunnel systems would be interesting, but hen again we have IC sewers

TreeHugger1

Qbiken wrote: »

Underground tunnel systems would be interesting, but hen again we have IC sewers

It's more than that, with tunnels you can collapse siege ramps or walls,surprise the enemy and ambush him.
btw I wonder when we will get the terrific siege on IC as zos promised in the trailer,this will give some life to this dying place:d

Docmandu

TreeHugger1 wrote: »

I want a game with siege towers

fyi... Dark Age of Camelot has siege towers... something you can build against an outer wall which allows you to climb over the outer wall (without cheats :P ). Defenders can interrupt the build.

Though I would prefer ZOS spend effort elsewhere first.. ie. a way to get people to use the 80% of the map that is currently neglected. Maybe something as simple as putting gathering nodes throughout Cyrodiil that give more resources than in PvE land.. then again.. I imagine that would spark a 100-page rants of PvE players about how unfair that is.

TreeHugger1

Docmandu wrote: »

TreeHugger1 wrote: »

I want a game with siege towers

fyi... Dark Age of Camelot has siege towers... something you can build against an outer wall which allows you to climb over the outer wall (without cheats :P ). Defenders can interrupt the build.

Though I would prefer ZOS spend effort elsewhere first.. ie. a way to get people to use the 80% of the map that is currently neglected. Maybe something as simple as putting gathering nodes throughout Cyrodiil that give more resources than in PvE land.. then again.. I imagine that would spark a 100-page rants of PvE players about how unfair that is.

Yea I wrote it in one of my comments :" What I am trying to do in this thread is to reconsider the things we got used to in cyrodiil.

The siege weapons, the castles, their location, the distances between the castles, the topographia of cyro, the transitus links, it's been so long since the game has been released and it's the time to redesign cyrodiil.

Every castle should have different surroundings, fortifications and should posses a control over an important road/town/holy place in the area.
In another words, there should be more variables to the decision of sieging a keep apart from transitus links, emp keeps etc..
"
btw I hope the devs will respond @ZOS_RichLambert @ZOS_BrianWheeler .... I don't know who is responsible for this neglect.

GreenSoup2HoT

PvD with Ram's OP! Nerf Ram's!

TreeHugger1

double

TreeHugger1

GreenSoup2HoT wrote: »

PvD with Ram's OP! Nerf Ram's!

Exactly this.

TreeHugger1

I am simply amazed that every whine/nerf thread gets tons of comments while no one is commenting in this one.
Whines will lead to nothing, this game has so many things that need to change.
I am so desperate, third comment in a row.

CTSCold

Small groups could use ladders. Requires 3 people to carry but provides no cover. Big groups get towers which provide cover.

Pirhana7_ESO

TreeHugger1 wrote: »

As you all know cyro is really boring, there aren't enough siege weapons and siege mechanics are far too simple.
Cyro's surface is identical, monotonous and very boring, even all of the castles are designed in the same way.
I want a game with siege towers, ladders,tunnels and siege ramps.
A siege should be an exciting and challenging experience, that should involve skill, creativity, deception, logic and team work.
Today a single player can buy 10 siege weapons and take down a wall in a few min, I don't think it's rational that you can conquer all of cyro in such a shot time.
I think it would also be great if certain player could fortify castles add ramparts and dig tunnels to protect a castle from incoming attack.
I guess that my suggestion sounds weird or unclear so I'll 2 sources that contain interesting info about roman warfare:

http://www.ancient.eu/Roman_Siege_Warfare/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_siege_engines

ESO has become a BG game. At this point everyone is just waiting for Camelot Unchained for seige warfare play

NBrookus

Skills like mining and CP to improve chances of mechanics like sapping/reinforcing walls would be amazing additions to Cyrodiil. But I think it's beyond the mechanics of the game as it is now.

davey1107

20'is a lot of feedback...but half of it is your responses, granted. Some addl thoughts:

I agree that keeps are too easy to take. And because you can't go there when flagged, campaigns become a lot of zergs quickly taking keeps unopposed. This week in PS4 na Scourge, the blues are obsessed with gold's home keeps, bloodmayne and black boot. They keep taking one quickly, then move to the next. Because defense is hard and stupid, golds just wait for them to move to the other and then take back the lost one. Because it's 7k ap per capture, the teams are fine going in loops...but it's silly.

So the keep could use a refresh, but there's a lot to balance. You want keeps to be challenging to take, but you also want smaller groups to be able to handle them. During off hours it can be thought to get eight people together, and allowing these groups to take keeps enhances the game. But then if 8 can take down a wall in 5 minutes, a Zerg of 40 can do it WAY too fast.

You probably can't have any sort of equipment that allows "early access" to a keep. (Getting in before the walls come down). Keep defense is already very difficult...and not overly rewarding. A year ago we got a bug where nightblades could Ambush up onto a wall by attacking a player on the edge. So I could ambush, get up there, cloak away and hide, then cause endless trouble. It was hilarious for a while...but it didn't work. A few enemies getting in early destroys the entire defense. This is still possible through strategic waiting after you lose a keep (and I do it all the time), but that's different from allowing multiple players to do it on the spur of the moment.

So in my keep taking and defending experience, yes we could use more variety. But we could use some other enhancements as well. My randomly generated list of ideas:

- keep capture should be slowed down via several mechanics adjustments

- Keep defense should pay a better AP reward. For example, if the inner wall is breached and the flag starts shifting at all during an attack, ifmthe defenders win after this point they should get the same 6k base reward the attacked would have received for taking it.

- siege engines should be more fragile, and should not be protected by anything other than specific abilities (siege shield) or repair kits. If I firepot an enemy siege, it should not lose 1% of its health...that's idiotic. It should catch on fire and begin a process of burning down, requiring a second player to douse or the sieving player to slow their attacks.

- when a keep is flagged, a limited number of players should be able to port in. Say five. This would ensure a defense in some form was always possible. It wouldn't foil an attack entirely, but it'd allow the defending team some ability to delay attackers while reinforcements arrive. (You'd be surprised how annoying my bow gank build can be solo v 10 from a wall, lol. I don't stop every Drakelowe capture, but it's enough to delay reds long enough to cause a wipe 1 in 4 attacks.)

- there's no AP incentive for spending a long time waiting and defending a specific keep. I can envision a system where keeps are assigned volunteer defenders...like there's a wait list at the keep and the top five are official defenders. Maybe they get the ability to port back from anywhere in Cyrodiil. Maybe they get extra power in that keep. But such a system would better reward these defenders w special AP ticks, with the goal of reducing unimpeded captures.

- you missed the most obvious siege enhancement - petardes. These are bombs you attach to walls with a cover that (theoretically) pushes the force of the explosion into the wall. The expression "hoisted by your own petarde?" This comes from the tendency of these stupid things to backfire (literally) and blow the person setting it away.

We want Petardes!

So this would be a siege item you buy from the merchant. It's one time use. You can set it on a wall that's under 50% health. When you set it, you enter a mini game like the lockpick. If you miss, it misfired and hits you for like 20k damage. If you are successful, there's a 75% chance it hits the wall for like 25k damage, then a 25% chance it misfires and hits you for 20k. Lol.

The future of Cyrodiil is all about petardes. Tell me that wouldn't be hilarious.

TreeHugger1

davey1107 wrote: »

20'is a lot of feedback...but half of it is your responses, granted. Some addl thoughts:

I agree that keeps are too easy to take. And because you can't go there when flagged, campaigns become a lot of zergs quickly taking keeps unopposed. This week in PS4 na Scourge, the blues are obsessed with gold's home keeps, bloodmayne and black boot. They keep taking one quickly, then move to the next. Because defense is hard and stupid, golds just wait for them to move to the other and then take back the lost one. Because it's 7k ap per capture, the teams are fine going in loops...but it's silly.

So the keep could use a refresh, but there's a lot to balance. You want keeps to be challenging to take, but you also want smaller groups to be able to handle them. During off hours it can be thought to get eight people together, and allowing these groups to take keeps enhances the game. But then if 8 can take down a wall in 5 minutes, a Zerg of 40 can do it WAY too fast.

You probably can't have any sort of equipment that allows "early access" to a keep. (Getting in before the walls come down). Keep defense is already very difficult...and not overly rewarding. A year ago we got a bug where nightblades could Ambush up onto a wall by attacking a player on the edge. So I could ambush, get up there, cloak away and hide, then cause endless trouble. It was hilarious for a while...but it didn't work. A few enemies getting in early destroys the entire defense. This is still possible through strategic waiting after you lose a keep (and I do it all the time), but that's different from allowing multiple players to do it on the spur of the moment.

So in my keep taking and defending experience, yes we could use more variety. But we could use some other enhancements as well. My randomly generated list of ideas:

- keep capture should be slowed down via several mechanics adjustments

- Keep defense should pay a better AP reward. For example, if the inner wall is breached and the flag starts shifting at all during an attack, ifmthe defenders win after this point they should get the same 6k base reward the attacked would have received for taking it.

- siege engines should be more fragile, and should not be protected by anything other than specific abilities (siege shield) or repair kits. If I firepot an enemy siege, it should not lose 1% of its health...that's idiotic. It should catch on fire and begin a process of burning down, requiring a second player to douse or the sieving player to slow their attacks.

- when a keep is flagged, a limited number of players should be able to port in. Say five. This would ensure a defense in some form was always possible. It wouldn't foil an attack entirely, but it'd allow the defending team some ability to delay attackers while reinforcements arrive. (You'd be surprised how annoying my bow gank build can be solo v 10 from a wall, lol. I don't stop every Drakelowe capture, but it's enough to delay reds long enough to cause a wipe 1 in 4 attacks.)

- there's no AP incentive for spending a long time waiting and defending a specific keep. I can envision a system where keeps are assigned volunteer defenders...like there's a wait list at the keep and the top five are official defenders. Maybe they get the ability to port back from anywhere in Cyrodiil. Maybe they get extra power in that keep. But such a system would better reward these defenders w special AP ticks, with the goal of reducing unimpeded captures.

- you missed the most obvious siege enhancement - petardes. These are bombs you attach to walls with a cover that (theoretically) pushes the force of the explosion into the wall. The expression "hoisted by your own petarde?" This comes from the tendency of these stupid things to backfire (literally) and blow the person setting it away.

We want Petardes!

So this would be a siege item you buy from the merchant. It's one time use. You can set it on a wall that's under 50% health. When you set it, you enter a mini game like the lockpick. If you miss, it misfired and hits you for like 20k damage. If you are successful, there's a 75% chance it hits the wall for like 25k damage, then a 25% chance it misfires and hits you for 20k. Lol.

The future of Cyrodiil is all about petardes. Tell me that wouldn't be hilarious.

Took me some time to get the double meaning in the end.

I understand the problem you described, maybe one possible solution is to limit the amount of siege weapons you can place in the same area, so the benefit of bigger numbers will be for the fight itself. I don't really like this specific suggestion though when you make a drastic change problems will always show up.
btw the bug you described still exist in pc.
Agree with all of your other suggestions specificly the Petardes.
@ZOS_RichLambert stop ignoring me.

TreeHugger1

double

TreeHugger1

triple

TreeHugger1

Pirhana7_ESO wrote: »

TreeHugger1 wrote: »

As you all know cyro is really boring, there aren't enough siege weapons and siege mechanics are far too simple.
Cyro's surface is identical, monotonous and very boring, even all of the castles are designed in the same way.
I want a game with siege towers, ladders,tunnels and siege ramps.
A siege should be an exciting and challenging experience, that should involve skill, creativity, deception, logic and team work.
Today a single player can buy 10 siege weapons and take down a wall in a few min, I don't think it's rational that you can conquer all of cyro in such a shot time.
I think it would also be great if certain player could fortify castles add ramparts and dig tunnels to protect a castle from incoming attack.
I guess that my suggestion sounds weird or unclear so I'll 2 sources that contain interesting info about roman warfare:

http://www.ancient.eu/Roman_Siege_Warfare/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_siege_engines

ESO has become a BG game. At this point everyone is just waiting for Camelot Unchained for seige warfare play

If zos will make an effort in making cyrodiil great again it won't be so,don't lose your hope, I am right here(waiting desperately for comments).

JimBobMcKrakken

I agree with davey1107, we should allow a limited number of defenders to port into a keep during an attack. This would make offense have to organize a little better, and keep the battles interesting and less predetermined.

I would add that that keeps should become stronger (wall strength, guard aggressiveness, etc.) when the population in a campaign is higher. This would slow down smaller groups, rotations, and keep the challenge alive when large guilds are operating.