OILS NOT SHIELDABLE AND DOING 18K DMG PER TICK

FakeZavos

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

Claiming siege will kill small group play is laughable. Small groups are least affected by siege. You can easily move to avoid siege damage and attack walls not doors. Big groups are far more affected, especially organized 15+ groups trying to snowball over keeps against unorganized randos.

It will however encourage stacking on crown even more in groups. However if the crown makes a mistake your group will wipe. Versus now where the only chance an organized group has to wipe is vs vastly superior numbers/players.

The other option is to spread out and risk letting onesies or twosies die because they were unsuccessful in avoiding siege.

Yeah and if you attack a wall you get 25 fire ballista's pointed at ur head. GL avoiding those and seriusly, spread out and mayb loose 1 or 2? If you are a 4 man. How are you gonna recover from that? Do you ever play in small groups mate? Or you actually have no idea what youre on about

Steelshiv

Okay idea: What if siege damage stays the same on keep/outpost/resources/bridges/milegates but is nerfed when not in those areas?

Krec

Currently siege equipment damage is too op. If peeps want realism then make siege gear crew weapons and immovable or very cumbersome. Also increase the costs for all that siege gear, including oil. If you wanted to make siege gear hit harder then maybe reduce the buffs from siege shields. Those shield pop up everytime

Wrathmane

This makes sense IMO...... I mean your dumping flaming oil on someone should be doing a staggering amount of damage....... it should almost have a fear effect too..... like the NB ability forcing you to run out of the AOE...... I don't know I haven' been in cyro since the patch drop.... will be in there tonight, then I'll have a better idea.

ZOS_GinaBruno

Hey guys, just to clear things up - when it was said that this is something we're discussing, it wasn't to keep siege's currently-broken state. Just that we're talking about potentially increasing the damage of siege from how it's been. Again, nothing set it stone, we're just talking like you all are.

thegreat_one

A middle ground would be an improvement.

Having to drop 6 oils at the same time to MAYBE kill one guy in a ball group is a tad annoying.

Ajax_22

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hey guys, just to clear things up - when it was said that this is something we're discussing, it wasn't to keep siege's currently-broken state. Just that we're talking about potentially increasing the damage of siege from how it's been. Again, nothing set it stone, we're just talking like you all are.

Is non-CP being taken into account for these discussions? Siege is already extremely strong in non-CP PvP. Any blanket damage increase to siege would make it not much better than the current bugged siege.

Additionally, is there discussion about keeping siege ignoring armor so that it's performing the same across all campaigns? The difference between non-CP, and CP siege damage is very extreme. It's kind of odd for a core function of Cyrodiil to be functioning so differently.

Ackwalan

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hey guys, just to clear things up - when it was said that this is something we're discussing, it wasn't to keep siege's currently-broken state. Just that we're talking about potentially increasing the damage of siege from how it's been. Again, nothing set it stone, we're just talking like you all are.

To siege or not to siege, that is the question. Seems this breaks down into 2 groups. One group seems to like the cavalry charge of 2 groups crashing into each other, while the other groups likes the chest play where 2 groups out maneuver each other. Hopefully there is a middle ground where siege is a force to reckon with yet not be like hunting baby seals with an AK47.

Rukzadlithau

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hey guys, just to clear things up - when it was said that this is something we're discussing, it wasn't to keep siege's currently-broken state. Just that we're talking about potentially increasing the damage of siege from how it's been. Again, nothing set it stone, we're just talking like you all are.

All the zerglings that had their hopes up:

TheBonesXXX

Recremen wrote: »

TheBonesXXX wrote: »

I can step aside the realism angle and talk simple game physics.

This game provides players with a plethora of visual ques, siege being placed, siege being aimed, siege firing, impact even has a ground visual that increases in size the closer it gets to a player.

Players can skip all the way till the last visual, because that big ole circle on the ground tells to how far one needs to move.

It's the simplest function. Pick a direction outside the radius. But this is bad?

Rather, than the game allowing players to hit other players with 2-3 incomplete animations in a shortened window in which other players have less time to react. Which doesn't have a significant increased difficulty, any competent player can line burst complete with weaves.

One has a plethora of visual indicators, one does not. However the one without visual indicators is okay.

Simply put, players just want to dictate how other players play and people don't play it their way they have a fit.

The one "without visual indicators" (read : actually you're just bad at recognizing the indicators/participating in the mind games) does not one-hit, it hits a much smaller area, and it requires building ultimate. You're also nitpicking about how long it takes to set up siege and overestimating the length of time between firing the siege and impact. Most siege it placed from a position of absolute safety within a keep and fired at a very short range, and/or leaves a DoT on the ground that acts as a semipermanent discouragement from moving into any location. So again, you're not giving an honest analysis for how fair siege is. You are ignoring the fact that siege primarily happens around a keep, and that accomplishing any map objective forces you to move into an area which by all rights should be littered with siege, if the defenders are even halfway competent.

This isn't about players dictating how others play, it's about you wanting a turn at easy AP for minimal effort.

Wrong, I'm giving an analysis of an experienced MMO player, Beta Tester, and has the education to know how human perception actually works.

There are visual ques for siege. Animation clipping is the result of broken game physics which results certain visual ques not to appear.

One is complete in it's animation and was intended that's sieging.

You know what was not intended in the games physics? Animation canceling because the game is built for binocular vision; that means you have a pair of eyes and an overlapping field of view.

I'm not attacking the ability to purposely hide animation even when it was never intended, it's literally an unintended function of the game because it removes visual indicators needed to react. No game designer builds games without visual indicators.

Each skill has it's own animation, a visual motion that indicates that the character is using a skill, it's not supposed to have one animation and a player gets hit with three skills.

A player who animation canceling is tricking another person's perception of what's going in because the physics are broken. No one sees it, in fights people are giving an anticipratory reaction. You or anyone did not see all of those necessary movements.

Now, back to basic game physics, dying from fall damage requires falling. The way to mitigate falling is, do not stand next to the edge of things.

Everyone laughs when someone roll dodges off the third floor of the inners and dies.

The way not to die in Lake Rumare is not to swim in Lake Rumare, because the games programmed to kill player characters.

Do not fall in lava in the game, because the game is programmed to kill players.

Same principle applies, it's on the player not to get hit by a missile with a fix trajectory it has all necessary and complete visual indicators.

If people die to, fall damage, Slaughter fish, Lava, or siege, it's on them to react because the game gives them more than necessary perceptual ques, visual indicators.

You know what's not the proper amount of perceptual ques per the amount of skills used? Animation canceling.

Literally explained how the game functions but continue on with a knee jerk emotional response.

FakeZavos

TheBonesXXX wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

TheBonesXXX wrote: »

I can step aside the realism angle and talk simple game physics.

This game provides players with a plethora of visual ques, siege being placed, siege being aimed, siege firing, impact even has a ground visual that increases in size the closer it gets to a player.

Players can skip all the way till the last visual, because that big ole circle on the ground tells to how far one needs to move.

It's the simplest function. Pick a direction outside the radius. But this is bad?

Rather, than the game allowing players to hit other players with 2-3 incomplete animations in a shortened window in which other players have less time to react. Which doesn't have a significant increased difficulty, any competent player can line burst complete with weaves.

One has a plethora of visual indicators, one does not. However the one without visual indicators is okay.

Simply put, players just want to dictate how other players play and people don't play it their way they have a fit.

The one "without visual indicators" (read : actually you're just bad at recognizing the indicators/participating in the mind games) does not one-hit, it hits a much smaller area, and it requires building ultimate. You're also nitpicking about how long it takes to set up siege and overestimating the length of time between firing the siege and impact. Most siege it placed from a position of absolute safety within a keep and fired at a very short range, and/or leaves a DoT on the ground that acts as a semipermanent discouragement from moving into any location. So again, you're not giving an honest analysis for how fair siege is. You are ignoring the fact that siege primarily happens around a keep, and that accomplishing any map objective forces you to move into an area which by all rights should be littered with siege, if the defenders are even halfway competent.

This isn't about players dictating how others play, it's about you wanting a turn at easy AP for minimal effort.

Wrong, I'm giving an analysis of an experienced MMO player, Beta Tester, and has the education to know how human perception actually works.

There are visual ques for siege. Animation clipping is the result of broken game physics which results certain visual ques not to appear.

One is complete in it's animation and was intended that's sieging.

You know what was not intended in the games physics? Animation canceling because the game is built for binocular vision; that means you have a pair of eyes and an overlapping field of view.

I'm not attacking the ability to purposely hide animation even when it was never intended, it's literally an unintended function of the game because it removes visual indicators needed to react. No game designer builds games without visual indicators.

Each skill has it's own animation, a visual motion that indicates that the character is using a skill, it's not supposed to have one animation and a player gets hit with three skills.

A player who animation canceling is tricking another person's perception of what's going in because the physics are broken. No one sees it, in fights people are giving an anticipratory reaction. You or anyone did not see all of those necessary movements.

Now, back to basic game physics, dying from fall damage requires falling. The way to mitigate falling is, do not stand next to the edge of things.

Everyone laughs when someone roll dodges off the third floor of the inners and dies.

The way not to die in Lake Rumare is not to swim in Lake Rumare, because the games programmed to kill player characters.

Do not fall in lava in the game, because the game is programmed to kill players.

Same principle applies, it's on the player not to get hit by a missile with a fix trajectory it has all necessary and complete visual indicators.

If people die to, fall damage, Slaughter fish, Lava, or siege, it's on them to react because the game gives them more than necessary perceptual ques, visual indicators.

You know what's not the proper amount of perceptual ques per the amount of skills used? Animation canceling.

Literally explained how the game functions but continue on with a knee jerk emotional response.

I can see where you are coming from. But falldamage and lava for example are clear self made misstakes, you if it happends midfight, you have that on yourself. Siege on the other hand, as you said is easy dodgeable. So imagine this, common, example. You are alone trying to get some fights somehwere. Not to flip a keep, just fighting because you enjoy it. You are fighting 2 people on your own, fights seems to be going good, then someone starts placing 2 siege and keeps firing it all around you, you get snared and stunned from the 2 people attacking you so the is no way to dodge the siege anymore.

To make my point clear, you compare 2 own fault scenarios to something that isnt (read, doesnt have to be) your own fault per definition.

And please dont start with the "1 guys houdnt be able to kill 3 others, or anything simular) because it should. A highly skillfull player should always be able to fight and kill outnumbered. This is still a game with some form of skillcap. Same eith small groups. 5 man should be able to kill 15 with the right skill, builds and organisation.

Edit: And about the animationcancelling part. Even tough animation cancelling can help, especislly with lightattackweaving. It can give you a more static pov. But it doesnt sctually lets you cast skills faster. The best you can pull is lightattack+skill+bash in 1 second. Cant do anything more then 1 skill in 1 second.

Ralamil

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hey guys, just to clear things up - when it was said that this is something we're discussing, it wasn't to keep siege's currently-broken state. Just that we're talking about potentially increasing the damage of siege from how it's been. Again, nothing set it stone, we're just talking like you all are.

@ZOS_GinaBruno Thanks for clearing that up!

I maintain my points that ZOS really should try to encourage other play styles that are less, as someone else in this or another thread described it, point-and-click-heroism, but I'm happy to hear you just meant an increase, not this increase.

Toc de Malsvi

FakeZavos wrote: »

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

Claiming siege will kill small group play is laughable. Small groups are least affected by siege. You can easily move to avoid siege damage and attack walls not doors. Big groups are far more affected, especially organized 15+ groups trying to snowball over keeps against unorganized randos.

It will however encourage stacking on crown even more in groups. However if the crown makes a mistake your group will wipe. Versus now where the only chance an organized group has to wipe is vs vastly superior numbers/players.

The other option is to spread out and risk letting onesies or twosies die because they were unsuccessful in avoiding siege.

Yeah and if you attack a wall you get 25 fire ballista's pointed at ur head. GL avoiding those and seriusly, spread out and mayb loose 1 or 2? If you are a 4 man. How are you gonna recover from that? Do you ever play in small groups mate? Or you actually have no idea what youre on about

Groups of four do not need to spread out, that part was pointed at groups of 15 or more. If your group of four cannot avoid siege you seriously need to L2P.

Toc de Malsvi

Buzo wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hey guys, just to clear things up - when it was said that this is something we're discussing, it wasn't to keep siege's currently-broken state. Just that we're talking about potentially increasing the damage of siege from how it's been. Again, nothing set it stone, we're just talking like you all are.

All the zerglings that had their hopes up:

LOL you really wish. The zerglings are the most harmed by this effect, most likely to be in a large group, most likely to stand in bad, least able to coordinate and avoid siege. Propaganda at its finest.

I'm sure the random zerglings popping siege was the most devastating, not an organized group of 4 or more than can time their ballista launch to devastate a whole region.

Ralamil

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

Groups of four do not need to spread out, that part was pointed at groups of 15 or more. If your group of four cannot avoid siege you seriously need to L2P.

XBox must be dead empty (or filled with people who have no idea what they're doing) if you and 4 friends can stand together and not get hit with any siege. Or, more likely, you're talking out your ass and don't actually do things like, I don't know, take keeps.

Like, seriously, what do you actually do? Stay nearby, run 1 siege each, and just immediately hop off after every shot, somehow miraculously timing it such that enemies only land their siege attacks when you're backing off? How long does it take you to actually take down a keep door or wall?

Toc de Malsvi

Ralamil wrote: »

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

Groups of four do not need to spread out, that part was pointed at groups of 15 or more. If your group of four cannot avoid siege you seriously need to L2P.

XBox must be dead empty (or filled with people who have no idea what they're doing) if you and 4 friends can stand together and not get hit with any siege. Or, more likely, you're talking out your ass and don't actually do things like, I don't know, take keeps.

Like, seriously, what do you actually do? Stay nearby, run 1 siege each, and just immediately hop off after every shot, somehow miraculously timing it such that enemies only land their siege attacks when you're backing off? How long does it take you to actually take down a keep door or wall?

Balling up at the door isn't usually the best option in a group of four. In fact I really have no issue whatsoever with two rando's being able to hold off a group of four if the rando's have a freaking CASTLE with guards. The fact that on live this is an impossibility due to how weak siege is is the joke. You do know there is more than one side to a keep right, and you can siege with Trebs from much further back? You don't have to stack on the door with the rest of the crowd. Wait you don't immediately hop off siege after each shot? NVM clearly L2P issue here.

Toc de Malsvi

Ralamil wrote: »

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

Groups of four do not need to spread out, that part was pointed at groups of 15 or more. If your group of four cannot avoid siege you seriously need to L2P.

XBox must be dead empty (or filled with people who have no idea what they're doing) if you and 4 friends can stand together and not get hit with any siege. Or, more likely, you're talking out your ass and don't actually do things like, I don't know, take keeps.

Like, seriously, what do you actually do? Stay nearby, run 1 siege each, and just immediately hop off after every shot, somehow miraculously timing it such that enemies only land their siege attacks when you're backing off? How long does it take you to actually take down a keep door or wall?

If you are trying to small group next to large zergs you should not be standing in or near breaches. If you find your small group is not sufficiently mobile to avoid siege I suggest you learn to play small scale better. If you are playing in a small group near a large fight, it is rarely beneficial for you to set up siege in the first place. If you cannot setup 3 siege and move between them solo then you need to L2P.

Whats not that interesting or hard to understand is that each wall point has only so many spots to set up siege. One person rolling between 3 siege is significantly harder to hit with counter siege without coordination. Siege has a long flight time, but not a long cast time, so you can quite literally wait for counter siege to hit before stepping in and launching your own without risk of being hit.

Two players can setup siege at distinctly different spots and run 6 engines total, while their pocket healers sit back out of range casting any necessary extra heals. This is of course assuming you are actually trying to take a keep with 4 players, something not very realistic during high activity.

TheBonesXXX

FakeZavos wrote: »

TheBonesXXX wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

TheBonesXXX wrote: »

I can step aside the realism angle and talk simple game physics.

This game provides players with a plethora of visual ques, siege being placed, siege being aimed, siege firing, impact even has a ground visual that increases in size the closer it gets to a player.

Players can skip all the way till the last visual, because that big ole circle on the ground tells to how far one needs to move.

It's the simplest function. Pick a direction outside the radius. But this is bad?

Rather, than the game allowing players to hit other players with 2-3 incomplete animations in a shortened window in which other players have less time to react. Which doesn't have a significant increased difficulty, any competent player can line burst complete with weaves.

One has a plethora of visual indicators, one does not. However the one without visual indicators is okay.

Simply put, players just want to dictate how other players play and people don't play it their way they have a fit.

The one "without visual indicators" (read : actually you're just bad at recognizing the indicators/participating in the mind games) does not one-hit, it hits a much smaller area, and it requires building ultimate. You're also nitpicking about how long it takes to set up siege and overestimating the length of time between firing the siege and impact. Most siege it placed from a position of absolute safety within a keep and fired at a very short range, and/or leaves a DoT on the ground that acts as a semipermanent discouragement from moving into any location. So again, you're not giving an honest analysis for how fair siege is. You are ignoring the fact that siege primarily happens around a keep, and that accomplishing any map objective forces you to move into an area which by all rights should be littered with siege, if the defenders are even halfway competent.

This isn't about players dictating how others play, it's about you wanting a turn at easy AP for minimal effort.

Wrong, I'm giving an analysis of an experienced MMO player, Beta Tester, and has the education to know how human perception actually works.

There are visual ques for siege. Animation clipping is the result of broken game physics which results certain visual ques not to appear.

One is complete in it's animation and was intended that's sieging.

You know what was not intended in the games physics? Animation canceling because the game is built for binocular vision; that means you have a pair of eyes and an overlapping field of view.

I'm not attacking the ability to purposely hide animation even when it was never intended, it's literally an unintended function of the game because it removes visual indicators needed to react. No game designer builds games without visual indicators.

Each skill has it's own animation, a visual motion that indicates that the character is using a skill, it's not supposed to have one animation and a player gets hit with three skills.

A player who animation canceling is tricking another person's perception of what's going in because the physics are broken. No one sees it, in fights people are giving an anticipratory reaction. You or anyone did not see all of those necessary movements.

Now, back to basic game physics, dying from fall damage requires falling. The way to mitigate falling is, do not stand next to the edge of things.

Everyone laughs when someone roll dodges off the third floor of the inners and dies.

The way not to die in Lake Rumare is not to swim in Lake Rumare, because the games programmed to kill player characters.

Do not fall in lava in the game, because the game is programmed to kill players.

Same principle applies, it's on the player not to get hit by a missile with a fix trajectory it has all necessary and complete visual indicators.

If people die to, fall damage, Slaughter fish, Lava, or siege, it's on them to react because the game gives them more than necessary perceptual ques, visual indicators.

You know what's not the proper amount of perceptual ques per the amount of skills used? Animation canceling.

Literally explained how the game functions but continue on with a knee jerk emotional response.

I can see where you are coming from. But falldamage and lava for example are clear self made misstakes, you if it happends midfight, you have that on yourself. Siege on the other hand, as you said is easy dodgeable. So imagine this, common, example. You are alone trying to get some fights somehwere. Not to flip a keep, just fighting because you enjoy it. You are fighting 2 people on your own, fights seems to be going good, then someone starts placing 2 siege and keeps firing it all around you, you get snared and stunned from the 2 people attacking you so the is no way to dodge the siege anymore.

To make my point clear, you compare 2 own fault scenarios to something that isnt (read, doesnt have to be) your own fault per definition.

And please dont start with the "1 guys houdnt be able to kill 3 others, or anything simular) because it should. A highly skillfull player should always be able to fight and kill outnumbered. This is still a game with some form of skillcap. Same eith small groups. 5 man should be able to kill 15 with the right skill, builds and organisation.

Edit: And about the animationcancelling part. Even tough animation cancelling can help, especislly with lightattackweaving. It can give you a more static pov. But it doesnt sctually lets you cast skills faster. The best you can pull is lightattack+skill+bash in 1 second. Cant do anything more then 1 skill in 1 second.

I primarily a solo and small scale player, Im actually on the folks side who don't want it dead.

I support one person murdering fifteen people without siege. I just don't support inconsistent arguments when the games engine is a certain way.

I also know that a field still can be ran properly and that a lot of these guys just weren't around when it happened. It takes a tactical acumen that a lot of these guys were around for.

Is it primarily siege versus siege, all it takes is a few well-built snipe builds in order to distrupt the siege line. Then as the snake builds are coordinating with the ballistas, you sweep with a smaller group from the sides in a pincer.

I guess people have forgotten what actual tactics looks like instead of having just being able to faceroll all the time.

We haven't seen a real structured group in sometime. Just assigned a button spam and numbers.

People must have forgotten what breaching was like when you could layer wall of elements, and still get one shot by oil.

But I respect everybody's play style, and I do not expect everybody to play the things I like to play.

So I don't make suggestions to the game that pigeonhole everybody into a particular play style that's not cool.

If people want to snipe and gank that's fine, there are counters to stealth. I've sniped and ganked, it is its own aspect of the game.

People want better perceptual cues for that place now so they can react better, but then people are going to want better perceptual cues for all the skills which means the game is going to have to perform every movement for every button pressed.

I'm very much aware the animation canceling doesn't mean the skills hit at the same time; it just tricks people's perceptual system in their head.

I think being field artillery and a mobile sapper unit is it play style that should be respected like any other play style.

Ralamil

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

Balling up at the door isn't usually the best option in a group of four.

No kidding. The game includes more people and more play styles than this "group of 4" that's been mentioned.

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

In fact I really have no issue whatsoever with two rando's being able to hold off a group of four if the rando's have a freaking CASTLE with guards.

The problem isn't these two random folks holding off 4. It's the fact that with this siege bug, you become a point-and-click hero that can destroy an insane amount of people with nothing even remotely approaching the build-up time of an ultimate.

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

The fact that on live this is an impossibility due to how weak siege is is the joke.

Never said they shouldn't make siege useful, just that it shouldn't be broken.

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

You do know there is more than one side to a keep right, and you can siege with Trebs from much further back? You don't have to stack on the door with the rest of the crowd.

Of course I do. And fun fact, being patronizing doesn't make you cute, doesn't make your argument better, and doesn't make you right.

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

Wait you don't immediately hop off siege after each shot? NVM clearly L2P issue here.

Never said that I don't, but the part you missed was that I implied you hopped off your siege and immediately hopped back onto the SAME siege, without cycling between multiple siege. Clearly a Learn 2 Read issue here.

Now, if you're done being... you... please let the adults resume the conversation.

TheBonesXXX

Ralamil wrote: »

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

Groups of four do not need to spread out, that part was pointed at groups of 15 or more. If your group of four cannot avoid siege you seriously need to L2P.

XBox must be dead empty (or filled with people who have no idea what they're doing) if you and 4 friends can stand together and not get hit with any siege. Or, more likely, you're talking out your ass and don't actually do things like, I don't know, take keeps.

Like, seriously, what do you actually do? Stay nearby, run 1 siege each, and just immediately hop off after every shot, somehow miraculously timing it such that enemies only land their siege attacks when you're backing off? How long does it take you to actually take down a keep door or wall?

Xbox probably does not have the same population as PC.

It's a suspicion, however it's impossible for us to know how populated it is.

Vapirko

Make projectile siege weapons reflectable. I want to send that coldfire back the way it came with my new mag dk.

TheBonesXXX

Vapirko wrote: »

Make projectile siege weapons reflectable. I want to send that coldfire back the way it came with my new mag dk.

Sheo should give you the Wabbajack so you can turn it into a flying unicorn mount.

technohic

Vapirko wrote: »

Make projectile siege weapons reflectable. I want to send that coldfire back the way it came with my new mag dk.

lol That would be awesome. As is; I was trying to figure out how to run with low health and hit wings when snipers dont see it. I wonder if reflected ones could be health desynced as well.

TheBonesXXX

technohic wrote: »

Vapirko wrote: »

Make projectile siege weapons reflectable. I want to send that coldfire back the way it came with my new mag dk.

lol That would be awesome. As is; I was trying to figure out how to run with low health and hit wings when snipers dont see it. I wonder if reflected ones could be health desynced as well.

Use alchemy to poison yourself.

Recremen

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hey guys, just to clear things up - when it was said that this is something we're discussing, it wasn't to keep siege's currently-broken state. Just that we're talking about potentially increasing the damage of siege from how it's been. Again, nothing set it stone, we're just talking like you all are.

Okay, thanks for the clarification. I would like to offer that siege was already at a good place, if not overperforming in some cases (like meatbag catapult, and likely oil catapult as well). People who had been complaining that siege "wasn't affecting" players are entirely mistaken. In fact, oils, catapults, and ballista were already forcing people to heal, purge, and siege to survive. Nobody is just standing around in siege, they are taking active measures to survive it. For people complaining that it's not strong enough, there is no middle ground, because anything other than an outright one-shot they're going to view as "people just standing around in and ignoring". The reality is, however, that siege has always been a critical part of keep defense, and oils and catapults over the door/front flag/etc. provide a palpable, measurable advantage to defenders. That's as it should be, since taking a keep should be harder than defending it, but there's really no need to tune up the damage when it's already performing splendidly.

Vapirko

I’d like to add my voice to those who say it’s a good thing, I’ve said this in a thread or two already but I after playing with it for an extended time, I beleive the battles are faster paced, more dynamic and much more tactical than ever before. At first I was like meh, but it certainly does make big groups think twice before zerging into a keep.

Recremen

TheBonesXXX wrote: »

Wrong, I'm giving an analysis of an experienced MMO player, Beta Tester, and has the education to know how human perception actually works.

There are visual ques for siege. Animation clipping is the result of broken game physics which results certain visual ques not to appear.

One is complete in it's animation and was intended that's sieging.

You know what was not intended in the games physics? Animation canceling because the game is built for binocular vision; that means you have a pair of eyes and an overlapping field of view.

I'm not attacking the ability to purposely hide animation even when it was never intended, it's literally an unintended function of the game because it removes visual indicators needed to react. No game designer builds games without visual indicators.

Each skill has it's own animation, a visual motion that indicates that the character is using a skill, it's not supposed to have one animation and a player gets hit with three skills.

A player who animation canceling is tricking another person's perception of what's going in because the physics are broken. No one sees it, in fights people are giving an anticipratory reaction. You or anyone did not see all of those necessary movements.

Now, back to basic game physics, dying from fall damage requires falling. The way to mitigate falling is, do not stand next to the edge of things.

Everyone laughs when someone roll dodges off the third floor of the inners and dies.

The way not to die in Lake Rumare is not to swim in Lake Rumare, because the games programmed to kill player characters.

Do not fall in lava in the game, because the game is programmed to kill players.

Same principle applies, it's on the player not to get hit by a missile with a fix trajectory it has all necessary and complete visual indicators.

If people die to, fall damage, Slaughter fish, Lava, or siege, it's on them to react because the game gives them more than necessary perceptual ques, visual indicators.

You know what's not the proper amount of perceptual ques per the amount of skills used? Animation canceling.

Literally explained how the game functions but continue on with a knee jerk emotional response.

Your "analysis" betrays a complete lack of either academic integrity or rigor, perhaps both. First, I don't know why you're going off on animation canceling, it is completely tangential to the siege debate. Second, animation canceling is no longer even A Thing after the animation rework. Third, binocular vision has absolutely nothing to do with anything you were talking about. What is the relevance of binocular vision to the difference between player ability and siege animations? Is it.... nothing? Are you just throwing words out there to add artificial depth to your statements? What are you going to talk about next, the ergonomics of sitting?

During the whole time you decided to bloviate about your animation canceling truther conspiracies, you also ignored every other aspect of my argument, which I must assume is because you don't actually have any counters. For example, you complete ignored the comment about mind games, which is an essential part of any PvP game system. You do know what those are, right? Even long ago when your nonsense comments regarding animation canceling were true, the mind games were the most important part of a PvP encounter. Everyone had access to this "animation canceling" (which I must remind you no longer exists), which means everyone was on a level playing field. If you were still getting hit by skills you couldn't see while being unable to get your own off, you were probably a mind game novice.

There are no mind games when it comes to defending a keep with siege, however. It's not a mind game to slather a breach with oil, for instance. That's literally the only way to get in. The options are : risk getting oiled, or don't try to take keeps. No special decision is needed on behalf of the defenders, you're just getting carried by the game design. But again, you seem incapable or unwilling to acknowledge that dynamic. I'd love to accuse you of a "knee jerk emotional response" as you've so falsely accused me, but for that you'd have to actually respond to the arguments presented.

Stevo_Moore

labambao wrote: »

LF3M for engeneer squad, 2 CH ballistas men, 1 for meatbag. I will use scattershot

If you're PC/NA, hmu: @Vypersnake

Bam_Bam

Max points into Thaumaturge, wear Vicious Death and something that boosts flame damage and win all the things.

Xsorus

Ralamil wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

That's easy

1. Siege in immobile

1. You can hop off of it and move around if absolute need be.
2. You can actually reposition it if need be, and most likely will have the opportunity to do so, either by being one of many laying down siege against an opposing group, safely up on keep walls (or other terrain, I suppose), or both, at least in some fights.

Xsorus wrote: »

2. You cannot use any other ability while operating siege

1. Anyone worth their salt can keep a volley of three ballistae going continuously.
2. Let's be honest, the use-case for these things isn't going to be 1 player vs. 60. It's going to be multiple players, grouped or otherwise, vs. another group of players. You don't need to be able to use another skill while you're all safely at range hitting for 18k per shot.

Meanwhile, pumping out all of this damage over a wide area with the reload time as your only cooldown, you could be safely out of range or elevated in a position players cannot get to you (ever since ZOS deemed things like leaping onto keep walls emergent gameplay bannable offenses), and in the most defensive setup one could imagine, which otherwise would be incapable of dealing damage if you had to rely on your own skill and skills.

So if we're going for terse responses: Cute post, but ultimately your reply responds effectively to literally none of my points, particularly those over trying to make Cyrodiil game play healthy, engaging, and rewarding.

1. If you hop off siege you're no longer using Siege, Also it takes a bit to reposition siege, saying it doesn't is hilarious.
2. Also you don't need to be able to use another skill? Tell that to all the people i gank while they use siege.