Maintenance for the week of May 18:
• NA megaservers for maintenance – May 18, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – May 18, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 13:00 UTC (9:00AM EDT)
• NA megaservers for maintenance – May 18, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – May 18, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 13:00 UTC (9:00AM EDT)
Why The Siege Changes are a Nightmare in Disguise
Huntler
✭✭✭✭✭
✭
✭
Friends, its been a while since I've posted one of these to try and give you a little insight into what I think the meta will evolve to when big changes are implemented. Given its been a little time since the siege changes info has been out there, its time for me to try and pull the veil back from your eyes as I see far too many people excited for this change. The biggest example people think is that this will help bust zergs (and while it may and this overall change can be both a positive and negative, I feel the negative far outweighs the positive).
Pre 1.6, zergs already were beginning to effectively use siege. Casuals, randoms, the big blobs all alike placed siege everywhere, it was effective so they might as well. It was a way for anyone, regardless of weak builds, bad gear, low levels, whatever, to really effectively impact the battlefield in a massive way. In essence thats a good thing as long as its reasonable and more or less it was (aside from heal debuff stacking). What worries me about this massive damage increase we are moving to, is that it is going to be way, way too effective to just have randoms or people in a zerg drop siege to utterly decimate any smaller force. It is already exceedingly difficult for a small group to afford someone to drop siege, but we do it regardless because it is strong. The risk of this is that the dropping of siege is a huge target for a zerg and the vulnerable player sieging is basically a free kill in how 1.6 damage is scaling when separated from the tight small man. What this will mean is that the already diminishing capabilities of a small man to wipe a mindless zerg are further diminishing. A zerg can afford to have people drop siege, it doesn't take thought, its easy, and now you placed such a high damage amount to it that it will be more useful to have 10-20 people drop siege everywhere instead of actually use their abilities. Before we get into discussion on spatial awareness and strategic movements, understand that when it comes to combating a zerg these days, you will effectively be lambasted with so much siege that it will get to the point where not being hit by it will be near impossible.
Just because we as individual players can drop siege does not mean the zerg cannot either, in fact... they will use it even more because they can afford to. Why are we rewarding so much a fire and forget easily usable item that is now more effective than literally anything a player can do from a strategic build standpoint, positioning, coordination with others, etc.? Why is that being rewarded and promoted? This is a cheap solution that ZOS thinks will destroy zergs, but I find that laughable. Its going to promote zerging even more, siege was always not aoe capped yet zerging existed. Upping this damage while will definitely lead to some zerg wipes and lots of kills to be had, in a real engagement the smaller organized groups cannot function effectively with the ease of rezzing coupled with the amount of damage that the group will be surrounded by through siege weapons. It will be far too easy to influence a battle where the better players are punished by such a simple game mechanic that I could teach monkeys to use. All while the players trying to effectively coordinate their players are punished. I welcome an increase in siege damage, it is definitely necessary, but take my warning now before you all start complaining to high heck next week... you are going to get destroyed. Whatever tool ZOS puts in place to zergs needs to be a tool that is difficult for a zerg to utilize. Siege weapons are trivial, easy to use mechanics and thus the zerg will take full advantage too. A small man cannot afford to "split up" anymore as lethal arrow, charge spam, wrecking blow from randoms etc is making TTK very low and being on your own a suicide mission. A zerg can afford to spread out because it has so many players it is in effect still diminishing the danger of being picked off on the edge.
This will not solve the zerg problem, its going to make it worse. It will also slow down keep siege that can be good in some ways, but in others it will just lag the server even more as the longer a siege lasts the more people show up. Enjoy getting blown up by siege so easy to use that everyone will be doing it. Why bother having abilities, just siege up friends.
Edited by Huntler on March 20, 2015 5:39PM Pre 1.6, zergs already were beginning to effectively use siege. Casuals, randoms, the big blobs all alike placed siege everywhere, it was effective so they might as well. It was a way for anyone, regardless of weak builds, bad gear, low levels, whatever, to really effectively impact the battlefield in a massive way. In essence thats a good thing as long as its reasonable and more or less it was (aside from heal debuff stacking). What worries me about this massive damage increase we are moving to, is that it is going to be way, way too effective to just have randoms or people in a zerg drop siege to utterly decimate any smaller force. It is already exceedingly difficult for a small group to afford someone to drop siege, but we do it regardless because it is strong. The risk of this is that the dropping of siege is a huge target for a zerg and the vulnerable player sieging is basically a free kill in how 1.6 damage is scaling when separated from the tight small man. What this will mean is that the already diminishing capabilities of a small man to wipe a mindless zerg are further diminishing. A zerg can afford to have people drop siege, it doesn't take thought, its easy, and now you placed such a high damage amount to it that it will be more useful to have 10-20 people drop siege everywhere instead of actually use their abilities. Before we get into discussion on spatial awareness and strategic movements, understand that when it comes to combating a zerg these days, you will effectively be lambasted with so much siege that it will get to the point where not being hit by it will be near impossible.
Just because we as individual players can drop siege does not mean the zerg cannot either, in fact... they will use it even more because they can afford to. Why are we rewarding so much a fire and forget easily usable item that is now more effective than literally anything a player can do from a strategic build standpoint, positioning, coordination with others, etc.? Why is that being rewarded and promoted? This is a cheap solution that ZOS thinks will destroy zergs, but I find that laughable. Its going to promote zerging even more, siege was always not aoe capped yet zerging existed. Upping this damage while will definitely lead to some zerg wipes and lots of kills to be had, in a real engagement the smaller organized groups cannot function effectively with the ease of rezzing coupled with the amount of damage that the group will be surrounded by through siege weapons. It will be far too easy to influence a battle where the better players are punished by such a simple game mechanic that I could teach monkeys to use. All while the players trying to effectively coordinate their players are punished. I welcome an increase in siege damage, it is definitely necessary, but take my warning now before you all start complaining to high heck next week... you are going to get destroyed. Whatever tool ZOS puts in place to zergs needs to be a tool that is difficult for a zerg to utilize. Siege weapons are trivial, easy to use mechanics and thus the zerg will take full advantage too. A small man cannot afford to "split up" anymore as lethal arrow, charge spam, wrecking blow from randoms etc is making TTK very low and being on your own a suicide mission. A zerg can afford to spread out because it has so many players it is in effect still diminishing the danger of being picked off on the edge.
This will not solve the zerg problem, its going to make it worse. It will also slow down keep siege that can be good in some ways, but in others it will just lag the server even more as the longer a siege lasts the more people show up. Enjoy getting blown up by siege so easy to use that everyone will be doing it. Why bother having abilities, just siege up friends.
3
-
Huntler✭✭✭✭✭
✭Excuse the wall of text and not perfectly put together ideas, had to write this quickly. Hopefully my point gets across to most players and will understand the situations I am concerned with. Also note I am not saying to undo the damage buff, I am just saying it is too much. Too influential/strong to the point that a bunch of people 50+ meters away from a fight with fire ballistas will make movement for the smaller group near infinitely impossible. The small man vs. zergs only change of winning is speed, siege restricts the movement, options, and speed of the smaller man groups which is fine as it can then be viewed as a counter but should not be so ridiculously powerful that it negates it entirely.
This is not good for the game guys, the tool for busting zergs needs to be a tool that zergs cannot make use of. As I said before siege is far to easy to execute, while treb damage is avoidable, ballistas are far more accurate and when a zerg can utilize them it becomes no longer a test of dancing out of the damage but rather being so many shot at you that it is unavoidable altogether. Pray tell how is a group supposed to negate a zerg backed by siege in any encounter other than the zerg all holding hands under oil?Edited by Huntler on March 19, 2015 9:25PM1 -
FENGRUSH✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Tool for busting zergs was not well thought out with the new alliance skills. Those skills should have added <X> damage for every target in range of the AOE.
Add that in and see how well people follow the crown. Lag problem goes away over night.8 -
Xsorus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭What you're describing though Huntlar is what all small mans have always dealt with in every massive scale game.
In daoc you ran 8 mans..You would try and zerg bomb..If you did not kill that zerg or enough of them quick enough..They'd eventually overwhelm you.
What your group will have to do is try and hit people at opportune time and wipe enough....If you don't you'll run the risk of dying to Siege that the zerg will pop down.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXpX7JMwRXtczc5GTrIYRIw
ESO and GW2 PvP videos3 -
Huntler✭✭✭✭✭
✭xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »What you're describing though Huntlar is what all small mans have always dealt with in every massive scale game.
In daoc you ran 8 mans..You would try and zerg bomb..If you did not kill that zerg or enough of them quick enough..They'd eventually overwhelm you.
What your group will have to do is try and hit people at opportune time and wipe enough....If you don't you'll run the risk of dying to Siege that the zerg will pop down.
The problem I have isn't the fact that if we are not fast enough we wipe, the fact is that this siege change is heralded as a solution for the zerg... which is just false. I also believe it makes it HARDER for the small man to succeed, where zerging continuously becomes more and more powerful.3 -
Yolokin_Swagonborn✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Siege is currently ineffective for a smaller force trying to stop a larger force taking a keep. There are much more places to place siege outside of a keep than on keep walls. Because of that, it is much harder to use limited counter-siege to destroy siege weapons pointed at walls or kill the players that are using them. A sieging zerg will have plenty of people standing around without siege that can spam heals keeping the siegers alive no matter how much counter siege is hitting them.
Even without off-heals, I can keep myself alive and sieging currently with minimal effort with my own selfheals and damage shields. If I can eat the damage of two fire ballistas pointed at me and not be inconvenienced at all to stop sieging, then siege damage is currently too weak.
Keeps should be easier to defend and harder to assault. A small group with well placed defensive siege should be able to hold against a larger zerg. When we had ground based oils, this was possible. When ground oils were removed, it became a lot harder to defend a keep against a mob. I think the new siege changes will support the defense of keeps by well organized smaller groups. It doesn't matter how much of a sieging zerg has siege weapons as the people on the walls will still have a positioning advantage and be able to hit them more easily.
I just don't see how more powerful siege benefits a zerg unless you are talking about a zerg defending a keep which is already almost impossible to assault with a small group due to the sheer number of bodies defending.
If you are talking about open field combat and people just dropping siege in the middle of nowhere then I still think a smart small group could outmaneuver the stationary siege and hit the flanks of a force.
Siege also helps give new and low rank players something constructive to do and would be a great force equalizer if it was strong enough to actually kill someone. If the larger siege engines start WTFPWNing people then perhaps their set-up times could be increased. But that remains to be seen.
Edited by Yolokin_Swagonborn on March 19, 2015 10:50PM9 -
RinaldoGandolphi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Siege should be the hardest hitting thing in the game, its field artillery for crying out loud, it's the equivalent of a Howitzer.
With these changes defensive position advantage will matter now more then ever, and smaller groups will have a fighting chance of holding a keep. That's a good thing.Rinaldo Gandolphi-Breton Sorcerer Daggerfall Covenant
Juste Gandolphi Dark Elf Templar Daggerfall Covenant
Richter Gandolphi - Dark Elf Dragonknight Daggerfall Covenant
Mathias Gandolphi - Breton Nightblade Daggerfall Covenant
RinaldoGandolphi - High Elf Sorcerer Aldmeri Dominion
Officer Fire and Ice
Co-GM - MVP
Sorcerer's - The ONLY class in the game that is punished for using its class defining skill (Bolt Escape)
"Here in his shrine, that they have forgotten. Here do we toil, that we might remember. By night we reclaim, what by day was stolen. Far from ourselves, he grows ever near to us. Our eyes once were blinded, now through him do we see. Our hands once were idle, now through them does he speak. And when the world shall listen, and when the world shall see, and when the world remembers, that world will cease to be. - Miraak6 -
Keron✭✭✭✭✭
✭If the meta really develops the way OP describes, it can be changed back. But please let us try it first before we start to complain about it.9 -
Hypertionb14_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »Siege is currently ineffective for a smaller force trying to stop a larger force taking a keep. There are much more places to place siege outside of a keep than on keep walls. Because of that, it is much harder to use limited counter-siege to destroy siege weapons pointed at walls or kill the players that are using them. A sieging zerg will have plenty of people standing around without siege that can spam heals keeping the siegers alive no matter how much counter siege is hitting them.
Even without off-heals, I can keep myself alive and sieging currently with minimal effort with my own selfheals and damage shields. If I can eat the damage of two fire ballistas pointed at me and not be inconvenienced at all to stop sieging, then siege damage is currently too weak.
Keeps should be easier to defend and harder to assault. A small group with well placed defensive siege should be able to hold against a larger zerg. When we had ground based oils, this was possible. When ground oils were removed, it became a lot harder to defend a keep against a mob. I think the new siege changes will support the defense of keeps by well organized smaller groups. It doesn't matter how much of a sieging zerg has siege weapons as the people on the walls will still have a positioning advantage and be able to hit them more easily.
I just don't see how more powerful siege benefits a zerg unless you are talking about a zerg defending a keep which is already almost impossible to assault with a small group due to the sheer number of bodies defending.
If you are talking about open field combat and people just dropping siege in the middle of nowhere then I still think a smart small group could outmaneuver the stationary siege and hit the flanks of a force.
Siege also helps give new and low rank players something constructive to do and would be a great force equalizer if it was strong enough to actually kill someone. If the larger siege engines start WTFPWNing people then perhaps their set-up times could be increased. But that remains to be seen.
Everything said by this guy is dead on.
Damage from a field Zerg using Seige is always due to the zerg using funneling tactics.. in those situations they might be able to get more use out of them but they always will no matter how much or how little siege does.. if you go where your enemy wants you do, dont complain if they do what they want with you (usually killing).
when both sides have seige, the damage done by the weapons is not as important as Positioning and numbers, and never will be.
there is no point in having seige at all if the effect of Vs plaayers is so weak that attacking groups can attack a keep wall without ever dying to counter seige...I play every class in every situation. I love them all.3 -
Yolokin_Swagonborn✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Perhaps people will start using siege bubbles if siege starts hitting harder. They are completely unnecessary currently. If siege starts hitting hard, then buff siege bubbles but don't reduce their cost. They are a good magicka sink for the sieging side.4 -
ToRelax✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭I do think it won't be that hard to not get hit by siege, or if it's one of the faster projectiles, rarely enough to survive.
Also you shouldn't die because spreading out to much...
I also think it should be a tool to wipe zergs and it sounds as if that could come true. Since meatbag debuff does not stack anymore a player is more effective without siege.
Currently it is hard to do anything against a zerg and the siege change will be a step in the right direction.DAGON - ALTADOON - CHIM - GHARTOK
The Covenant is broken. The Enemy has won...
Elo'dryel - Sorc - AR 50 - Hopesfire - EP EU1 -
Rook_Master✭✭✭✭✭Increased Siege damage against players will absolutely help defenders.
Defenders also have the advantage of higher siege placement and further range.
If you can throw a stone treb into a group and hit everyone for 17k, they are going to feel that for sure.
Also, these changes are being combined with the scoring changes to encourage people to take resources and spread out. All of these things will help counter zerging tactics.1 -
technohic✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭A smaller group is not going to run head on into the zerg and try to put up siege right in front of them. They are going to stealth up, get on the flanks and set up the siege from there. They will then have a lot more targets to hit which mean more people who need healing and maybe even too many to heal.2 -
Weberda✭✭✭✭✭
✭As it is today siege weapons are pretty ineffective against opposing players. Next week's changes look to reverse that. I would much rather utilize something that provides some kind of effect as opposed to something that is no more than an AP sink.Fernwood, EP Haderus NA
Lo Behold, AD Thornblade NA (formerly Haderus, inactive)1 -
Huntler✭✭✭✭✭
✭A smaller group is not going to run head on into the zerg and try to put up siege right in front of them. They are going to stealth up, get on the flanks and set up the siege from there. They will then have a lot more targets to hit which mean more people who need healing and maybe even too many to heal.
And thats where this game turns into just one massive siege fest that is literally mind numbingly boring and stupid. Anyone can use siege, it doesn't take some genius. It is literally the easiest mechanic in the game to use and that will be the most effective way to play. That is awful for gameplay. But don't worry, you'll all see in a few days.0 -
technohic✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭A smaller group is not going to run head on into the zerg and try to put up siege right in front of them. They are going to stealth up, get on the flanks and set up the siege from there. They will then have a lot more targets to hit which mean more people who need healing and maybe even too many to heal.
And thats where this game turns into just one massive siege fest that is literally mind numbingly boring and stupid. Anyone can use siege, it doesn't take some genius. It is literally the easiest mechanic in the game to use and that will be the most effective way to play. That is awful for gameplay. But don't worry, you'll all see in a few days.
Siege is slow, so it is not very effective against a spread out group. Not to mention; when on it you are really vulnerable to stealth attacks and your friends will have a lot slower time to react. Snipe is still a pretty big thing, but WB from stealth is freaking awesome but very hard to do. Easier to do to someone tunneling a catapult.3 -
Keron✭✭✭✭✭
✭It may result in making sieges very difficult for attackers, because they are forced to remain relatively stationary to breach the walls.
In the end it will be an adjustment process. Fact remains, right now siege is useless and changes are mandatory.3 -
Huntler✭✭✭✭✭
✭A smaller group is not going to run head on into the zerg and try to put up siege right in front of them. They are going to stealth up, get on the flanks and set up the siege from there. They will then have a lot more targets to hit which mean more people who need healing and maybe even too many to heal.
And thats where this game turns into just one massive siege fest that is literally mind numbingly boring and stupid. Anyone can use siege, it doesn't take some genius. It is literally the easiest mechanic in the game to use and that will be the most effective way to play. That is awful for gameplay. But don't worry, you'll all see in a few days.
Siege is slow, so it is not very effective against a spread out group. Not to mention; when on it you are really vulnerable to stealth attacks and your friends will have a lot slower time to react. Snipe is still a pretty big thing, but WB from stealth is freaking awesome but very hard to do. Easier to do to someone tunneling a catapult.
And it is precisely this reason that a zerg will be able to effectively use it a lot more than a small organized group, because you are massively vulnerable on a siege weapon. Thats my whole point. The game will turn into who drops siege faster and has more (the zerg always will) and the small groups cannot afford in open field to separate. People keep saying this will give great defender advantage as their reasoning, completely ignoring my points in the OP... I get it, yes siege is going to be great for small numbers in a keep, but I'm talking more than just a keep here. This entire game will revolve around siege, even in the open field. The only time skills will even be important is when you are in locations that siege cannot be placed. Its going to be ***.0 -
Huntler✭✭✭✭✭
✭It may result in making sieges very difficult for attackers, because they are forced to remain relatively stationary to breach the walls.
In the end it will be an adjustment process. Fact remains, right now siege is useless and changes are mandatory.
I agree that changes are mandatory, a damage increase is the obvious solution. But the increase should not have been this drastic.1 -
Roechacca✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭A smaller group is not going to run head on into the zerg and try to put up siege right in front of them. They are going to stealth up, get on the flanks and set up the siege from there. They will then have a lot more targets to hit which mean more people who need healing and maybe even too many to heal.
And thats where this game turns into just one massive siege fest that is literally mind numbingly boring and stupid. Anyone can use siege, it doesn't take some genius. It is literally the easiest mechanic in the game to use and that will be the most effective way to play. That is awful for gameplay. But don't worry, you'll all see in a few days.
Siege is slow, so it is not very effective against a spread out group. Not to mention; when on it you are really vulnerable to stealth attacks and your friends will have a lot slower time to react. Snipe is still a pretty big thing, but WB from stealth is freaking awesome but very hard to do. Easier to do to someone tunneling a catapult.
Well said .1 -
NukeAllTheThings✭✭✭✭✭I can understand OP's concerns because I am always looking for unintended consequences that come from large changes. But, the intent of buffing of siege vs. players doesn't come off like a way to bust zergs. It is simply to make siege do actual damage to players instead of what it does now....which is next to nothing. Currently I can stand on my ballista and take fire bolts while Rally ticks keep me healed. I like this change and it will force people to attack in a different manner.
"it's important to state that our decision to go with subscriptions is not a referendum on online game revenue models. F2P, B2P, etc. are valid, proven business models - but subscription is the one that fits ESO the best, given our commitment to freedom of gameplay, quality and long-term content delivery. Plus, players will appreciate not having to worry about being "monetized" in the middle of playing the game, which is definitely a problem that is cropping up more and more in online gaming these days." - Matt Firor0 -
Huntler✭✭✭✭✭
✭Everyone likes making quips off of the ESO name, so how do you guys not see this will be elder siege online? Where every fight is determined by siege instead of anything else that requires even an ounce of skill (lets be honest this game has barely even that, but at least its something). Siege is equal for everyone, no build diversity, nothing... its point and click with absolutely no differentiation.0 -
Keron✭✭✭✭✭
✭
I say better too large a change and establish "upper limit" than no change or too small a change...
Also, it will affect people differently. Those who know how to run purge and healing need to be in trouble also. Otherwise it will not change the meta.0 -
technohic✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Everyone likes making quips off of the ESO name, so how do you guys not see this will be elder siege online? Where every fight is determined by siege instead of anything else that requires even an ounce of skill (lets be honest this game has barely even that, but at least its something). Siege is equal for everyone, no build diversity, nothing... its point and click with absolutely no differentiation.
Well; it is a siege based game regardless of how strong or weak siege is. If you are expecting that regular fights will not happen much, I think I just disagree with you there.2 -
Huntler✭✭✭✭✭
✭Everyone likes making quips off of the ESO name, so how do you guys not see this will be elder siege online? Where every fight is determined by siege instead of anything else that requires even an ounce of skill (lets be honest this game has barely even that, but at least its something). Siege is equal for everyone, no build diversity, nothing... its point and click with absolutely no differentiation.
Well; it is a siege based game regardless of how strong or weak siege is. If you are expecting that regular fights will not happen much, I think I just disagree with you there.
It isn't a siege based game. Siege is meant to supplement. The only thing siege is required (and should be) is taking down a keep. Siege should always be supplementary/supportive, not the primary which I feel is where we are headed. It will be far more effective to get on siege than use your abilities.... that is bad for the game.2 -
DHale✭✭✭✭✭
✭As a real life infantry marine Artillery does more damage that an entire company of men can do. The battle landscape will change there is no doubt of that. It will be about getting siege down and protecting the siege and person manning it. Groups will need to group together fast and not sit there in stealth and wait for the right moment. I am looking forward to siege doing actual damage. Grouping up is not how actual battle is done. That is why we invented grenades I was never less than 5 meters from any man next to me out in the field. Most of the time you are 15 meters away from the man next to you but no more than 15 meters away. Zerging works great in a video game it really does, but I want combat to be remotely believable and plausible (yes I know this is a fantasy video game). IRL zerging would get you and your buddies killed not helped. IRL siege warfare changed the landscape of battle for over a thousand years. Those siegers are going to be a huge target and we will need to defend them not running off chasing down some yahoo who thinks he can 1 v x everyone. Beside level 10’s should not out of Blackwater and it will give them all something to do that contributes to the team IMO. For the siegers I hear a wrecking blow coming…For those not wanting to be impacted by the siege changes using line of sight and rocks, hills and cliffs and uneven surfaces will be the new battle grounds. Real tactics not cause i was a WOW raid commander for 7 years. Real cool.../facepalm
Sorcerna, proud beta sorc. RIP April 2014 to May 31 2016 DArk Brotherhood. Out of retirement for negates and encases. Sorcerna will be going back into retirement to be my main crafter Fall 2018. Because an 8 k shield is f ing useless. Died because of baddies on the forum. Too much qq too little pew pew. 16 AD 2 DC. 0 EP cause they bad, CP 2300 plus 18 level 50 toons. NA, PC, Grey Host#SORCLIVESMATTER actually they don’t or they wouldn’t keep getting nerfed constantly.1 -
Huntler✭✭✭✭✭
✭As a real life infantry marine Artillery does more damage that an entire company of men can do. The battle landscape will change there is no doubt of that. It will be about getting siege down and protecting the siege and person manning it. Groups will need to group together fast and not sit there in stealth and wait for the right moment. I am looking forward to siege doing actual damage. Grouping up is not how actual battle is done. That is why we invented grenades I was never less than 5 meters from any man next to me out in the field. Most of the time you are 15 meters away from the man next to you but no more than 15 meters away. Zerging works great in a video game it really does, but I want combat to be remotely believable and plausible (yes I know this is a fantasy video game). IRL zerging would get you and your buddies killed not helped. IRL siege warfare changed the landscape of battle for over a thousand years. Those siegers are going to be a huge target and we will need to defend them not running off chasing down some yahoo who thinks he can 1 v x everyone. Beside level 10’s should not out of Blackwater and it will give them all something to do that contributes to the team IMO. For the siegers I hear a wrecking blow coming…For those not wanting to be impacted by the siege changes using line of sight and rocks, hills and cliffs and uneven surfaces will be the new battle grounds. Real tactics not cause i was a WOW raid commander for 7 years. Real cool.../facepalm
Stop it. Stop with the real-life references. If this was meant to be remotely real-life 1 player wouldn't be able to carry a ballista, let alone set it up in a few seconds so no, any argument on what siege should do due to realism effect is ABSOLUTELY pointless. You can't have your cake and eat it too with these half references to realism while ignoring everything else. I know you claim that well later it is a fantasy game, but you want it realistic...... try and read the problem there. It should not be included in your points anywhere.... at all.
Second, instead of ignoring my point, no where did I say zerging was good. I said it was bad and the whole point of the siege changes are meant to help combat the zerg. My point is its going to help it. Its going to make the zerg safe anywhere except when taking a keep, whereas at the moment a zerg isn't safe even in the open field.Edited by Huntler on March 20, 2015 2:56PM5 -
Weberda✭✭✭✭✭
✭As a real life infantry marine Artillery does more damage that an entire company of men can do. The battle landscape will change there is no doubt of that. It will be about getting siege down and protecting the siege and person manning it. Groups will need to group together fast and not sit there in stealth and wait for the right moment. I am looking forward to siege doing actual damage. Grouping up is not how actual battle is done. That is why we invented grenades I was never less than 5 meters from any man next to me out in the field. Most of the time you are 15 meters away from the man next to you but no more than 15 meters away. Zerging works great in a video game it really does, but I want combat to be remotely believable and plausible (yes I know this is a fantasy video game). IRL zerging would get you and your buddies killed not helped. IRL siege warfare changed the landscape of battle for over a thousand years. Those siegers are going to be a huge target and we will need to defend them not running off chasing down some yahoo who thinks he can 1 v x everyone. Beside level 10’s should not out of Blackwater and it will give them all something to do that contributes to the team IMO. For the siegers I hear a wrecking blow coming…For those not wanting to be impacted by the siege changes using line of sight and rocks, hills and cliffs and uneven surfaces will be the new battle grounds. Real tactics not cause i was a WOW raid commander for 7 years. Real cool.../facepalm
Stop it. Stop with the real-life references. If this was meant to be remotely real-life 1 player wouldn't be able to carry a ballista, let alone set it up in a few seconds so no, any argument on what siege should do due to realism effect is ABSOLUTELY pointless. You can't have your cake and eat it too with these half references to realism while ignoring everything else. I know you claim that well later it is a fantasy game, but you want it realistic...... try and read the problem there. It should not be included in your points anywhere.... at all.
Second, instead of ignoring my point, no where did I say zerging was good. I said it was bad and the whole point of the siege changes are meant to help combat the zerg. My point is its going to help it. Its going to make the zerg safe anywhere except when taking a keep, whereas at the moment a zerg isn't safe even in the open field.
Since you have a big tendency to dismiss anybody's viewpoint that isn't in line with yours then you must realize that your credibility is close to zero.
Edited by Weberda on March 20, 2015 2:59PMFernwood, EP Haderus NA
Lo Behold, AD Thornblade NA (formerly Haderus, inactive)4 -
NukeAllTheThings✭✭✭✭✭Did I miss a statement where the siege changes were supposed to combat the zerg?"it's important to state that our decision to go with subscriptions is not a referendum on online game revenue models. F2P, B2P, etc. are valid, proven business models - but subscription is the one that fits ESO the best, given our commitment to freedom of gameplay, quality and long-term content delivery. Plus, players will appreciate not having to worry about being "monetized" in the middle of playing the game, which is definitely a problem that is cropping up more and more in online gaming these days." - Matt Firor2
-
Oughash✭✭✭✭As a real life infantry marine Artillery does more damage that an entire company of men can do. The battle landscape will change there is no doubt of that. It will be about getting siege down and protecting the siege and person manning it. Groups will need to group together fast and not sit there in stealth and wait for the right moment. I am looking forward to siege doing actual damage. Grouping up is not how actual battle is done. That is why we invented grenades I was never less than 5 meters from any man next to me out in the field. Most of the time you are 15 meters away from the man next to you but no more than 15 meters away. Zerging works great in a video game it really does, but I want combat to be remotely believable and plausible (yes I know this is a fantasy video game). IRL zerging would get you and your buddies killed not helped. IRL siege warfare changed the landscape of battle for over a thousand years. Those siegers are going to be a huge target and we will need to defend them not running off chasing down some yahoo who thinks he can 1 v x everyone. Beside level 10’s should not out of Blackwater and it will give them all something to do that contributes to the team IMO. For the siegers I hear a wrecking blow coming…For those not wanting to be impacted by the siege changes using line of sight and rocks, hills and cliffs and uneven surfaces will be the new battle grounds. Real tactics not cause i was a WOW raid commander for 7 years. Real cool.../facepalm
Stop it. Stop with the real-life references. If this was meant to be remotely real-life 1 player wouldn't be able to carry a ballista, let alone set it up in a few seconds so no, any argument on what siege should do due to realism effect is ABSOLUTELY pointless. You can't have your cake and eat it too with these half references to realism while ignoring everything else. I know you claim that well later it is a fantasy game, but you want it realistic...... try and read the problem there. It should not be included in your points anywhere.... at all.
Second, instead of ignoring my point, no where did I say zerging was good. I said it was bad and the whole point of the siege changes are meant to help combat the zerg. My point is its going to help it. Its going to make the zerg safe anywhere except when taking a keep, whereas at the moment a zerg isn't safe even in the open field.
Since you have a big tendency to dismiss anybody's viewpoint that isn't in line with yours then you must realize that your credibility is close to zero.
The post which Huntlar responded to was a straw-man argument. That is, it is created an fallacy of comparison between real life warfare and Huntlar's comments on video gameplay. Indeed, Huntlar's point was that changed siege mechanics (damage) in ESO will promote zerging gameplay which has literally nothing to do with how real life warfare has been influenced by real siege weaponry.0