Proliferation of Siege

SpiritusSancti · April 2015

What do folk think of the changes to siege in pvp? Personally I don't enjoy it. Siege now seems a part of every fight and watching siege pop up everywhere seems odd and unrealistic. Siege has become super powerful and carves big chunks out of health. And it's virtually skill-less. I've used the trebs to 1 shot numerous players in no time and it's a very dull way to play. And I've died many times to the new siege and find it intrusive or distracting.

I can understand it when used in the vicinity of a keep but not in some field in the middle of nowhere against personnel. And I think it is unrealistically easy to use. Deploying it should take longer and only when near a keep. Changing target and swinging left and right should be a whole lot slower. And whilst I can't see them doing it the two things I'd most I'd like to see is damage to all players (not just enemy) and a skill line for using it.

daemonios · April 2015

Nice.

I got bored with PvP long ago, but these changes seem positive. Less zerging, more sieging!

TequilaFire · April 2015

Believe it or not under Alexander the ballista was given wheels and field artillery was invented.
So it was used in open field battles, not that realism matters in a video game.

Siege operators are sitting ducks and easy to flank if not protected by their team.

SpiritusSancti · April 2015

Yeah I suppose they are easy to get to if out in the open but getting to them is an issue if they are behind walls or if they get erected at gates too easily and then are very hard to remove but for very little effort and less skill devastate players going head top head.

I don't think it encourages returning or new players to be 1-shotted by an opponent they can't see and can't reach. And, if the player is well heeled and prepared to abandon his siege engine all he has to do is hit Esc and he's free to run or defend himself.

It's the damage they do that is out of whack. Very few of us can hit for that kind of damage and you don't need any skill top do it. I suppose I just don't get a designer adding such a devastating element to the game that needs no skill. Just one more thing that seems out of kilter with the PvP these days.

Curragraigue · April 2015

It was added to break up zerg groups that kept clustering together. The Romans were using balista for open field warfare and the swing and fire rate seem pretty slow to me already. It does do a lot of damage but that is the intention. People will get used to it soon enough.

BoloBoffin · April 2015

TequilaFire wrote: »

Siege operators are sitting ducks and easy to flank if not protected by their team.

True this. Sneak around and take those folks out.

daswahnsinn · April 2015

Well as someone said this did cut the zerging down by a lot. This has been positive and needed. The negative side is that I've seen 12 players groups wiped out in mere seconds do to 5 fire ballistas. I think the damage should be dropped by 25%, keep them hard hitting but the 24+K dmg is over kill.

Erock25 · April 2015

I like it but I could understand if they increased the deployment times a bit.

Egonieser · April 2015

Siege engines are fine as they are, however i think the cost is too cheap.
Increasing AP/Gold cost should go up at least 2x to make people evaluate whether or not to deploy it or leave it, as losing it would cost dearly, thus reducing the constant spam on the battlefield. Instead, using it more tactical.

I've lost many due to the fact that i'm too tempted to use it on the open field with enemy group right in front of me, no biggie, just run to the nearest NPC and buy 5 more of the bloody things, not that it matters much. However, if it cost a lot more - i would evaluate whether or not i would use it in a situation i could easily lose it.

Lionxoft · April 2015

I love the siege change. If you're in the red then you should be dead.

daemonios · April 2015

Egonieser wrote: »

Siege engines are fine as they are, however i think the cost is too cheap.
Increasing AP/Gold cost should go up at least 2x to make people evaluate whether or not to deploy it or leave it, as losing it would cost dearly, thus reducing the constant spam on the battlefield. Instead, using it more tactical.

I've lost many due to the fact that i'm too tempted to use it on the open field with enemy group right in front of me, no biggie, just run to the nearest NPC and buy 5 more of the bloody things, not that it matters much. However, if it cost a lot more - i would evaluate whether or not i would use it in a situation i could easily lose it.

I actually find your idea very interesting! I think it's great that sieges now do big damage, but they shouldn't really be spammable.

RoyJade · April 2015

I like Egonieser's idea too.

I think it's should be good too if siege lose their life twice faster when they aren't deployed near a keep. Like this, only siege engine used for…siege will be really useful and durable.

And one reason I like siege actually : low level players can play a little more now, when they were totally useless against a v14 before.