I was sitting in front of a wall. Some people came out and I murdered them.

They respawned, and decided to use fire ballistas to take me down.

I just sit there purging the DoT with Dark Cloak and healing with nothing else but Regeneration (unmorphed 'cause it was a lowbie alt).

They gave up after seeing they'd damage me for a crazy amount: 3% of my max health.

Does that answer your question?

Use meatbags.

Siege is extremely ineffective.

Manoekin wrote: »

Siege is fine. If I could buy one shot weapons for miniscule amounts of AP I don't know why I even need abilities on my bar at that point. Siege is used as support dps/debuff which is the proper place for it regarding Player vs. Player fights.

Ie, I run a lot in groups that might have to spread out or at least do something more than (continue to spam) purge/heal when a huge flaming ball drops in the middle of us.

Siege is not the answer. It actually benefits those with larger numbers over those will less. It should be left as it is.

How to balance siege a tip for @ZOS_GinaBruno or @ZOS_RichLambert up the power and cost.

Power: Siege should take you the edge of death one shotting is a bit much a level ten on a Trebuchet should not be able to solo wipe a whole group but the damage needs to be increased to something meaningful.

The effects of some siege like Meat bags and Catapults should not be purge-able. The healing debuff and Snare should least on a set timer. Leave something that can't be over come have some kind of treat that Purge spam can't make pointless. Lighting Ballistas and Ice Trebuchets should also be unremovable to force strategies outside of ball up and spam purge.

Ballistas and Trebuchets, Alliance and Fire should be for Wall and Doors and Anti siege the pay load should be too small and focused to kill moving targets but wall and other engines should be rocked by them. But like The burn of oils should be removable for players.

Cost: Raise the cost of siege it should be a weapon that everyone shouldn't have a bank full of. I'm talking five or six time the cost they are now level tens should not be able to walk in to Cyrodiil day one and buy siege.

Repairs: Make the Repair Kits something worth buying as it stands you buy them to be nice and repair others engines. As it stands the cost to just buy a new engine is the same as the cost to fully repair. Leave the cost the same for the Kits.

Now why do this too many groups just leave siege to flap the flags the very thing you need to take over a keep should have more value then f*uck it we can always get more. Siege should be something that you earn and need as it is it's a joke. A soldier on any Battle Field should fear Siege not get their armor a bit damaged and hit purge and walk away.

Siege doesn't benefit the zergs. If it went back to it's prior damage level and incorporated some non-purgeable elements, it would be useful against spammy zerg groups. Those groups rely on tight bunching and would be vulnerable. They don't use siege against players.

Heck most of the zerg groups barely siege walls these days. They are happy to run around keeps farming anyone that tries to engage them. And when they try and siege is the only point they are vulnerable (because they are no longer stacked with heals, purges and massive damage to anyone who gets close).

Small groups and solos, on the other hand, can use siege. Most semi skilled players can run multiple siege weapons. A group of 5 or so can lay down enough siege to come close to the siege limit. Now if only there was a reason to use siege.

RinaldoGandolphi wrote: »

Talcyndl wrote: »

Siege doesn't benefit the zergs. If it went back to it's prior damage level and incorporated some non-purgeable elements, it would be useful against spammy zerg groups. Those groups rely on tight bunching and would be vulnerable. They don't use siege against players.

Heck most of the zerg groups barely siege walls these days. They are happy to run around keeps farming anyone that tries to engage them. And when they try and siege is the only point they are vulnerable (because they are no longer stacked with heals, purges and massive damage to anyone who gets close).

Small groups and solos, on the other hand, can use siege. Most semi skilled players can run multiple siege weapons. A group of 5 or so can lay down enough siege to come close to the siege limit. Now if only there was a reason to use siege.

Yup

I have said my piece on this numerous time....Siege needs to be a heavy hitter...it needs to hit HARD, it needs to go back to 1.6 Damage levels with a few unpurgable elements(Meatbags and Oil Catapults should not be purgeable) Oil Cata's were instrumental in fighting larger groups back in the day, sadly thats no longer the case.

This would do a lot to help there server too as these large zerg groups would be killable.

Its a fallacy that someone is more skillful because they run a large group, bunch together, and use certain skills, its also equally a fallancy that someone is a noob because they could kill you with siege. These are both illogical positions to hold.

siege right now is useless, A Fire Ballista hits for like 5k, Wrecking Blow hits for 9k.....there is something really wrong with that....

Disagree. I run with 16-20, we're well organized. You boost siege damage, we're going to constantly designate 4 party members to setup, fire, then take down siege, and make our group even more powerful. Additionally, we'd change our tactics to have a spread stack (we did this when many of us WERE vamps and could be one shotted by fire trebs)

See how this works? Careful what you wish for. The constant desire to make single players more power against zergs (see prox det) is making the "zergs" (or, players who have learned to play that get called zergs) even more powerful.

reften wrote: »

RinaldoGandolphi wrote: »

Talcyndl wrote: »

Siege doesn't benefit the zergs. If it went back to it's prior damage level and incorporated some non-purgeable elements, it would be useful against spammy zerg groups. Those groups rely on tight bunching and would be vulnerable. They don't use siege against players.

Heck most of the zerg groups barely siege walls these days. They are happy to run around keeps farming anyone that tries to engage them. And when they try and siege is the only point they are vulnerable (because they are no longer stacked with heals, purges and massive damage to anyone who gets close).

Small groups and solos, on the other hand, can use siege. Most semi skilled players can run multiple siege weapons. A group of 5 or so can lay down enough siege to come close to the siege limit. Now if only there was a reason to use siege.

Yup

I have said my piece on this numerous time....Siege needs to be a heavy hitter...it needs to hit HARD, it needs to go back to 1.6 Damage levels with a few unpurgable elements(Meatbags and Oil Catapults should not be purgeable) Oil Cata's were instrumental in fighting larger groups back in the day, sadly thats no longer the case.

This would do a lot to help there server too as these large zerg groups would be killable.

Its a fallacy that someone is more skillful because they run a large group, bunch together, and use certain skills, its also equally a fallancy that someone is a noob because they could kill you with siege. These are both illogical positions to hold.

siege right now is useless, A Fire Ballista hits for like 5k, Wrecking Blow hits for 9k.....there is something really wrong with that....

Disagree. I run with 16-20, we're well organized. You boost siege damage, we're going to constantly designate 4 party members to setup, fire, then take down siege, and make our group even more powerful. Additionally, we'd change our tactics to have a spread stack (we did this when many of us WERE vamps and could be one shotted by fire trebs)

See how this works? Careful what you wish for. The constant desire to make single players more power against zergs (see prox det) is making the "zergs" (or, players who have learned to play that get called zergs) even more powerful.

your scenarios really only apply to open field combat or on a resource. Even then the winner of that battle is mostly dictated on who has the best position for siege placement. Increased siege damage for defending keeps benefits small groups the most.

rich.magab14a_ESO wrote: »

reften wrote: »

RinaldoGandolphi wrote: »

Talcyndl wrote: »

Siege doesn't benefit the zergs. If it went back to it's prior damage level and incorporated some non-purgeable elements, it would be useful against spammy zerg groups. Those groups rely on tight bunching and would be vulnerable. They don't use siege against players.

Heck most of the zerg groups barely siege walls these days. They are happy to run around keeps farming anyone that tries to engage them. And when they try and siege is the only point they are vulnerable (because they are no longer stacked with heals, purges and massive damage to anyone who gets close).

Small groups and solos, on the other hand, can use siege. Most semi skilled players can run multiple siege weapons. A group of 5 or so can lay down enough siege to come close to the siege limit. Now if only there was a reason to use siege.

Yup

I have said my piece on this numerous time....Siege needs to be a heavy hitter...it needs to hit HARD, it needs to go back to 1.6 Damage levels with a few unpurgable elements(Meatbags and Oil Catapults should not be purgeable) Oil Cata's were instrumental in fighting larger groups back in the day, sadly thats no longer the case.

This would do a lot to help there server too as these large zerg groups would be killable.

Its a fallacy that someone is more skillful because they run a large group, bunch together, and use certain skills, its also equally a fallancy that someone is a noob because they could kill you with siege. These are both illogical positions to hold.

siege right now is useless, A Fire Ballista hits for like 5k, Wrecking Blow hits for 9k.....there is something really wrong with that....

Disagree. I run with 16-20, we're well organized. You boost siege damage, we're going to constantly designate 4 party members to setup, fire, then take down siege, and make our group even more powerful. Additionally, we'd change our tactics to have a spread stack (we did this when many of us WERE vamps and could be one shotted by fire trebs)

See how this works? Careful what you wish for. The constant desire to make single players more power against zergs (see prox det) is making the "zergs" (or, players who have learned to play that get called zergs) even more powerful.

your scenarios really only apply to open field combat or on a resource. Even then the winner of that battle is mostly dictated on who has the best position for siege placement. Increased siege damage for defending keeps benefits small groups the most.

You'd be surprised at the number of siege we can get up in tight spaces...