Elsterchen wrote: »Elsterchen wrote: »Are we really discussion "stealing" sieges?
Imo, 2 sieges siege faster then one... so do 2 people using these sieges. After all the darn things are put up for breaking down some enemy structure as fast as possible, right? And if you already think you need to put your siege on my sieges spot, resulting an ineffective siege to start with, be happy and thankfull I use my time to help our fraction win, despite your selfishness and lack of strategic thinking.
I am not even going to start about the argument of "costs" -> the darn things pile up in the inventory and jam otherwise usefull banking space. I always have to hand some of them over to guildies to make some room once in a while, especially since the best ones are for free from dolmens the "cost"-argument is less then valid, imo.
3 people running 3 siege will always be less efficient that 1 person running 3 siege between cooldowns. And the counter-argument to your cost argument is that players shouldn't need to steal siege if they can just buy it themselves.
Please elaborate on bolded part (still do not believe you manage to run between 3 sieges and operate them solemnly during cooldown of ONE siege!). And yes effective means not only just that, but with your claim of 3 people beeing less effective when using one siege each at cooldown. I really like to know how you (singlehandedly) can operate (3) sieges faster then cooldown dictates!
As said, "costs" are no argument - after all one is thrown at with sieges at no cost. However, spots to put down sieges, are limited, if you block 2 spots in which i could use to put up a siege don't whine if I use whats already there!
disintegr8 wrote: »I've actually had someone who chose to use two of my ballistas after I died rather than resurrect me.
Elsterchen wrote: »Are we really discussion "stealing" sieges?
Imo, 2 sieges siege faster then one... so do 2 people using these sieges. After all the darn things are put up for breaking down some enemy structure as fast as possible, right? And if you already think you need to put your siege on my sieges spot, resulting an ineffective siege to start with, be happy and thankfull I use my time to help our fraction win, despite your selfishness and lack of strategic thinking.
I am not even going to start about the argument of "costs" -> the darn things pile up in the inventory and jam otherwise usefull banking space. I always have to hand some of them over to guildies to make some room once in a while, especially since the best ones are for free from dolmens the "cost"-argument is less then valid, imo.
lol is there ANYTHING PVPers won't complain about?
Sieges? Really? Who cares?
Go to your guild banks and get a few of the 6646094206026 of them in there!Elsterchen wrote: »Are we really discussion "stealing" sieges?
Imo, 2 sieges siege faster then one... so do 2 people using these sieges. After all the darn things are put up for breaking down some enemy structure as fast as possible, right? And if you already think you need to put your siege on my sieges spot, resulting an ineffective siege to start with, be happy and thankfull I use my time to help our fraction win, despite your selfishness and lack of strategic thinking.
I am not even going to start about the argument of "costs" -> the darn things pile up in the inventory and jam otherwise usefull banking space. I always have to hand some of them over to guildies to make some room once in a while, especially since the best ones are for free from dolmens the "cost"-argument is less then valid, imo.
Except for I can run 3 siege alone - I 100% agree with the lameness of whining if someone used YOUR siege *eyeroll* OF COURSE anyone can use any of my siege.
Greedyguts PVPers.
lol is there ANYTHING PVPers won't complain about?
Sieges? Really? Who cares?
Go to your guild banks and get a few of the 6646094206026 of them in there!Elsterchen wrote: »Are we really discussion "stealing" sieges?
Imo, 2 sieges siege faster then one... so do 2 people using these sieges. After all the darn things are put up for breaking down some enemy structure as fast as possible, right? And if you already think you need to put your siege on my sieges spot, resulting an ineffective siege to start with, be happy and thankfull I use my time to help our fraction win, despite your selfishness and lack of strategic thinking.
I am not even going to start about the argument of "costs" -> the darn things pile up in the inventory and jam otherwise usefull banking space. I always have to hand some of them over to guildies to make some room once in a while, especially since the best ones are for free from dolmens the "cost"-argument is less then valid, imo.
Except for I can run 3 siege alone - I 100% agree with the lameness of whining if someone used YOUR siege *eyeroll* OF COURSE anyone can use any of my siege.
Greedyguts PVPers.
PvErs...missing the point. As usual.
Elsterchen wrote: »Are we really discussion "stealing" sieges?
Imo, 2 sieges siege faster then one... so do 2 people using these sieges. After all the darn things are put up for breaking down some enemy structure as fast as possible, right? And if you already think you need to put your siege on my sieges spot, resulting an ineffective siege to start with, be happy and thankfull I use my time to help our fraction win, despite your selfishness and lack of strategic thinking.
I am not even going to start about the argument of "costs" -> the darn things pile up in the inventory and jam otherwise usefull banking space. I always have to hand some of them over to guildies to make some room once in a while, especially since the best ones are for free from dolmens the "cost"-argument is less then valid, imo.
Elsterchen wrote: »Elsterchen wrote: »Are we really discussion "stealing" sieges?
Imo, 2 sieges siege faster then one... so do 2 people using these sieges. After all the darn things are put up for breaking down some enemy structure as fast as possible, right? And if you already think you need to put your siege on my sieges spot, resulting an ineffective siege to start with, be happy and thankfull I use my time to help our fraction win, despite your selfishness and lack of strategic thinking.
I am not even going to start about the argument of "costs" -> the darn things pile up in the inventory and jam otherwise usefull banking space. I always have to hand some of them over to guildies to make some room once in a while, especially since the best ones are for free from dolmens the "cost"-argument is less then valid, imo.
3 people running 3 siege will always be less efficient that 1 person running 3 siege between cooldowns. And the counter-argument to your cost argument is that players shouldn't need to steal siege if they can just buy it themselves.
Please elaborate on bolded part (still do not believe you manage to run between 3 sieges and operate them solemnly during cooldown of ONE siege!). And yes effective means not only just that, but with your claim of 3 people beeing less effective when using one siege each at cooldown. I really like to know how you (singlehandedly) can operate (3) sieges faster then cooldown dictates!
As said, "costs" are no argument - after all one is thrown at with sieges at no cost. However, spots to put down sieges, are limited, if you block 2 spots in which i could use to put up a siege don't whine if I use whats already there!
Exactly that. You can run 3 siege easily. Fire one, move to the second and fire, move to the third and fire. By the time you get back to the 1st its cooldown is over. Repeat.
You can also set 4 up in a diamond and run 4 in the time it takes 1 to re-load.
Elsterchen wrote: »Elsterchen wrote: »Elsterchen wrote: »Are we really discussion "stealing" sieges?
Imo, 2 sieges siege faster then one... so do 2 people using these sieges. After all the darn things are put up for breaking down some enemy structure as fast as possible, right? And if you already think you need to put your siege on my sieges spot, resulting an ineffective siege to start with, be happy and thankfull I use my time to help our fraction win, despite your selfishness and lack of strategic thinking.
I am not even going to start about the argument of "costs" -> the darn things pile up in the inventory and jam otherwise usefull banking space. I always have to hand some of them over to guildies to make some room once in a while, especially since the best ones are for free from dolmens the "cost"-argument is less then valid, imo.
3 people running 3 siege will always be less efficient that 1 person running 3 siege between cooldowns. And the counter-argument to your cost argument is that players shouldn't need to steal siege if they can just buy it themselves.
Please elaborate on bolded part (still do not believe you manage to run between 3 sieges and operate them solemnly during cooldown of ONE siege!). And yes effective means not only just that, but with your claim of 3 people beeing less effective when using one siege each at cooldown. I really like to know how you (singlehandedly) can operate (3) sieges faster then cooldown dictates!
As said, "costs" are no argument - after all one is thrown at with sieges at no cost. However, spots to put down sieges, are limited, if you block 2 spots in which i could use to put up a siege don't whine if I use whats already there!
Exactly that. You can run 3 siege easily. Fire one, move to the second and fire, move to the third and fire. By the time you get back to the 1st its cooldown is over. Repeat.
You can also set 4 up in a diamond and run 4 in the time it takes 1 to re-load.
So, after all you are not more effective running 3 sieges alone. And I beg to differ that you can use all 3 within 1 cooldown time. People used to say putting up more sieges is more effective, because the sieges have been expensive in the beginning and having 2 sieges instead of only one IS more effective. However these early days are long gone. sieges are not expensive and usually there are enough ppl to operate them, too. Just non-brainer-babbling remained... building a philosophy on it is even more stupid imo.
Elsterchen wrote: »Elsterchen wrote: »Elsterchen wrote: »Are we really discussion "stealing" sieges?
Imo, 2 sieges siege faster then one... so do 2 people using these sieges. After all the darn things are put up for breaking down some enemy structure as fast as possible, right? And if you already think you need to put your siege on my sieges spot, resulting an ineffective siege to start with, be happy and thankfull I use my time to help our fraction win, despite your selfishness and lack of strategic thinking.
I am not even going to start about the argument of "costs" -> the darn things pile up in the inventory and jam otherwise usefull banking space. I always have to hand some of them over to guildies to make some room once in a while, especially since the best ones are for free from dolmens the "cost"-argument is less then valid, imo.
3 people running 3 siege will always be less efficient that 1 person running 3 siege between cooldowns. And the counter-argument to your cost argument is that players shouldn't need to steal siege if they can just buy it themselves.
Please elaborate on bolded part (still do not believe you manage to run between 3 sieges and operate them solemnly during cooldown of ONE siege!). And yes effective means not only just that, but with your claim of 3 people beeing less effective when using one siege each at cooldown. I really like to know how you (singlehandedly) can operate (3) sieges faster then cooldown dictates!
As said, "costs" are no argument - after all one is thrown at with sieges at no cost. However, spots to put down sieges, are limited, if you block 2 spots in which i could use to put up a siege don't whine if I use whats already there!
Exactly that. You can run 3 siege easily. Fire one, move to the second and fire, move to the third and fire. By the time you get back to the 1st its cooldown is over. Repeat.
You can also set 4 up in a diamond and run 4 in the time it takes 1 to re-load.
So, after all you are not more effective running 3 sieges alone. And I beg to differ that you can use all 3 within 1 cooldown time. People used to say putting up more sieges is more effective, because the sieges have been expensive in the beginning and having 2 sieges instead of only one IS more effective. However these early days are long gone. sieges are not expensive and usually there are enough ppl to operate them, too. Just non-brainer-babbling remained... building a philosophy on it is even more stupid imo.
Even I can do that. Three trebs in a triangle formation. You can go with two trebs and a ballista, but three trebs is perfect to get you back to the first just as it's ready to fire again.
I was pretty excited the first time I managed it actually. It's the little things.
Vilestride wrote: »But turning them around has been the best troll since launch
Serjustin19 wrote: »Stealing sieges vs mass enemy army below. I would pick the latter, I have a right to "borrow" your oils. In honestly wouldn't matter. We be re-spawn say 5 minutes, no use saying I stole or siege.
While I benefit my right to "borrow" the oils to benefit the alliance I'm currently serving. Yes it's your sieges, your name not on it though. We all must share responsibility, no matter the situation. Includes "borrowed" oils.
Annoying. Get your own.
Elsterchen wrote: »Elsterchen wrote: »Elsterchen wrote: »Are we really discussion "stealing" sieges?
Imo, 2 sieges siege faster then one... so do 2 people using these sieges. After all the darn things are put up for breaking down some enemy structure as fast as possible, right? And if you already think you need to put your siege on my sieges spot, resulting an ineffective siege to start with, be happy and thankfull I use my time to help our fraction win, despite your selfishness and lack of strategic thinking.
I am not even going to start about the argument of "costs" -> the darn things pile up in the inventory and jam otherwise usefull banking space. I always have to hand some of them over to guildies to make some room once in a while, especially since the best ones are for free from dolmens the "cost"-argument is less then valid, imo.
3 people running 3 siege will always be less efficient that 1 person running 3 siege between cooldowns. And the counter-argument to your cost argument is that players shouldn't need to steal siege if they can just buy it themselves.
Please elaborate on bolded part (still do not believe you manage to run between 3 sieges and operate them solemnly during cooldown of ONE siege!). And yes effective means not only just that, but with your claim of 3 people beeing less effective when using one siege each at cooldown. I really like to know how you (singlehandedly) can operate (3) sieges faster then cooldown dictates!
As said, "costs" are no argument - after all one is thrown at with sieges at no cost. However, spots to put down sieges, are limited, if you block 2 spots in which i could use to put up a siege don't whine if I use whats already there!
Exactly that. You can run 3 siege easily. Fire one, move to the second and fire, move to the third and fire. By the time you get back to the 1st its cooldown is over. Repeat.
You can also set 4 up in a diamond and run 4 in the time it takes 1 to re-load.
So, after all you are not more effective running 3 sieges alone. And I beg to differ that you can use all 3 within 1 cooldown time. People used to say putting up more sieges is more effective, because the sieges have been expensive in the beginning and having 2 sieges instead of only one IS more effective. However these early days are long gone. sieges are not expensive and usually there are enough ppl to operate them, too. Just non-brainer-babbling remained... building a philosophy on it is even more stupid imo.
@Telel: 4 ppl on 4 sieges are more effective then 2 ppl on 4 sieges ... please read my argument first, then do some thinking and stop putting hillarious claims in my mouth pls.