It could use a SLIGHT buff but nothing more. Just because you want to one shot a blob with your scattershot doesn't mean you should be able to. It should do something to enemy players, but that something is not immediately wipe them by clicking left mouse button.

RinaldoGandolphi wrote: »

I have posted this before, but i'll post it here again

Ineffective Siege - Siege is mostly ineffective due to Purge, However I do NOT think Siege needs its damage increased by a blanket damage increase. I have changed position on that to some degree as i do not want to see a small group or a single person being 1 shot by siege, but what they need to do is this:

"Change siege where it gets a 5% increase in damage for each target hit with no cap on targets that can be hit and scaling damage up to 300%. Also, damage shielding effects such as Barrier and Hardened Ward no longer mitigate or absorb damage from siege artillery, and siege damage is no longer reduced by the Battle Spirit nerf, and Oil Catapault Snare is no longer Purgable"

This means:
if you hit 10 targets the siege does 50% more damage to everyone hit.
If you hit 20 targets it does 100% more damage to everyone hit.
If you hit 30 targets it does 150% more damage to everyone hit.
if you hit 40 targets its does 200% more damage to everyone hit.
if you hit 50 targets it does 250% more damage to everyone hit.
if you hit 60 targets it does 300% more damage to everyone hit.

What this does is it makes siege a viable defense against zerg blobs only if your not shooting atleast 20 people, its not going to 1 shot anyone...however if you fire that siege right into the middle of a big zerg blob of 25+ people, they are gonna get hosed......this is how you balance siege so you don't turn it into something the zerg can use even better then smaller groups.

This adds strategy to the game.

Say your in stealth and you see two 30+ man groups clash, you can drop siege from a side flank and shoot them and actually have an impact and kill them...this is NOT cheap, its smart play....only the 24+ man groups will be against this because they don't want anyone have any kind of counter play against them.

in PVE if you stand in stupid(red circles) you die, in PVP you stand in red circles it doesn't matter and this is the problem...stacked groups should not be immune to siege.

The Oil Catapault snare needs to be unpurgable like it was in 1.5 to allow viable defenses...snaring a raid as they cross a breech gives the oil pourers a chance of actually killing them or thinning their numbers enough to actually hold on..keeps and outposts are too easy to take in this game....at worst these changes allow outnumbered folks to buy time and allow reinforcements time to cross the map and get to the keep to defend which will result in much more fun fights all around for all sides involved.

I personally think you should be required to hold 2 resources on a non-home keep(Emp keep) in order to be able to flip the flags, and to take an opponents relic keep you should be required to hold all 3 resources to flip the flags and open the gates....

this means you can be in the inner, and someone flips a resource outside and you can't flip the flags in the keep until you take it back...

his helps make it more difficult to take a factions relic keeps....its a method to buy time and to drag out fights, spread people out and give us PVP....marshaling all your forces in 1 concentrated area should have drawbacks, those being losing a resource and not being able to flip a flag...being forced to leave a few guys behind to make sure none of the resources outside the keep get flipped while your trying to flip the flags at the keep will just gives us much better pvp game play overall.

regardless siege does need some tweaks to make it effective against large groups without hurting small group gameplay.

Well said, that damage scale increase would make sense also but I imagine it might be too much for the servers to handle, I don't know though. Definitely wouldn't mind if Oil was unpurgable.

Because all siege dmg, disease or flame or whatever is weak and easily purgeable. It definately needs a buff and would be a better weapon to battle zergblobs.

Cherryblossom wrote: »

Agreed, that it needs a buff, I actually don't even think about standing in stupid in stupid whilst in PVP as it means nothing

I know yeah, I stand in it on purpose sometimes to tease the enemy

JamilaRaj wrote: »

There should be some premium, more damaging siege weapons in the crown store for the rich who think standard damage is not enough!!!

.... No!

Artjuh90 wrote: »

CrowsDescend wrote: »

JamilaRaj wrote: »

There should be some premium, more damaging siege weapons in the crown store for the rich who think standard damage is not enough!!!

.... No!

LESS PAY2WIN!

'Pay 2 win' does indeed ruin games so badly...

Remember when offensive siege was a viable anti-zerg tool? Right now the damage from siege engines vs. players is laughable.

RAGUNAnoOne wrote: »

@CrowsDescend: http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/233510/upcoming-siege-changes-in-next-major-update#latest

Yes!!!!!! awesome news

CrowsDescend wrote: »

Typhoios wrote: »

I think siege should scale in damage to the number of people you hit. Hit 12 players at once, it should do massive damage. It will at least help disperse zergs.

That would be a lot more interesting, since it definitely would cause the big unorganized zergs to spread out, if they're communicating/listening to their leader and using common sense then they have no excuses if they die to the siege weapon damage.

I suppose the whole scaling damage thing though, may be complicated to pull off from a coding/development perspective, I have absolutely no idea though, just assuming.

I've probably seen a small group of 3 or 4 put down siege in an open field battle roughly 5 times. You know who I see put down siege every time though? Dumb useless zergs. They roll up to a resource (yes, a resource that most people can solo) and put down siege just to zerg a flag. When they see 4 or 5 decent players in open field. Siege. People who don't know how to successfully play their classes all run in a big group and they're the ones who use siege. You people have to understand that what you give to the "small group players" also benefits zergs but to an exponential extent. You want your one siege to do more damage to that zerg? Well, guess what. They have 5 firing back at your small group doing the same increased damage. Learn to PvP. Siege should damage walls not people. ZOS needs to stop catering to zergs or give the majority of their PvP population something different than the same thing since beta.

OmniDevil wrote: »

dlepi24 wrote: »

I've probably seen a small group of 3 or 4 put down siege in an open field battle roughly 5 times. You know who I see put down siege every time though? Dumb useless zergs. They roll up to a resource (yes, a resource that most people can solo) and put down siege just to zerg a flag. When they see 4 or 5 decent players in open field. Siege. People who don't know how to successfully play their classes all run in a big group and they're the ones who use siege. You people have to understand that what you give to the "small group players" also benefits zergs but to an exponential extent. You want your one siege to do more damage to that zerg? Well, guess what. They have 5 firing back at your small group doing the same increased damage. Learn to PvP. Siege should damage walls not people. ZOS needs to stop catering to zergs or give the majority of their PvP population something different than the same thing since beta.

In wars, Siege weapons are more likely to kill people at the same time of breaking down a wall. Armies win wars, not small dueling groups that are starting to run rampant. It's Alliance vs Alliance vs Alliance for a reason. The whole objective is to take over resources followed by keeps for your Alliance. Learn to PvP? No, we're doing it right. Can't handle being trampled by a stampeding army, joining the one of many zergs in your alliance. Problem solved. Don't like being in a zerg, that's your prerogative. Can't handle being killed by siege? Fight fire with fire. Stop standing in stupid and learn to use the terrain/objects to your advantage.

Pre-IC, even a zerg with a line of ballistas could still be taken out with decent counter-siege placement by a small group. But you don't want to use siege? Good, more AP for my group. Sorry, not sorry.

I hear the IC sewers don't have siege weapons. You can always go back there and "partner" up with the opposing alliance to grief the other. Not your style? Well, I guess you need to start learning the current and intended meta. Siege weapons hurt. Get used to it.

Took the words right out of my.... fingers (and mind) right there. ^_^

IKilled007 wrote: »

Also make siege friendly fire. It's ridiculous that only people from other factions in the blast area take damage.

Best idea ever. Let the Zerg hurt themselves as well.

Frankly I hate siege pvp and want arenas. The siege you're proposing will kill the small group plenty. 2-4 people taking a resources. Hit them with siege and let the 8 guards take the care of the rest. No actual PVP even needs to take place. Small groups will be REQUIRED to defend and defend only. If you want to put this in then take out all PVE questing and delves so the pop cap isn't effected by those not participating in the combat.

The flag flips FASTER the more people that are there. That seems pretty anti-small group. More AP for group kills.


NPC and uneven numbers create complains. Zerg this and Zerg that. This is usually when devs put in battlegrounds and Arenas to give an alternative to constantly shaping the game around 2 completely different player bases.

Well in ESO its at least 4 player bases.
1) PVE
2) Siege PVP
3) Controlled PVP (arenas)
4) Those that are happy as long as they have cool cosmetics and mini games they can collect.

Many of us are going to fit in to more then one of these, but all are going to have to be addressed if you want to maintain that player base. How ever I really only see one that will promote and grow the player base.

You really can't have 2015 ESO PVE Championships. Can't have ESO Siege Championships.
2015 ESO Housing Championships? I don't think so.

But you could have 2016 ESO PVP Arena Championships and it would grow your game. Yes other games do it, just like other games have cusmetics and housing. You really thing housing is going to peek the interest of those outside this game? PVP promotes it's self.

The rest of this is just maintaining. You're not selling your strongest asset. Combat system. Of course then you'll need to fix and balance the classes. Siege PVP only hides you're combat system and looks *** to prospective buyers. It might be fun but it doesn't really look fun ... 24 ppl casting one shadow is magic trick that already scared away a bunch of people from the game. Options could have prevented some of that and might even bring some back and others to the game for the first time.

You could start in small stages. Give us let the group finder glitch like it @Wrobel talked about on ESO Live when pair people of other factions with out changing them to friendly. Allow us to invite players of other factions with out them being friendly and give us one dungeon with out mobs. Give us this, fix your skills, and see what the community can do with that. If it works add leader boards, pretty menus, etc.

4v4v4 arena with 15 min timer, most AP gained wins, and reward being the same AP you get for taking a Keep you'll probably get some people checking it out.

dlepi24 wrote: »

Shardaxx wrote: »

dlepi24 wrote: »

Siege should damage walls not people.

That's so funny. A ballista should knock down a castle wall but leave a person unscathed? Brilliant!

Sorry, I forgot the audience I was talking to. It's a video game. Not real life.

Ye so it should not matter if siege weaponry was actually even remotely near their real life counterparts then ye?

You know, cos its a video game and all that