Can Anyone Honestly Say PvP Is Better W/Out OP Siege?

Savos_Saren

One-shot siege? Bad.

But, harder-hitting siege would be good.

It would have to be something that you could heal through- but not strong enough to kill you in a single shot. Stam builds don't have purges and mag builds can't constantly dodge roll... so you have to take in consideration that you WILL get hit by siege at some point.

Cyrodiil is absolutely boring if you can get one-shot or combo killed within 1.5 seconds.

Vapirko

Savos_Saren wrote: »

One-shot siege? Bad.

But, harder-hitting siege would be good.

It would have to be something that you could heal through- but not strong enough to kill you in a single shot. Stam builds don't have purges and mag builds can't constantly dodge roll... so you have to take in consideration that you WILL get hit by siege at some point.

Cyrodiil is absolutely boring if you can get one-shot or combo killed within 1.5 seconds.

It just needs to be legit strong enough to break up zergs without the need for 20/20 siege to land in the same spot.

Koensol

Yes. Anything that one shots is not fun. Same goes for pve.

Xsorus

It’s funny, cause for years I’ve been saying how those zergballs cause lag and how if you get rid of them lag would go away.. and those zergs were like nah... then siege gets buffed and they get screwed for a week and magically the lag goes away.

zyk

I don't have a problem with one-shot mechanics as long as the telegraphs work. The only time I am ever angry about dying to siege is when the red circle doesn't appear.

Lots of good PVP games have mechanics like this in the form of grenades, shells and bombs. The idea is you actively try to avoid them -- not just by constantly dodging red circles, but by going where there are no red circles or where the red circles can't reach.

Knootewoot

Fatalyis wrote: »

That week or so when siege was super deadly was the most fun I’d had in ESO in a long time. You had to constantly be on your toes. Trying to take a keep was rough and I loved it!

Now, we’re back to standing in 4 oils with a ram and just healing through it. It’s boring.

Siege should be feared...taking a keep should be difficult. Risk / reward.

My two cents.

I'll add my 2 cents so we have 4.

Yeah i agree. I like OP siege better when defending/capturing keeps. I understand people don't want OP siege in a skirmish not near a keep, but they could keep the OP siege damage when in a certain radius of the keep.

Vapirko

Knootewoot wrote: »

Fatalyis wrote: »

That week or so when siege was super deadly was the most fun I’d had in ESO in a long time. You had to constantly be on your toes. Trying to take a keep was rough and I loved it!

Now, we’re back to standing in 4 oils with a ram and just healing through it. It’s boring.

Siege should be feared...taking a keep should be difficult. Risk / reward.

My two cents.

I'll add my 2 cents so we have 4.

Yeah i agree. I like OP siege better when defending/capturing keeps. I understand people don't want OP siege in a skirmish not near a keep, but they could keep the OP siege damage when in a certain radius of the keep.

Or just keep ballista strong and have them only work near keeps. That way oils won’t completely negate the use of rams and siege won’t dominate open world play.

Merlight

Savos_Saren wrote: »

Stam builds don't have purges and mag builds can't constantly dodge roll... so you have to take in consideration that you WILL get hit by siege at some point.

I, for one, did slot purge on stam sorc. It was totally worth it.

SodanTok

Current sieges are joke. Running thru defended maingates is way too easy unless it is 50 on 50 fight where 49 of your faction are too scared to go in so 50 of enemy can focus you when you go in.

noCP btw

technohic

They just need to find a way to scale it up the more people that are in the area of impact. Then ballista damage would be hard to get huge numbers but oils and catapults would be more effective without just buffing them to nail small groups.

Also; cant think of the last time I've seen oil pot catapults used. Might need a buff there.

I do want something though. Logged in yesterday and it wasn't even prime time, and abilities had like a 1.5 second delay. Cant run a non heavy armor character like that very well. I just logged and went and played something else

Merlight

technohic wrote: »

Also; cant think of the last time I've seen oil pot catapults used. Might need a buff there.

I occasionally use oil catapult on chokes, and I don't think it needs a buff -- it will automatically become stronger when other siege damage gets buffed. Maybe increased fire damage in the area where oil cata hits, that'd be fun

Toc de Malsvi

WuffyCerulei wrote: »

Yes, it's better. It's not pugs merely pouring oils and yeeting entire groups. It's actual pvp again, not player vs siege that has no counters except high af health. I'm not against buffing siege damage in the future in CP campaigns tho. Several sieges, i.e. iceball trebuchet, lightning ballista, and scattershot catapult, all need buffs.

And people, Cyrodiil is designed for large fights. Maybe the servers can't handle it, but the general idea is for faction vs faction battles. Y'know, like war. Watch this older cinematic vid of ESO. It essential shows what the pvp in Cyrodiil is supposed to be similar to:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MySC13H_2cE

That video doesn't support what you pretend it does. Siege in that video was wiping out several combatants at once, not bouncing harmlessly off them. They are siegeing the entire keep not stacking on the door, if they had been stacking on the breach that was made they would have been wiped out. Which is more akin to the OP siege than the tickle-fire we have now.

eliisra

Can't say I miss it really. However I do think they should increase siege + oil dmg properly near keeps, gates to scrolls etc.

That way you can still skirmish and random PvP for fun open world without opportunistic d-bags sneaking around with easy 1-shot buttons lol. But if you wanna take a keep or change the map, you have to watch where you stand and raids can't blob up and out-heal everything.

miteba

Opinions diverge but when a lot of players comment (in the forum threads and ingame) that their best time at PVP was when siege was bugged and overpowered, i think it is something that the Devs should at least rethink...
I assume that i killed and died a lot thanks to these infernal machines, but it was lot of fun for the majority of my pvp time, although sometimes i was angry too with too much overpowerness.
But what matters is that these times bring good memories instead of typical pvp, which is...just ok!
I vote for a siege rebalance, just not so OP as before, to please the greeks and trojans

Toc de Malsvi

WuffyCerulei wrote: »

Yes, it's better. It's not pugs merely pouring oils and yeeting entire groups. It's actual pvp again, not player vs siege that has no counters except high af health. I'm not against buffing siege damage in the future in CP campaigns tho. Several sieges, i.e. iceball trebuchet, lightning ballista, and scattershot catapult, all need buffs.

And people, Cyrodiil is designed for large fights. Maybe the servers can't handle it, but the general idea is for faction vs faction battles. Y'know, like war. Watch this older cinematic vid of ESO. It essential shows what the pvp in Cyrodiil is supposed to be similar to:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MySC13H_2cE

If they really wanted to emulate that video without OP siege where the best representation of players are the hero's in the video. Then they need to drastically reduce player cap, say 40 per alliance, per campaign and introduce Horde's of NPC's to rove between keeps. Let NPC's build up at keeps and be unleashed to march toward opposing keeps, destroying your opponents horde as the only way to push your own horde to the keep walls. This would be similar in a way to the adds in a MOBA while retaining the world of ESO.

Add's could then have a variety of scaling strengths and sizes, and they could open up 10 or so different campaigns. Virtually all play styles would benefit from this sort of change.

However having fought guards in PVP, I'm not sure the game could handle that many interactions. They could of course add more terrain to arbitrarily gate off sections similar to Imperial City now. Winning a section would merely open the bridge/gate/door/trail to the other side.

Lucky28

Karm1cOne wrote: »

I liked the lack of major lag, but I feel there is a compromise between killed in 2 ticks and bathing in siege without dying.

a thing to consider is that occurred right along side new content. so was the lack of lag a result of siege?, or was it because people where out farming gear and not in Cyrodiil?. i dunno, but the later is a possibility.

The siege was fun for a while, but i didn't want it to be a permanent thing.

Minno

technohic wrote: »

They just need to find a way to scale it up the more people that are in the area of impact. Then ballista damage would be hard to get huge numbers but oils and catapults would be more effective without just buffing them to nail small groups.

Also; cant think of the last time I've seen oil pot catapults used. Might need a buff there.

I do want something though. Logged in yesterday and it wasn't even prime time, and abilities had like a 1.5 second delay. Cant run a non heavy armor character like that very well. I just logged and went and played something else

Not going to work honestly. Serve
Siege currently is the middle ground between powerful anti-group DMG and non-punishing solo status. Problem is, players don't die. So they either:
- need to drop tankiness hard (which impacts pve tanks)
- return siege to start instagibbing players.

Otherwise we will never see lag removed. The only way to get players to play differently is to punish players doing the action you want them to stop. Different objectives won't work either because unless you let players instarez at places are over the map or tally cyro objectives to benefit solo more than group, then players will keep yolo zerging the next keep in line and the groups that want to farm them will follow them like sharks smelling blood.

Fix? Buff the hell out of siege but remove some of thedebuffs (keep the mag drain but remove the stamina). Then work to offer multiple solutions to solely restructure cyro objectives to deincentivize zergs. For example, why offer blanket AP on objective takes when you can offer multiple npc quests that force players to accomplish solo oriented tasks, or link the town's together so you can rez+travel to their locations all the time with objectives like mini BGs.

Till then, the game will forever be a lag headache induced hell.

Toc de Malsvi

Minno wrote: »

technohic wrote: »

They just need to find a way to scale it up the more people that are in the area of impact. Then ballista damage would be hard to get huge numbers but oils and catapults would be more effective without just buffing them to nail small groups.

Also; cant think of the last time I've seen oil pot catapults used. Might need a buff there.

I do want something though. Logged in yesterday and it wasn't even prime time, and abilities had like a 1.5 second delay. Cant run a non heavy armor character like that very well. I just logged and went and played something else

Not going to work honestly. Serve
Siege currently is the middle ground between powerful anti-group DMG and non-punishing solo status. Problem is, players don't die. So they either:
- need to drop tankiness hard (which impacts pve tanks)
- return siege to start instagibbing players.

Otherwise we will never see lag removed. The only way to get players to play differently is to punish players doing the action you want them to stop. Different objectives won't work either because unless you let players instarez at places are over the map or tally cyro objectives to benefit solo more than group, then players will keep yolo zerging the next keep in line and the groups that want to farm them will follow them like sharks smelling blood.

Fix? Buff the hell out of siege but remove some of thedebuffs (keep the mag drain but remove the stamina). Then work to offer multiple solutions to solely restructure cyro objectives to deincentivize zergs. For example, why offer blanket AP on objective takes when you can offer multiple npc quests that force players to accomplish solo oriented tasks, or link the town's together so you can rez+travel to their locations all the time with objectives like mini BGs.

Till then, the game will forever be a lag headache induced hell.

Pretty much agree. There are several things that can be done to combat Zergs, but not enough of the community wants it. In fact many different idea's have been tossed out to combat zergs and virtually all of them get shouted down by players stating: "Cyrodiil is meant for large scale, find your own group and get gud."

That isn't to say that the idea's posted were necessarily good, only that the Zerglings outnumber the rest and really don't want to lose the power of the Zerg. These players most of the time honestly don't care about individual performance in fight dynamics, they care more about the feeling of being in a war. They are not all bad at the game as much as I would like to blame it on that, although many are in fact bad at the game.

One thing that was improved somewhat in the last year was the addition of more capture points, I think however this is quite short of what it should be. There is still a lot of open space in Cyrodiil and adding more capture points that affect score in those open spaces will serve to help spread players out, IF they are captureable by a small group in a reasonable amount of time. If they take to long to capture with small groups then large Zergs will still be able to effectively run between flags and dominate the map.

I agree though that without punishment for stacking up in huge numbers players will continue to do so. Many cannot or have not set themselves up to play without significant group support. They will not change that without some form of punishment.

Fatalyis

Merlight wrote: »

Savos_Saren wrote: »

Stam builds don't have purges and mag builds can't constantly dodge roll... so you have to take in consideration that you WILL get hit by siege at some point.

I, for one, did slot purge on stam sorc. It was totally worth it.

That’s what I’m talking about! It forced us to improvise and think outside the box

Lucky28 wrote: »

Karm1cOne wrote: »

I liked the lack of major lag, but I feel there is a compromise between killed in 2 ticks and bathing in siege without dying.

a thing to consider is that occurred right along side new content. so was the lack of lag a result of siege?, or was it because people where out farming gear and not in Cyrodiil?. i dunno, but the later is a possibility.

The siege was fun for a while, but i didn't want it to be a permanent thing.

I honestly don’t think it was people farming gear...more so I think it was the ball groups who realized their tactics weren’t going to work and therefore took a break.

Which, in turn, made it so much more fun and made the game playable.

Marcus684

During the siege-apocalypse I only died once to siege, and I think it was a double coldfire hit, and I pvped more that week have in months due to the wonderful absence of lag. The way things stand now with siege, it’s a joke unless you get focused by 3 or more engines at once. If you’re instantly dying to any single siege hit, then or now, your health is too low. I’d like to see ZOS adjust siege damage to somewhere between what it is now and what it was after Wrathstone dropped, preferably on the higher side.

thedude33

It's not better at all. In fact, it's pointless to even defend. If you do actually defend, you will actually get the attackers' attention quicker if you just light attack. At least you can damage them.

"Epic" keep battles are rare when siege doesn't actually hurt

HowlKimchi

IMO I think siege should be that strong if you're in keeps, but in open world, it shouldnt be as powerful.

IzzyStardust

Vapirko wrote: »

Aside from those who regularly run in giant groups either as a part of that zerg or as a zerg surfer, can anyone honestly say PvP is better now that it’s over? Sure people might have been setting up siege to Xv1 but how is that better than 20+ players stacking together because they know nothing can stand against them except another group of equal size? The level of zerging that goes on is just disgusting and the lag is back to being horrendous. People say that stronger siege stopped people from fighting but I strongly disagree. PvP is back to FD stacking without shame and PvP has once again split into two groups, those who zerg keeps and those who want nothing to do with keep takes and go off to farm a resource or gate. As someone who tries to do a bit of both, playing the map is a real *** downer. It’s headache inducing, how banal most bigger fights are. Run over or be run over and rarely anything in between.

Liars can. No one else can.

zyk

One only needs to observe Alik'r dolmens to see the pitiful gameplay experience players of this game are willing to accept. Let's face it, most (not all!) discerning PVP players left years ago and probably have forgotten this game exists.

I wonder what percentage of AvA players are now only there as part of their grind routine.

Vapirko

zyk wrote: »

One only needs to observe Alik'r dolmens to see the pitiful gameplay experience players of this game are willing to accept. Let's face it, most (not all!) discerning PVP players left years ago and probably have forgotten this game exists.

I wonder what percentage of AvA players are now only there as part of their grind routine.

That or they go off to their own corners/groups and do their thing which I understand. I only see very few content producers/really good players regularly participating in playing the map at all. PvP is just incredibly polarizing rn. Being at a lot of the main conflict points just isn’t fun for people who value being able to go through a rotation, and going off to take a keep or outpost that’s out of the way with a small group isn’t fun for for most people because they’ll just get smashed. It all comes back to the smash or be smashed flow of combat and the fact that for most people the only way to avoid being smashed is ever increasing groups size and currently there’s no way to combat that.

visionality

Siege is highly effective in its current state as long as it is combined with player skill and knowledge of mechanics. Especially the removal of cc-immunity from rapid maneuver has made passing an skillfully defended breach a challenge. Just last night I saw 50+ zergs break and vanish at a well defended maingate and they were not an unorganized blob but had at least one, probably even two organized groups in their center and a swarm of randoms around.

I feel the problem is not weak or strong siege but the hilarious heavy-armor-meta ZOS is forcing on PVP with every nerf they do to every other build. As long as immortal tanks can still do punishing damage without running out of ressources and as long as sword&board healers in heavy armor can be as effective (or more) as their light armored variants, the game will remain broken, no matter how painfully the siege hits.

Joy_Division

Because destroying players in under two seconds standing 50 meters away by using a piece of inventory is not why I log in for "player Vs player."

But by all means, don't let me interrupt the chorus of "nerf this player skill" because it's overloaded or some nonsense while asking for a piece of inventory to destroy entire groups.

Vapirko

Joy_Division wrote: »

Because destroying players in under two seconds standing 50 meters away by using a piece of inventory is not why I log in for "player Vs player."

But by all means, don't let me interrupt the chorus of "nerf this player skill" because it's overloaded or some nonsense while asking for a piece of inventory to destroy entire groups.

You seem particularly angry at this discussion each time and tbh I’m not entirely sure why. A number of decent suggestions have been made such as keep oils and trebs the same but design ballista to be much stronger v players near keeps. Idk how much you played during OP siege week, but from what I and many others experienced, there was more quality actual PvP than at any time in a long while. OP siege did a lot more in the hands of experienced players than it did in the hands of new players, and was the only thing that I’ve ever seen that break up zergs consistently. I’ve never seen you play so I’ve no idea how you run in Cyro, but from what I saw during that week it was only the dogpile zergs that’s suffered. Everyone else found a way to utilize siege and also to play around it from people sieging Ales to small scale groups using it to gain massive amounts of AP on rss. And no ones saying that all siege must be buffed to that point again, but certainly looking at some items like ballista within range of keeps has merit.

technohic

Joy_Division wrote: »

Because destroying players in under two seconds standing 50 meters away by using a piece of inventory is not why I log in for "player Vs player."

But by all means, don't let me interrupt the chorus of "nerf this player skill" because it's overloaded or some nonsense while asking for a piece of inventory to destroy entire groups.

Right on man. It's not pvp without it being mano a mano. A fair and perfectly even fight of 50 running over 20. Or 20 balled up so tight running over randoms 1 at a time, never mind that; there were 50 in the area so its outnumbered bro. Real pvp where everyone gets in 1 or 2 hits to really feel like real pvpers.

Hell yeah. Stack on crown birches and git gud.

darkblue5

The piece of inventory merely presented an occasional anti stack and burn mechanic that can be facetanked with purge or three dodge rolls. The skilled ball groups make reasonable arguments for the skillful play based primarily being able to prioritize using one key skill for your role at the right time and in the right place. I think despite being at times boring and hilarious the siege of siege week fulfilled that test.

You are truly more vulnerable while on siege while they don't actually present a 360 immediate zone of death. Instead they largely acted to create area denial that could be countered by carefully unstacking, or a nightblade ganking siegers, or by purge and heal spamming, or by sieging a new side, or by performing the classic feigned retreat.....

The main groups that couldn't counter siege were the skill-less faction stacked blobs. Siege breaking them up is partly because the lag they themselves create prevent them from reacting to slow small AOE circles that aren't even true one shots. Mechanics in PVE are hardly so forgiving and are much worse to deal with with lag.

Cyrodiil more closely resembling WWI was good not because "the better player" always won which has very rarely been the case in Cyrodiil but because it created more dynamic and interesting fights for the majority of players. ZOS agrees that we need to prevent stacking if you look at the most recent Trials, and this is because stacking is fundamentally uninteresting to design around. Given how few organized PvP guilds have lasted as long as PvE raiding guilds I think it is clear that there is a clear and fundamental boringness to being a sweaty ball. It does require skill, thought and sound technical play but maybe in a game we should prioritize interesting and interactive play instead.