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

Savos_Saren

If you want to "play pretend" and keep the idea that siege should one-shot someone. Then, I guess make all mechanics one-shot people, right? I've never known anyone to be able to survive an arrow to the face or a meteor landing on them...

If we have siege that can insta-kill someone then, perhaps, the sieger should instantly be killed if they're hit with a ranged attack?

Again- these "pros" that defend insta-kill siege are probably the ones that sat on a keep wall, eating Doritos with one hand, and left-clicked their way to victory... while actual PVPers attempted to take keeps or fight enemies.

Kartalin

I fully realize that in warfare like this siege could have a powerful impact, but at the same time this is a game and if the goal is to not get better at a game and just sit up on the edge of a keep and play Missile Command (for all you from the Atari generation) then what's the fun in that?

Vapirko wrote: »

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.

The point is that individual player skill has continuously been downplayed and deprecated as a factor of success in Cyrodiil by ZOS. Placing siege and left clicking your way to victory is not compelling gameplay, and not what caused us to come to love this game in spite of all its flaws. I know I'm not the best player but I like to think that what I'm able to do will influence my success and my team's success in all types of PVP. We spend all this time leveling and gaining skill points, figuring out a build, working hard to see what is effective for our playstyles, only to end up firing siege at one another? Please.

OtarTheMad

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 agree with this 1000000%

It is dumb when I am working 2 oils, someone else working 2 others and more players using siege weapons and it just does not matter, it does not even slow down the FD attack so that a group can get there in time.

I am not saying siege should do the amount of damage it did (that'd be OP) but maybe it should do a tad more than it does now.

vamp_emily

OP siege was nice. Players actually responded when they got hit, now they just ignore it.

thedude33

OtarTheMad 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 agree with this 1000000%

It is dumb when I am working 2 oils, someone else working 2 others and more players using siege weapons and it just does not matter, it does not even slow down the FD attack so that a group can get there in time.

I am not saying siege should do the amount of damage it did (that'd be OP) but maybe it should do a tad more than it does now.

I agree even more.

Rams should be the quickest way into a keep. So if the attackers have taken resources and cut off reinforcement .... or used subterfuge and attacked a keep no one was expecting, then rams are a great option. If somehow defenders are in play and are using oils, then attackers go to plan B.

I saw far more tactics during that week. Attacking near the door while another group attacked behind or side. Very effective.

What you don't want this game to evolve to is GW2, where the blobs did a circuit taking undefended keeps. That blob would be followed by an enemy blob that retook the keep you just took. Rinse/repeat. Why? Because it was pointless trying to defend. So people stopped defending.

ESO is really close to that point now where trying to defend is pointless. As someone mentioned earlier, you would like to feel you made an impact in the battle.

Toc de Malsvi

Savos_Saren wrote: »

If you want to "play pretend" and keep the idea that siege should one-shot someone. Then, I guess make all mechanics one-shot people, right? I've never known anyone to be able to survive an arrow to the face or a meteor landing on them...

If we have siege that can insta-kill someone then, perhaps, the sieger should instantly be killed if they're hit with a ranged attack?

Again- these "pros" that defend insta-kill siege are probably the ones that sat on a keep wall, eating Doritos with one hand, and left-clicked their way to victory... while actual PVPers attempted to take keeps or fight enemies.

Right, because you cannot eat Doritos while clicking Healing Springs. Following crown is the real skilled gameplay right?

Pretending stacking on the door is somehow more skillful than placing a siege weapon is a pathetic joke.

Toc de Malsvi

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.

Because huddling in a crowd spamming AOEs on outnumbered players is somehow better? Why place siege weapons, or have keeps to siege if all you want us a scrum in the middle of a field.

HowlKimchi

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.

Sassy. Gotta ask though, what's your opinion on ball groups with a ton of healers just out healing everything?

zyk

I find it ironic when large group players complain about how little skill siegeplay takes because they deal with basically the same unfair prejudice from small scale players.

It's still player versus player.

Merlight

Savos_Saren wrote: »

If you want to "play pretend" and keep the idea that siege should one-shot someone. Then, I guess make all mechanics one-shot people, right? I've never known anyone to be able to survive an arrow to the face or a meteor landing on them...

If we have siege that can insta-kill someone then, perhaps, the sieger should instantly be killed if they're hit with a ranged attack?

Again- these "pros" that defend insta-kill siege are probably the ones that sat on a keep wall, eating Doritos with one hand, and left-clicked their way to victory... while actual PVPers attempted to take keeps or fight enemies.

What are you even talking about? There was no insta-kill siege during the Wrathstone siege week.

Thank you for that image of people sitting on a keep wall, eating Doritos with one hand, and left-clicking their way to victory... while "actual PvPers" are so incompetent that they can't kill someone standing still on siege.

Minno

Merlight wrote: »

Savos_Saren wrote: »

If you want to "play pretend" and keep the idea that siege should one-shot someone. Then, I guess make all mechanics one-shot people, right? I've never known anyone to be able to survive an arrow to the face or a meteor landing on them...

If we have siege that can insta-kill someone then, perhaps, the sieger should instantly be killed if they're hit with a ranged attack?

Again- these "pros" that defend insta-kill siege are probably the ones that sat on a keep wall, eating Doritos with one hand, and left-clicked their way to victory... while actual PVPers attempted to take keeps or fight enemies.

What are you even talking about? There was no insta-kill siege during the Wrathstone siege week.

Thank you for that image of people sitting on a keep wall, eating Doritos with one hand, and left-clicking their way to victory... while "actual PvPers" are so incompetent that they can't kill someone standing still on siege.

yea there was lol. they were bypassing shields and dealing 34k+ dmg in 1 or 2 ticks lol.

Merlight

Minno wrote: »

yea there was lol. they were bypassing shields and dealing 34k+ dmg in 1 or 2 ticks lol.

They were doing 14k dmg per tick. Not instant. Also, dodge-able (which didn't make sense) and purge-able.

WillhelmBlack

I usually run in groups 2-8 man. Yeah PvP is playable again now. Nothing worse than 4 potatoes spamming ballistae at you when they 16-20 vs your 2-8 man.

WHYKNOTWHY

Bring back OP siege. Sickening seeing groups stand under oil baths and being hit with multiple ballistae while being bombarded with caltrops, various aoes, and they simply stand on the ram with little to no health drop. I can be solo and not drop a siege shield and bathe in the pathetic oil baths. Did someone forget to light the oil in the pot before dumping it on my head? lol

Lucky28

Fatalyis wrote: »

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.

I don't really buy that tho. i mean what did ball groups do with all the "counters" to ball groups that zos has added over the years?. they incorporated the ball group counters into their ball groups, why assume siege would be any different?. i dunno, it was easier to survive the siege when in a group than it was solo. in a group you had heals, purges and all kinds of defensive buffs.

going beyond that though. people complain about the tank meta, you think the siege bug would help that?. nah, more people would be rolling tanks to sit on siege all day, easy AP.

Rikumaru

It's funny how people advocate for siege to be buffed to split apart zergs but theres no comment about proxy det at all anywhere. Dunno about you but I loved the days of overpowered proxy det, it benefited solo / small groups fighting larger ones but you had to actually learn how to PvP somewhat for it to work. Do people really want this easy "I win" button especially on something which requires zero effort or skill to use?

NyassaV

I hate large ball groups but I also hate OP siege

Minno

Rikumaru wrote: »

It's funny how people advocate for siege to be buffed to split apart zergs but theres no comment about proxy det at all anywhere. Dunno about you but I loved the days of overpowered proxy det, it benefited solo / small groups fighting larger ones but you had to actually learn how to PvP somewhat for it to work. Do people really want this easy "I win" button especially on something which requires zero effort or skill to use?

Remember when everyone had proc det on their bars ? At least you can run away from siege, can't run away from a meta.

CatchMeTrolling

Rikumaru wrote: »

It's funny how people advocate for siege to be buffed to split apart zergs but theres no comment about proxy det at all anywhere. Dunno about you but I loved the days of overpowered proxy det, it benefited solo / small groups fighting larger ones but you had to actually learn how to PvP somewhat for it to work. Do people really want this easy "I win" button especially on something which requires zero effort or skill to use?

Proxy det is in the same boat really that’s why it got nerfed , vicious death and handing out proxy was part of it too. But it was still being used by zergers once everyone got their hands on it. Small scalers and solo players also got it nerfed because zergers ran it. In the state of the game it wouldn’t last long, you’d be able to jump in the middle of 50 people and kill them since aoe caps is gone.

I still use proxy and used it back then, it was strong against one person, now imagine it being used in the current patch. It definitely would get reverted 3 months later.

Vapirko

Kartalin wrote: »

I fully realize that in warfare like this siege could have a powerful impact, but at the same time this is a game and if the goal is to not get better at a game and just sit up on the edge of a keep and play Missile Command (for all you from the Atari generation) then what's the fun in that?

Vapirko wrote: »

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.

The point is that individual player skill has continuously been downplayed and deprecated as a factor of success in Cyrodiil by ZOS. Placing siege and left clicking your way to victory is not compelling gameplay, and not what caused us to come to love this game in spite of all its flaws. I know I'm not the best player but I like to think that what I'm able to do will influence my success and my team's success in all types of PVP. We spend all this time leveling and gaining skill points, figuring out a build, working hard to see what is effective for our playstyles, only to end up firing siege at one another? Please.

Yeah I mean I’ve heard the argument. But with the way PvP is played rn there really isn’t much high ground to take. Most people just left click now and you know it. You run a medium to large size group no? So I can see why you wouldn’t like it, but I think if you’re group is good you can deal. The rest of us are sick of being run over by zergs that lag their way to a win.

Joy_Division

Vapirko wrote: »

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.

I wouldn't say I'm "angry". I'd say I have the same level of passion as you do: you are absolutely convinced siege should be one way and you can;t even comprehend how someone could honestly feel differently. Just because we both feel strongly doesn't make me angry and the people who I disagree with level headed.

I played every day during the non siege week and I actually paid attention to what happens. Yes, the bad/uncoordinated groups did get destroyed by siege. But they get destroyed right now by meatbags and scattershots or by players who know what they are doing. Meanwhile, during the siege bug most of the people who get destroyed by siege are inexperienced players, outnumbered players, terrible players, the unfortunate "want to help the alliance types" who dutifully set up stone trebuchets to knock down a wall, i.e., those players who don't deserve to get destroyed.

Yes, I and experienced players didn;t die - that is when the actual red circle displayed and we weren;t snared/rooted - but that's because we're good. Catering to an environment where you have to be good/experienced to actually stay alive is not healthy. I think that position is very reasonable.

People don;t seem to understand the more powerful something is made in this game, the people who suffer from its effects the most are newer/inexperienced players and the people who suffer from it the least are exactly the intended targets: tight organized ball-groups like Drac and Omni. They dont suffer nearly as much because they are all good/experienced players, and they have dedicated support players that the vast majority of cyrodiil doesn't. For every lucky coldfire ballista shot that gets a KB on a drac player, there are dozens and dozens of players who don't deserve to get destroyed by cold-fire have to play horse ride simulator or wait for someone to rez them. Anything that is too strong is going to cause problems and it's the newer and more inexperienced players they are going to bear the brunt of those problems.

Yes, I can honestly say that when I play a fantasy game where I am this heroic person with these awesome skills, I want to do awesome things with said skills and have the bards sings about me being a great hero, not how a mundane piece of equipment saved the day.

Kartalin

Vapirko wrote: »

Kartalin wrote: »

I fully realize that in warfare like this siege could have a powerful impact, but at the same time this is a game and if the goal is to not get better at a game and just sit up on the edge of a keep and play Missile Command (for all you from the Atari generation) then what's the fun in that?

Vapirko wrote: »

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.

The point is that individual player skill has continuously been downplayed and deprecated as a factor of success in Cyrodiil by ZOS. Placing siege and left clicking your way to victory is not compelling gameplay, and not what caused us to come to love this game in spite of all its flaws. I know I'm not the best player but I like to think that what I'm able to do will influence my success and my team's success in all types of PVP. We spend all this time leveling and gaining skill points, figuring out a build, working hard to see what is effective for our playstyles, only to end up firing siege at one another? Please.

Yeah I mean I’ve heard the argument. But with the way PvP is played rn there really isn’t much high ground to take. Most people just left click now and you know it. You run a medium to large size group no? So I can see why you wouldn’t like it, but I think if you’re group is good you can deal.

Our groups run 8-12 and we actually were mostly fine as you might expect. But here's the problem which showed up on Sotha Sil and may not have been seen on Vivec or Shor: We have an active NA prime time population where factions are usually within 1 bar of each other. Frequently though only one faction dominates outside of NA prime time and that was EP during that campaign. It turned out to be extremely difficult if not impossible to capture a well defended keep in non-cp where siege was already pretty hard hitting before that change. So EP would capture emperor at some point prior to prime time and proceed to hold most of the map. OP siege actually encouraged this behavior, because the faction that held emp, that held keeps, would be the most successful during prime time as other factions would fall mercilessly at the keep doors or resort to attempting to find an undefended keep or outpost to pvdoor. AD pugs already have a difficult time being on fire under normal conditions so you can imagine how they fared under OP siege.

Vapirko wrote: »

The rest of us are sick of being run over by zergs that lag their way to a win.

I understand your frustration here but I feel like you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater here.

Merlight

Joy_Division wrote: »

Yes, I and experienced players didn;t die - that is when the actual red circle displayed and we weren;t snared/rooted - but that's because we're good. Catering to an environment where you have to be good/experienced to actually stay alive is not healthy. I think that position is very reasonable.

TheBonesXXX

Don't know how many bloody times it's gonna be said but dangerous siege is good for the health of the game.

True Zerg busting mechanics should be welcomed, not shunned.

Assigned potato spam just upgrades players to yams, not skilled PvPers. Just a perveyor of skills that overperform, spin to win Ulti dumping is just a DPS dump is just that, ezpz not talent.

TheBonesXXX

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.

DBOS + Shalks + Undodgeable Execute is quicker, easier, and requires less time.

TheBonesXXX

HaruKamui wrote: »

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

Just make them dangerous with a caveat. 50% slower away from keeps/outposts.

Qbiken

TheBonesXXX wrote: »

Don't know how many bloody times it's gonna be said but dangerous siege is good for the health of the game.

True Zerg busting mechanics should be welcomed, not shunned.

Assigned potato spam just upgrades players to yams, not skilled PvPers. Just a perveyor of skills that overperform, spin to win Ulti dumping is just a DPS dump is just that, ezpz not talent.

Personally I think the damage during siegebug week was severely overkill and one/two shot mechanics are unhealthy for both pve and pvp


But sure, if you want siege to be powerful enough to 1-2 shot players, I want to be able to bring down a keep wall/door with only 3-4 trebuche shots.
I mean, u said it yourself, siege should be powerful, but that should go both ways.

Ahtu

I and many others would have quit the game if the siege bug was permanent. I know people who stopped logging into the game when this happened and still haven't come back yet. Population levels were dwindling when siege was OP and it was harder to find people looking for group in Cyrodiil.

So yes, PvP is better without the siege bug.

Vapirko

Ahtu wrote: »

I and many others would have quit the game if the siege bug was permanent. I know people who stopped logging into the game when this happened and still haven't come back yet. Population levels were dwindling when siege was OP and it was harder to find people looking for group in Cyrodiil.

So yes, PvP is better without the siege bug.

Don’t you roll with a massive zerg?

technohic

Ahtu wrote: »

I and many others would have quit the game if the siege bug was permanent. I know people who stopped logging into the game when this happened and still haven't come back yet. Population levels were dwindling when siege was OP and it was harder to find people looking for group in Cyrodiil.

So yes, PvP is better without the siege bug.

For those in the know, this is proof that siege week would have made the game better. You are exactly what people are talking about