About this Siege Change - Proposal

Feanor

Tan9oSuccka wrote: »

Feanor wrote: »

Tan9oSuccka wrote: »

Feanor wrote: »

Tasear wrote: »

You aren't supposed to win when outnumbered greatly.

You absolutely are when you are playing much better than your opponents. A chess grandmaster is supposed to win vs 20 amateurs even if they combine and are allowed to discuss.

Uh oh. Sounds like a pitch for balancing for 1 v X.

No. You can be yolo swag 420 and animation cancel, and used the most whacked out bugged builds and sets.....

When facing 10 decent people, you will and should lose.

Yes, and that’s what’s happening in Cyrodiil and has always happened. No need to buff Siege through the roof.

I’m confused with your chess reference as it suggests one excellent player should simultaneously face roll 20 poor ones.

Siege does need another buff as CP and sets have gotten stronger.

I’d say at least a 20% increase in damage in CP campaigns and no changes in Non CP.

Well, that’s essentially what 1vX videos consist of - good players facerolling noobs. You said a l33t player should lose to ten decent ones. And that’s what’s happening in Cyrodiil every day even without siege changes.

For all I care siege can be nukes in CP. But noCP needs to be reverted.

SilverPaws

Tasear wrote: »

You aren't supposed to win when outnumbered greatly.

You went zergling ?

Oakenaxe

We can find balance. Sounds nice to give more importance to siege, but not exaggerated.

RANKK7

To the enthusiasts of this crap situation with siege and defending a bug with the excuse "it's more realistic, it makes sense, etc..."

then let's have keeps requiring days and months to conquer, that's realistic too and it makes sense.

You also could get a "cast time" to set up siege on the ground, of minutes (to be generous and do not slow down too much the awesome new pvp form), this too makes sense.

Pls @ZOS just fix it. It's utterly bs.

INinjaNinja

Tan9oSuccka wrote: »

INinjaNinja wrote: »

Rejoice zerglings that cant 5v1 players! Your'e prayers are being answered with zos considering giving you free skill less kills, no longer will you have to work for your AP simply set up seige and press left click till youre drowning in undeserved AP

ALL HAIL THE COMBAT BALANCE TEAM!

Running in circles around a keep tower for 20 minutes doesn’t really equate skill either.

But they need to make siege matter. Maybe not quite this severe, but a lot more than it was.

please oh please do give me your definition of skill good sir. is it maybe chasing down one player with 10 others maybe?

xxthir13enxx

Would encourage multiple breaches on keeeps

Would benefit Resource farming groups

Would allow a smaller group to hold off attackers until help arrives

Would encourage more people to defend rather than sit n watch

Glad my Dunmer got fire resistance boost...

I dunno... I kinda like the sound of it

RamiroCruzo

People complaining here want to survive after getting hit by an arrow of their own size Or maybe they wanna survive to experience it

DreadDaedroth

I'd like to see the interaction between siege and gear sets come back, that'd help adding some damage to them.
Combat engineer !

Temeraire507

I like sieging castles and siege weapons in this game in general but it is really boring to just left click on everything. For me it comes down to this:

• Siege weapons should be really strong. And therefor also hit very hard.
  
• You should still be able to use abilities and quickslots while standing on a siege weapon.
  
• Using a siege weapon should be interactive as you would technically need to load it, set it up, aim it and then fire it and hope it hits where you wanted it to hit. It should also be possible to do it faster with more people working on it.
  
• There should just be one ballista, catapult and trebuchet of the same type (no need for a difference between fire trebuchets and normal ones). Maybe they could add different types for each (like a smaller and a larger type).
  
• A siege weapon should have different ammunition you can load into it (partially based on the type of weapon and on the subcategory if there are any) like you can load your ballista with the common big arrows but then they only deal massive damage against siege weapons or keep doors (or directly hit players) or with something like containers filled with something like greek fire that deal massive AoE fire damage over time to everything hit (except stone structures like walls that shouldn't take a substantial amount of damage from it) but have the downside of being able not to activate properly, not being very precise and maybe being able to activate when you are hit by enemies with fire.
  
• Enable us to put siege weapons behind the embrasures in the walls of a keep to use them without being targetable by the attackers but at the cost of a lot of line of sight.
  
• Create new NPC's defending the keep with 5-10 siege weapons even if no player is inside. (Don't count those for the max amount that can be set up)
  
• Increase the amount of siege weapons players can build up but make trebuchets and catapults the best option to siege a wall by far if used with stones that don't do any AoE damage and ballistas a strong counter against them for the defenders.
  
• Make gatehouses actually have two gates and a portcullis (which is completely immune to anything fire based).
  
• Make oil leave the ground burning for a few seconds.
  
• Give us more counter against oil than purge (I think of a movable siege shields comparable to the rams we currently have). Maybe make it nonpurgeable (I am not really sure if I am for or against this).
  
• Maybe give us small movable walls we can place in the world to have protection against siege weapons and ranged enemies
  
• Make siege weapons hit a bit more randomly than exactly where you aimed at.
  
• Make siege weapons spawn empty instead of loaded.
  
• Make people need to push their siege weapon into the direction they want to aim at instead of the weapon automatically rotating if you want to shoot in a different direction.

Holy cow that list is long. And I'm sure people will come up with more.

Temeraire507

Another point that I would really like to see in PvP is that players get a solid hitbox. No moving through someone blocking the way. No stacking in a very small place. No attacking through the backs of your buddies.

And in all honesty it is ridiculous to think one person or a few ones should be able to withstand a greater number of opponents easily. I'm all for the 'few person can hold a gateway or another place with limited space against an army because they need to come one by one' thing but I believe it is ridiculous that people can win against more than 3 fully armed and armored people (on a comparable level) in open field battles. Maybe make it so that the more people attack from different sides the more damage the player gets or the less effective his armor gets, since technically when you fight one opponent and someone comes from behind you that person should have enough time (and few enough pressure on them) to find ways to bypass your armor, stab you into weaker spots, hinder your movement or hinder you to fight like you want to.

Ackwalan

I must admit a certain amount of glee, watching a tower farming group get melted. Before they would run around in circles spamming rapids and heals until their ult was ready, it would take a long time to kill them or drive them away. Now, a few caltrop a time stop here or there then boom drop some siege on them. Having siege be dangerous is needed, perhaps a little slower tick, but they need to be dangerous.

Starlock

I'm not really into PvP for a variety of reasons, but among them is that siege weapons don't actually do what they should - be a deadly threat on the battlefield. I might get more interested if siege is actually powerful. That said, the only really guaranteed way to snag me into PvP would be to separate that game mode's mechanics from PvE entirely.

ScruffyWhiskers

Siege was in need of a buff. Especially oils but it's way to powerful right now. Drop it down a notch or two.

TBois

xxthir13enxx wrote: »

Would encourage multiple breaches on keeeps

Would benefit Resource farming groups

Would allow a smaller group to hold off attackers until help arrives

Would encourage more people to defend rather than sit n watch

Glad my Dunmer got fire resistance boost...

I dunno... I kinda like the sound of it

Does not promote fighting campaigns with large population imbalances.

Promotes a boring point and click gameplay.

Promotes using siege open world, not near keeps.

Feanor

It’s amazing how many people want stacking and zerging as the standard Cyrodiil game experience.

xxthir13enxx

TBois wrote: »

xxthir13enxx wrote: »

Would encourage multiple breaches on keeeps

Would benefit Resource farming groups

Would allow a smaller group to hold off attackers until help arrives

Would encourage more people to defend rather than sit n watch

Glad my Dunmer got fire resistance boost...

I dunno... I kinda like the sound of it

Does not promote fighting campaigns with large population imbalances.

Promotes a boring point and click gameplay.

Promotes using siege open world, not near keeps.

I’d have to disagree with that actually...as this would strengthen a smaller groups defense and slow down the over populated Alliances steamroll through keeps....and there is a buff coming to Keep Defense ticks aswell I believe...and isn’t there an Underdog perk aswell?

Hell....would even benefit gate farming defence...lol

TBois

xxthir13enxx wrote: »

TBois wrote: »

xxthir13enxx wrote: »

Would encourage multiple breaches on keeeps

Would benefit Resource farming groups

Would allow a smaller group to hold off attackers until help arrives

Would encourage more people to defend rather than sit n watch

Glad my Dunmer got fire resistance boost...

I dunno... I kinda like the sound of it

Does not promote fighting campaigns with large population imbalances.

Promotes a boring point and click gameplay.

Promotes using siege open world, not near keeps.

I’d have to disagree with that actually...as this would strengthen a smaller groups defense and slow down the over populated Alliances steamroll through keeps....and there is a buff coming to Keep Defense ticks aswell I believe...and isn’t there an Underdog perk aswell?

Hell....would even benefit gate farming defence...lol

But once the smaller group logs after primetime ends, the larger group will take the map, then the smaller group will have to retake the map under the same conditions they were defending with but against more people

Temeraire507

Feanor wrote: »

It’s amazing how many people want stacking and zerging as the standard Cyrodiil game experience.

I don't want it all to be zerging and stacking but since it is created around the idea of a massive war between three groups of interest I expect it to be filled with some large armies at least. The tactical aspect is too much neglected though as there should be more ways for relatively small groups to fight off large groups with tactical approaches (not in open areas unless they are way better though). And the vet vs. noob scenario is way too imbalanced. A new player relies on zerging if they want to get good any time later since every solo or smallscale player their dog and their mother eat them for breakfast.

Typical_T_ReX

I've already lost 3 friends in one day of this "change." If it continues I won't have a PvP guild anymore. Nice.

TheBonesXXX

Feanor wrote: »

It’s amazing how many people want stacking and zerging as the standard Cyrodiil game experience.

No kidding, siege should always hit harder than players.

However, I wouldn't be opposed to siege being crafted and require resources. The game needs to be fast and furious, but challenging and the objectives take length. Like the original Chalamo.

This easy mode run in a zerg ball press button to have all the abilities hit at once in a zerf and call yourself organized has to go.

Small-scale and 1 v X won't be effect, they lure in terrain.

And bring ball ground oils.

Suddwrath

Feanor wrote: »

Tasear wrote: »

You aren't supposed to win when outnumbered greatly.

You absolutely are when you are playing much better than your opponents. A chess grandmaster is supposed to win vs 20 amateurs even if they combine and are allowed to discuss.

Does anyone remember the Chalamo during the closed beta?

Anyone...?

A small group of well-coordinated players should be able to fend off a larger group of disorganized players.

Toc de Malsvi

Would love to see variable siege damage. Imagine a central circle with multiple donut rings.

Center circle takes insane damage that will one shot just about everything. Next ring takes 75%, next takes 50%, etc.

Amksed1991

Wanna add some more to this regarding PvP.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/461049/bgs-a-little-wacked-out#latest

technohic

Amksed1991 wrote: »

Wanna add some more to this regarding PvP.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/461049/bgs-a-little-wacked-out#latest

First person I heard mention this, I was not sure but I am hearing more. Wonder if its something to do with the damage reduction we are used to in battlespirit not working. Maybe the Devs know but don't want to expose exactly what is going on so it deosnt spread.

Joy_Division

Tasear wrote: »

You aren't supposed to win when outnumbered greatly.

Says who?

The whole premise of playing a fantasy game is to be able to accomplish heroic deeds worthy of legend, beyond rational calculation. And that does not even take into consideration that just a cursory glance into military history reveals many such example when a force that was outnumbered indeed were not defeated or outright won.

So if it's possible in "real life" then there is zero reason why it should not be possible in a fantasy video game, unless your idea of entertainment is just to automatically lose because of circumstances.

Drummerx04

Tasear wrote: »

You aren't supposed to win when outnumbered greatly.

This is an insane statement. A good player should be able to fight multiple opponents of lesser skill/experience, just because 15 players run together wearing trash gear and all decide to light attack in the general direction of another player doesn't mean they should win.

For basically the entire existence of PvP in eso, 1vXers get crushed or are immediately forced on the defensive the second an opposing player of comparable skill joins in.

More people should not be the main deciding factor in winning most fights, otherwise what's the point of fighting if you are outnumbered? "Oh man, the enemy brought 10 people and we only have 5, so I guess it's our turn to die. If only we had thought to bring 10 more people, then we could have won automatically instead!!!"

Get out of here with that.

Malamar1229

The hell did I read?
Here's a suggestion....stop balling up like a wild pack of lemmings and also dont stand in red.

I hope they keep siege the way it is so small groups of well coordinated players can take out the 40k health earthgore/purge spamming zerglings like Dracarys.

Malamar1229

As it stood previous to change, you had groups standing at front door with multiple oils being dumped and it doing nothing because of overpowered survivability mechanics, sets, and skills.
Q

Noctus

Drummerx04 wrote: »

Tasear wrote: »

You aren't supposed to win when outnumbered greatly.

This is an insane statement. A good player should be able to fight multiple opponents of lesser skill/experience, just because 15 players run together wearing trash gear and all decide to light attack in the general direction of another player doesn't mean they should win.

For basically the entire existence of PvP in eso, 1vXers get crushed or are immediately forced on the defensive the second an opposing player of comparable skill joins in.

More people should not be the main deciding factor in winning most fights, otherwise what's the point of fighting if you are outnumbered? "Oh man, the enemy brought 10 people and we only have 5, so I guess it's our turn to die. If only we had thought to bring 10 more people, then we could have won automatically instead!!!"

Get out of here with that.

i dont know in which favor u guys are but im putting it out there. the less time it takes to kill people the more someone is rewarded for mechanical skill instead of gear. becouse i can then kill a person without my stamina or magicka fully drained and take care of the next. a person with equal skill would roll dodge block and counter to survive. currently we have sets that allow u to live without using the mechanics

believe me i know these type of guys and i play with them as a team yes im a little guilty here but its nice to have an unkillable healbot with u in bg ;D

our tank meta supports the idea : bigger number = winner

TBois

Malamar1229 wrote: »

The hell did I read?
Here's a suggestion....stop balling up like a wild pack of lemmings and also dont stand in red.

I hope they keep siege the way it is so small groups of well coordinated players can take out the 40k health earthgore/purge spamming zerglings like Dracarys.

You don't think they will be able to spam siege better than the small grp? I mean they will have more people available for sieging.