people welcome the pvp changes

Noctus

this is obvious from the comments in other threads but the cost of the siege weapons that do great ammount of damage should be increased. such weapons should be tactically deployed and not spammed. it adds some flavor to pvp.

LeagueTroll

Siege do twice the dmg now. I am not sure coldfire with 7k a tick is good.

Noctus

LeagueTroll wrote: »

Siege do twice the dmg now. I am not sure coldfire with 7k a tick is good.

well u see i have friends running around with 30 k + hp healbotting my ass. i get sometimes ridiculous scores becouse of this in bg for example. if they get hit with such a siege weapon they wont even mind its like tickling them.

new players and even experienced ones have little to no chance of killing such monsters when they are grouped up together. i d say keep it and increase the cost for siege weapons. make like cheap version and expensive versions

KaraBela94

So you basically saying leave siege weapons how they are so smallscalers wont hurt zerglings?

U know that these changes will sooner or later make that those players group into bigger groups and when they start sieging also...what you will do then?

Loralai_907

Its a toss up really. Yeah, its kind of fun, but everyone knows it happening and so people aren't exactly trying to be good targets. I expected/hoped for more piles of death lol

Kagukan

I kind of like the extra damage but think its a little too much right now. Maybe somewhere between where it is now and where it was would be ideal.

VaranisArano

Last time siege got a buff, that buff was eventually reverted.

What's actually changed to justify keeping this buff to siege when the last buff got reverted?

Noctus

VaranisArano wrote: »

Last time siege got a buff, that buff was eventually reverted.

What's actually changed to justify keeping this buff to siege when the last buff got reverted?

the implemented it the wrong way. they should have make the high hitting siege weapons cost more. this is an opportunity.

ezio45

Siege on update 20 is fine, leave it alone

VaranisArano

Noctus wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Last time siege got a buff, that buff was eventually reverted.

What's actually changed to justify keeping this buff to siege when the last buff got reverted?

the implemented it the wrong way. they should have make the high hitting siege weapons cost more. this is an opportunity.

No really. What has actually changed to justify this?

We've already tried siege buffs. The Devs reverted the buffs.

Why should we do the same thing over again, expecting different results?

Noctus

VaranisArano wrote: »

Noctus wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Last time siege got a buff, that buff was eventually reverted.

What's actually changed to justify keeping this buff to siege when the last buff got reverted?

the implemented it the wrong way. they should have make the high hitting siege weapons cost more. this is an opportunity.

Why should we do the same thing over again, expecting different results?

becouse sheogorath would love it that way

Osteos

I don't know. I think hitting the front door became too easy. Used to be you only went front door on empty or lightly defended keeps but now its standard operating procedure. Gotten a little stale. Maybe its hitting too hard now but before it didn't even tickle the ball groups.

TheBonesXXX

VaranisArano wrote: »

Last time siege got a buff, that buff was eventually reverted.

What's actually changed to justify keeping this buff to siege when the last buff got reverted?

Because they can make Cyrodiil and interactive and dynamic map. Siege needs to hit harder than players.

There can be many caveats to this, they can implement Siegesmithing, they can implement Cyrodiil only resource nodes that have to be found, farmed, refined, then made into Siege pieces.

They can limit the number of carried siege and add ammo/charges so theres no more infinite firing.

It opens the map up to options creates an economy for three factions in Cyrodiil. It gives avenues adding depth to the game.

It also allows people who enjoy the artillery aspect of the game to enjoy that part of the game.

Its just like sniping, it's a playstyle. To many egotistical and selfish people who only want their playstyle and class to shine while crying for nerfs for everything else.

If people enjoy broken game physics and want to use skills that are kept from other people's perceptual fields and try to pass it off as skill. Let them be legends in their own minds.

People want to bring two hundred people to a single keep, go ahead.

If people want to 1 v X, go for it.

People want to X v 1, have fun.

But if anyone dies from fall damage while doing it, next time don't play that close to the edge.

Don't fall in lava. Don't swim across Lake Rumare. Don't fall off high spots. Don't stand in fire. Don't catch high velocity missiles with face.

VaranisArano

TheBonesXXX wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Last time siege got a buff, that buff was eventually reverted.

What's actually changed to justify keeping this buff to siege when the last buff got reverted?

Because they can make Cyrodiil and interactive and dynamic map. Siege needs to hit harder than players.

There can be many caveats to this, they can implement Siegesmithing, they can implement Cyrodiil only resource nodes that have to be found, farmed, refined, then made into Siege pieces.

They can limit the number of carried siege and add ammo/charges so theres no more infinite firing.

It opens the map up to options creates an economy for three factions in Cyrodiil. It gives avenues adding depth to the game.

It also allows people who enjoy the artillery aspect of the game to enjoy that part of the game.

Its just like sniping, it's a playstyle. To many egotistical and selfish people who only want their playstyle and class to shine while crying for nerfs for everything else.

If people enjoy broken game physics and want to use skills that are kept from other people's perceptual fields and try to pass it off as skill. Let them be legends in their own minds.

People want to bring two hundred people to a single keep, go ahead.

If people want to 1 v X, go for it.

People want to X v 1, have fun.

But if anyone dies from fall damage while doing it, next time don't play that close to the edge.

Don't fall in lava. Don't swim across Lake Rumare. Don't fall off high spots. Don't stand in fire. Don't catch high velocity missiles with face.

Sorry. Future changes that you want but ZOS has never hinted at being a thing don't actually count as reasons why ZOS should buff siege after they reverted the previous nerf to siege.

If they do in fact add mechanics as you desire, then it would be appropriate to buff siege. Not now, when none of the mitigating mechanics you suggest are present, when siege is plentiful and ammo infinite.

frostz417

No it’s not a good thing. Those who think it’s the best thing ever likely have their entire hot bar consisting of just siege. Sorry, some of us actually like to fight other players, I don’t feel like having a bunch of 40k health tank bots with plague doctor lightning staves putting up siege at the sight of 1-3 people. That’s stupid. This PvP change is ridiculous because it just encourages a bunch of noobs to just sit and siege. Nobody will fight and it’ll just be Elder Siege Online. Siege bots make the game unenjoyable. Because it’s way too often you have those useless kids who just have 40k health and only use siege even if there’s only 1 person.

ZOS_Mika

We have removed a few non-constructive comments from this thread. Please refrain from rude comments or name calling, as they do not promote a meaningful discussion and are not in the spirit of our community. Thanks for your understanding.

Bone_Demon

Let's be honest. You don't want to kill the zerg balls, you want to kill that solo player that killed 6 of you because he has more skill than you.

TheBonesXXX

VaranisArano wrote: »

TheBonesXXX wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Last time siege got a buff, that buff was eventually reverted.

What's actually changed to justify keeping this buff to siege when the last buff got reverted?

Because they can make Cyrodiil and interactive and dynamic map. Siege needs to hit harder than players.

There can be many caveats to this, they can implement Siegesmithing, they can implement Cyrodiil only resource nodes that have to be found, farmed, refined, then made into Siege pieces.

They can limit the number of carried siege and add ammo/charges so theres no more infinite firing.

It opens the map up to options creates an economy for three factions in Cyrodiil. It gives avenues adding depth to the game.

It also allows people who enjoy the artillery aspect of the game to enjoy that part of the game.

Its just like sniping, it's a playstyle. To many egotistical and selfish people who only want their playstyle and class to shine while crying for nerfs for everything else.

If people enjoy broken game physics and want to use skills that are kept from other people's perceptual fields and try to pass it off as skill. Let them be legends in their own minds.

People want to bring two hundred people to a single keep, go ahead.

If people want to 1 v X, go for it.

People want to X v 1, have fun.

But if anyone dies from fall damage while doing it, next time don't play that close to the edge.

Don't fall in lava. Don't swim across Lake Rumare. Don't fall off high spots. Don't stand in fire. Don't catch high velocity missiles with face.

Sorry. Future changes that you want but ZOS has never hinted at being a thing don't actually count as reasons why ZOS should buff siege after they reverted the previous nerf to siege.

If they do in fact add mechanics as you desire, then it would be appropriate to buff siege. Not now, when none of the mitigating mechanics you suggest are present, when siege is plentiful and ammo infinite.

I only gave examples in which they can expand the game.

I'm also tired of explaining the game's physics and how people's visual perception works.

Siege is fine, move.

VaranisArano

TheBonesXXX wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

TheBonesXXX wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Last time siege got a buff, that buff was eventually reverted.

What's actually changed to justify keeping this buff to siege when the last buff got reverted?

Because they can make Cyrodiil and interactive and dynamic map. Siege needs to hit harder than players.

There can be many caveats to this, they can implement Siegesmithing, they can implement Cyrodiil only resource nodes that have to be found, farmed, refined, then made into Siege pieces.

They can limit the number of carried siege and add ammo/charges so theres no more infinite firing.

It opens the map up to options creates an economy for three factions in Cyrodiil. It gives avenues adding depth to the game.

It also allows people who enjoy the artillery aspect of the game to enjoy that part of the game.

Its just like sniping, it's a playstyle. To many egotistical and selfish people who only want their playstyle and class to shine while crying for nerfs for everything else.

If people enjoy broken game physics and want to use skills that are kept from other people's perceptual fields and try to pass it off as skill. Let them be legends in their own minds.

People want to bring two hundred people to a single keep, go ahead.

If people want to 1 v X, go for it.

People want to X v 1, have fun.

But if anyone dies from fall damage while doing it, next time don't play that close to the edge.

Don't fall in lava. Don't swim across Lake Rumare. Don't fall off high spots. Don't stand in fire. Don't catch high velocity missiles with face.

Sorry. Future changes that you want but ZOS has never hinted at being a thing don't actually count as reasons why ZOS should buff siege after they reverted the previous nerf to siege.

If they do in fact add mechanics as you desire, then it would be appropriate to buff siege. Not now, when none of the mitigating mechanics you suggest are present, when siege is plentiful and ammo infinite.

I only gave examples in which they can expand the game.

I'm also tired of explaining the game's physics and how people's visual perception works.

Siege is fine, move.

We could just move out of it the last time siege got buffed too. ZOS still reverted that buff.

Again, I'm trying to figure out what's actually changed that ZOS should try the same thing over again, expecting to get different results.

RedGirl41

heard they wanna buff siege in the future. I thought this was player vs player not pve