Guild Wars 2

Let’s admit it: having 20 (or 50) people sitting on the side watching 3 people flinging rocks to a wall is NOT a lot of fun. At the same time, being under the focused fire of a few superior arrowcarts and cannons is definitely not fun as you’ll probably die in seconds.

WvW is a Player vs Player game mode, siege primary role should be to get rid of the enemy’s siege and hinder the enemy players, not kill them. It feels wrong to me that a tiny force is able to scatter a huge blob only because they have a lot of superior arrowcarts. They should not to kill the blob, but they should be able to slow down the attackers for long enough for reinforces to arrive.

If you want to defend an objective against a blob, Bring Your Own Blob!

These are the changes I would make to siege.

Changes to siege

• Reduced the maximum target limit across all siege, with the exception of ballistas and cannons
• Normalized the damage so that is not affected by player stats
• Siege disablers have a larger radius, but can only disable one siege at a time and only cost 5 supplies to use.
• Reworked Flame Rams, Catapults and Trebuchets so they can be used by multiple players, increasing the damage dealt.
• Streamlined the skills on Rams, Catapults and Trebuchets to make them easier to use and better reflect their role.
• A new mechanic has been introduced: the Power Bar is used by Flame Rams and additional players on Catapults and Trebuchets. A cursor moves around the bar and the player needs to activate the “special action” button at the right time to stop the cursor inside the highlighted area (by default 1% of the bar width) to get the best possible Power Score. This is used to calculate the damage increase for the hit.
• All projectile-based siege now has a limited amount of charges and can be refilled with supplies.
• A new “Siege Refill” mastery line has been introduced to make the refilling of various siege more efficient (uses less supplies, increases number of charges gained per supply, etc)
• Inactive, friendly siege located inside an objective that is not under attack will be automatically refilled by workers using spare supplies from the objective’s supply depot. Killing the workers prevents the automatic refill from happening.

Arrow carts

Arrow carts are the most used defensive siege. We want them to be useful to slow down enemies, but we don’t want for them to “automatically win” the fights for the defensive force, so we reduced the damage dealt but increased the amount and quality of conditions applied and we made changes to how they affect enemy siege.

• damage and conditions have been normalized and are not influenced by players’ stats
• as with other projectile-based siege, arrow carts now have a limited amount of charges (I’d say 50, but numbers as usual can be tweaked), then they need to be refilled spending 10 supplies.
• all arrow cart attacks disrupt the use of the “power bar” on the enemy siege, making the cursor movement erratic and by consequence, limiting the damage from the siege.
• damage to players decreased by 50% and to siege decreased by 80%
• decreased maximum number of targets for normal AC to 15 and for superior AC to 25
• Arrow cart mastery rank 1: increases range on all arrow cart skills by 300
• Arrow cart mastery rank 2 (new): arrow cart skills apply the chill effect on enemy siege, slowing down the recharge for siege skills (and/or increasing the cooldown period after using a skill)
• Arrow cart mastery rank 3 (new): arrow cart Fire skill applies 1s of slow to enemies and siege; stacks in duration up to 5 times
• Arrow cart mastery rank 4: increases radius on all arrow cart skills by 180
• Arrow cart mastery rank 5: new skill, Toxic Unveiling Volley, removes stealth and applies poison to targets

Ballistas

Ballistas have suffered from several limitations since the start of the game. The need for a clear line of sight, the slow projectiles and limited range makes them rarely useful to clear enemy siege and to counter enemy groups. The changes are intended to make the ballista a better tool overall.

• as with other projectile-based siege, ballistas now have a limited amount of charges (I’d say 20, but numbers as usual can be tweaked), then they need to be refilled spending 10 supplies.
• changed the AoE size for ballista bolts to 120, but there’s no limit to the number of targets a ballista projectile can pierce.
• the default bolt speed has been increased (now fast as Swift Bolt was before)
• reduced the damage to players by 50%
• increased range to 4000
• Fire Shattering Bolt has been changed into Fire Explosive Bolt that deals damage on a large area (radius 400) and inflicts burning. This skill has a target limit of 50, cooldown 20s and uses 3 charges. Deals the same damage as a cannon (untraited) attack and plus inflicts 3 stacks of burning for 3 seconds. This skill does massive amount of damage to siege all siege in the blast area.
• Fire Reinforced Shot cooldown has been decreased to 20s. This attack uses 2 charges.
• Ballista mastery rank 1: new skill, Spread Shot — Fires 5 projectiles in a cone pattern. Uses 5 charges.
• Ballista mastery rank 2: increases ballista damage by 25%
• Ballista mastery rank 3: increases ballista range by 500
• Ballista mastery rank 4: increases ballista bolt AoE size to 180
• Ballista mastery rank 5: all ballista shots pierce unlimited targets
• Ballista mastery rank 6 (new): the ballista now rotates 50% faster
• Ballista mastery rank 7 (new): Spread Shot now fires 7 projectiles and uses 7 charges.
• Ballista mastery rank 8 (new): players hit by the ballista are also pushed back a little (120 units).

Burning oil

The big pot of burning oil is – on paper – one of the best defensive sieges available: lots of damage where it hurts, directly above the gate. But in reality, it suffers the same problem as cannons, since it’s often destroyed before even being used. The oil area of attack is limited and sitting on it puts the operator in one of the worse spots possible when it comes to being slaughtered by an angry zerg.

• increased Burning Oil HP by 100%
• changed how the main attack, Pour Oil, works: it is now a fixed area, as wide as the gate and extending outward from the gate for 360 units in length, with a 10 seconds cooldown. This attack does enough damage to bring a normal flame ram to 50% HP in 6 seconds. Deals about 2000 damage to players and inflicts 3 stacks of burning for 3 seconds per tick.
• the skill Pour Tar works the same way, except the area is longer (480 units), so it can hit further away from the gate
• Burning oil mastery rank 1: increases Pour Oil and Pour Tar area by 25%
• Burning oil mastery rank 2 (new): increases Pour Oil damage to siege by 30% and to players by 15%
• Burning oil mastery rank 3 (modified): reduces the damage received by the oil pot and the player who is using it by 90%
• Burning oil mastery rank 4: Pour Oil also burns one supply from the targets affected
• Burning oil mastery rank 5 (modified): when the player is using the oil, a fiery dome that reflects projectiles surrounds both (always up, not a skill: the oil can still be damaged by ground-targeted AoE, siege, well aimed siege disablers, etc)

Cannons

Cannons are in a good spot at the moment, but they still suffer from being often destroyed even before being used and for being a “trap” for the players using them.

• as with other projectile-based siege, cannons now have a limited amount of charges (I’d say 50, but numbers as usual can be tweaked), then they need to be refilled spending 10 supplies.
• each cannon skill puts the cannon on cooldown for 8 seconds: use them wisely!
• increased the damage inflicted to siege by 125% to balance the increased cooldown, maintaining the same amount of DPS against siege
• fixed a bug that made the chill effect hit outside the displayed ring when traited
• Cannon mastery rank 1 (new): the player gains 3s of Protection every 3s and 3 stacks of Stability for 3s every 3s when using a cannon.
• Cannon mastery rank 2: increases damage on the normal cannon attack by 33%
• Cannon mastery rank 3: Grapeshot now inflicts 10 stacks of bleeding instead of 5
• Cannon mastery rank 4: increases the radius of all cannon skills
• Cannon mastery rank 5: the normal attacks remove 3 boons from all targets
• Cannon mastery rank 6 (new): the cannon rotates 50% faster
• Cannon mastery rank 7 (new): changes the pushback from the normal attack into a 300 unit launch

Catapults

Catapults are the staple of most attacks aimed at walls and are often used defensively, too, so we’re happy with them at the moment. We’ve made a few changes to accomodate the new multiple-user mechanics and swapped the defensive bubble mastery with something new, since with the introduction of the Shield Generator, the bubble has been made redundant.

• as with other projectile-based siege, catapults now have a limited amount of charges (I’d say 40, but numbers as usual can be tweaked), then they need to be refilled spending 10 supplies.
• the main attack is now ground-targeted and the “power bar” mechanic handles the amount of damage dealt, making the catapults easier to use – only the first player using the catapult can use the targeting circle.
• normal catapults can be used by up to 2 players, the damage will be increased by up to 10% per additional player (based on their Power Score)
• superior catapults can be used by up to 4 players with the same mechanic as the normal catapults.
• Catapult mastery rank 1: increases damage done to walls by 20%
• Catapult mastery rank 2: Gravel Shot now applies bleeding
• Catapult mastery rank 3: increases radius of all catapult skills
• Catapult mastery rank 4: increases catapult damage by 25%
• Catapult mastery rank 5: reduces the gravel and boulder cooldown by 20%
• Catapult mastery rank 6 (new): the catapult rotates 25% faster
• Catapult mastery rank 7 (new): new skill, Explosive Barrel, allows to shoot an explosive barrel that deals 100% more damage damage to walls, 200% more damage to siege and inflicts burning in a wide area (radius 600), but disables the catapult for 10 seconds.
• Catapult mastery rank 8 (new): the catapult rotates 25% faster (stacks with rank 6)

Flame Rams

Flame rams are the siege of choice for most attacks: cheap and reliable, they are vulnerable to most of the defensive siege, requiring a well coordinated group for a successful run at a well defended gate. Building on that foundation, with the implementation of multi-user siege, we wanted for rams to be the most affected by the changes, requiring more coordination for a greater reward in efficiency at damaging enemy gates.

• a new mechanic has been introduced: a cursor moves around a Power Bar and the player needs to activate the “special action” button at the right time to stop the cursor inside the highlighted area (by default 1% of the bar width) to get the best possible Power Score. This is used to calculate the damage increase for the hit.
• normal rams can be used by up to 3 players, the damage will be increased by up to 10% per additional player (based on their Power Score)
• superior rams can be used by up to 5 players with the same mechanic.
• if at maximum capacity (3 people for normal rams and 5 people for superior rams) all players get a perfect Power Score, the ram will initiate a Wrecking Attack, dealing 100% increased damage and launching away enemies that are behind the gate. This skill has a 20 seconds internal cooldown. Each player participating in the Wrecking Attack is rewarded a Proof of Heroics.
• all other flame ram skills have been removed, Iron Will/Iron Hide have been moved to shield generators
• Flame Ram Mastery Rank 1 (new): the player gains 3s of protection every 3s when is using a Flame Ram
• Flame Ram Mastery Rank 2 (new): automatically applies the Flame Blast burning and fear on every hit (it only applies if the “main” character using the ram has the mastery)
• Flame Ram Mastery Rank 3 (modified): the main attack can be used more often (20% cooldown reduction, it only applies if the “main” character using the ram has the mastery)
• Flame Ram Mastery Rank 4 (new): unlocks the ability to initiate “wrecking attacks” (it only applies if the “main” character using the ram has the mastery)
• Flame Ram Mastery Rank 5 (new): increases the area for a “perfect” power score to 3% of the full bar
• Flame Ram Mastery Rank 6 (new): increases the area for a “perfect” power score to 5% of the full bar

Golems

Golems are pretty balanced: they are expensive, both the blueprint and as supply cost, enough not to be overly used, very strong but with obvious vulnerabilities and require a well coordinated group – or no defenders – to work properly.

• as with other projectile-based siege, Omega Golems now have a limited amount of charges (I’d say a generous amount since they are already costly… 100? 150? numbers, as usual, can be tweaked), then they need to be refilled spending 10 supplies.

Mortars

Mortars are a strong defensive weapon, able to hit offensive siege even at longer distances, and their burn and CC can be very effective against players, too. We’ll update them to bring them in line with the changes made to other siege and revise the cooldowns a bit to keep things in check.

• as with other projectile-based siege, mortars now have a limited amount of charges (I’d say 30, but numbers as usual can be tweaked), then they need to be refilled spending 10 supplies
• Fire Exploding Shells and Fire Incendiary Shells are now two different skills and are ground targeted
• a new camera angle has been added to allow players to better target at long range
• when any skill is used, the mortar is put on a 10s cooldown (reduced to 8s with the mastery)
• Fire Exploding Shells range has been slighly reduced and the blast radius has been slighly increased. The target limit for this skill is now 25. The damage to siege has been increased by 20% to account for the increased cooldown. The skill uses 1 charge.
• Fire Incendiary Shells range has been reduced by 50%, but the skill now launches a barrage of 5 projectiles, each creating the familiar fire field around the targeted area. Uses 5 charges.
• Mortar Barrage now fires 7 projectiles, each dealing damage and CC to a maximum of 10 players. The damage to players has been reduced by 50% and the cooldown increased to 30s. This skill uses 7 charges.
• Mortar mastery rank 1: increase blast radius on all mortar skills
• Mortar mastery rank 2 (new): increase the range for a perfect Power Score to 3% of the full bar
• Mortar mastery rank 3 (modified): reduce the cooldown period after using a mortar skill to 8s
• Mortar mastery rank 4: increase damage on all mortar skills by 25%
• Mortar mastery rank 5: new skill, Mortar Barrage, launches a barrage of rounds that pushes back foes where they land
• Mortar mastery rank 6 (new): the mortar rotates 25% faster
• Mortar mastery rank 7 (new): Incendiary Shells fire fields now also inflict Cripple for 1 second
• Mortar mastery rank 8 (new): increases the range for a perfect Power Score to 5% of the full bar

Shield generators

Shield generators are a strong defensive option that perfectly embodies the “slow your opponents down without killing them” role we want for siege. It can be used to defend walls from catapults, for example, but also to split enemy groups so a smaller force can take on chunks of the enemy blob at a time. Since the introduction of the Shield Generator changed the roles for various siege, we removed the defensive bubble from catapults and we moved Iron Will from the Flame Ram to the Shield Generator to keep the focus of each siege on a specific role.

• as with other projectile-based siege, shield generators now have a limited amount of charges (I’d say 50, but numbers as usual can be tweaked), then they need to be refilled spending 10 supplies.
• Force Ball target limit reduced to 10 allies and 10 enemies for normal shield generators and 25 (allies and enemies) for superiors. Uses one charge.
• Force Wall uses 8 charges.
• Force Dome uses 5 charges.
• New skill, Iron Will, applies Iron Hide (50% damage reduction) to up to 50 allies in the selected area (radius untraited 450, traited 600) for 10 seconds. 50s cooldown. Uses 10 charges.
• Shield Generator mastery rank 1: Force Ball grants aegis to allies on impact
• Shield Generator mastery rank 2: Force Dome grants twice as much stability per pulse
• Shield Generator mastery rank 3: increases the radius for all shield generator skills
• Shield Generator mastery rank 4: increases the duration of Force Wall, Force Dome and Iron Hide and increases the average number of Force Ball bounces
• Shield Generator mastery rank 5: prevents damage from arrow cart fire to allies inside Force Dome

Trebuchets

Trebuchets are the ultimate long-range weapon for siegeing objectives that are too fortified and they are very good for cleaning up siege inside said objectives, too. Trebs have been used for defending gates from the inside: that wasn’t originally intended and one of the changes we plan to apply is to fix the damage going through the gates. We’re confident that the changes to cannons and oil should be enough to cover the defense of gates, so this won’t feel like a loss.
Trebs are also the most massive siege we have in game, and since they are very long range, most of the time when using them you end up with a few guys “working” and everyone else sitting there watching. As we said, we wanted to change that, so now normal trebs can be used by up to 5 players and superior trebs up to 10.

• as with other projectile-based siege, trebuchets now have a limited amount of charges (I’d say 60, but numbers as usual can be tweaked), then they need to be refilled spending 10 supplies.
• the skills are now ground-targeted and the “power bar” mechanic handles the amount of damage dealt, making the catapults easier to use. Only the first player using the catapult can use the targeting circle.
• a new camera angle has been added when using trebuchets to allow players to better target at long range.
• a new mechanic has been introduced: a cursor moves around a Power Bar and the player needs to activate the “special action” button at the right time to stop the cursor inside the highlighted area (by default 1% of the bar width) to get the best possible Power Score. This is used to calculate the damage increase for the hit.
• normal trebuchets can be used by up to 5 players, the damage will be increased by up to 10% per additional player (based on how accurate their Power Score)
• superior trebuchets can be used by up to 10 players with the same mechanic.
• when using the Fire Explosive Shot skill, if the trebuchet is fully manned (5 people for normal trebs and 10 people for superior trebs) and all players get a perfect Power Score, it will initiate a Wrecking Attack, dealing 100% increased damage in an area 50% wider than usual and launching away enemies in the area. This skill has a 30 seconds internal cooldown. Each player participating in the Wrecking Attack is rewarded a Proof of Heroics.
• using any skill puts the trebuchet on cooldown for 5 seconds
• Fire Explosive Shot, Fire Rotting Cow and Healing Oasis are now ground targeted skills.
• Fire Explosive Shot uses one charge.
• Fire Rotting Cow uses one charge.
• Healing Oasis uses 5 charges.
• Trebuchet mastery rank 1: increases the damage of trebuchet skills
• Trebuchet mastery rank 2: Rotting Cow now drains supply from enemy players
• Trebuchet mastery rank 3: increases the radius of trebuchet skills
• Trebuchet mastery rank 4: new skill, Healing Oasis, creates a water field that heals allies
• Trebuchet mastery rank 5: when Explosive Shot hits an enemy supply depot, it will now destroy 10 of the objective’s supplies. Wrecking attacks hitting an enemy supply depot will destroy 50 supplies.
• Trebuchet mastery rank 6 (new): the trebuchet rotates 25% faster
• Trebuchet mastery rank 7 (new): the pushback from Explosive Shot is now a 360 units launch effect

This post is part of a series I made for the 4th birthday of the game. You can find links to the other posts in the overview

Some iffy ideas here (even more damage on rams?!), some good ideas.

• Will all of this take more than 10 minutes of development time, though? This seems to be all they are willing to spend on WvW.

• I don’t think MO is going to risk changing WvW because he doesn’t get it.

On your point that

If you want to defend an objective against a blob, Bring Your Own Blob!

I would mention that a lot of the time the reason a large number of defenders man arrow carts is that they lack a “Fights Commander”. In this situation you are, in fact, fighting a blob in another guise – but they haven’t got the Commander to open-field it.

Only made it about a quarter of the way through the book you are writing before I got tired of seeing the same common theme in all your ideas which is basically “bring a blob”.

Your ideas seem better suited for eotm than they do for WvW.

Jim Hunter.6821:

Only made it about a quarter of the way through the book you are writing before I got tired of seeing the same common theme in all your ideas which is basically “bring a blob”.

Your ideas seem better suited for eotm than they do for WvW.

I don’t get your point: nobody defends in EOTM.
My idea is: siege counters siege and slows down the attackers. If you want to kill the attackers, you need people. If you don’t have people to defend, you lose the objective.

Svarty.8019:

Some iffy ideas here (even more damage on rams?!), some good ideas.

You’re right, rams already do a lot of damage, but as I mentioned, the numbers could always be tweaked, for example ANet could tone down the damage from a single-manned ram to account for the possible damage with more people manning it.

Svarty.8019:

• Will all of this take more than 10 minutes of development time, though? This seems to be all they are willing to spend on WvW.

I know. But I had to try.

Svarty.8019:

On your point that

If you want to defend an objective against a blob, Bring Your Own Blob!

I would mention that a lot of the time the reason a large number of defenders man arrow carts is that they lack a “Fights Commander”. In this situation you are, in fact, fighting a blob in another guise – but they haven’t got the Commander to open-field it.

I know, that is a different problem and should require a “meta” solution: at the moment everything is left in the hands of players (because player X knows commander Y that is currently in another borderland and can page him for help). It would be nice to have a mechanic for that in game. One of the suggestions I made previously was to make Team Chat readable across all maps, so it would be easier to call for help.

In the end, I believe that if you cannot fight an enemy, you should lose the objective. I know losing is not fun, but in the medium term if you keep losing you’ll hopefully end up against enemies you can face and that will be more fun for everyone

“If you want to defend an objective against a blob, Bring Your Own Blob!”

That would be interesting but, blob gameplay is awfull in this game, group who has more aoe spam capabilities wins.
To get siege down all it is needed is aoe walls, no more siege, nor players.
And if one blob atacks the castles and other apears to defend, atacker blob go search for something empty most of times, (recall EOTM gameplay?).

But the issue is, when one have a blob the other 2 servers dont have a blob, i would dare to say with my tin hat foil , that how pairings are ment to work, since population “control” on this design it is impossible to do, matches will be always large server vs 2 smaller ones, with diferent fight times.
Links of red will probably will always link smaller servers that it total will always be smaller than blue while blue will be smaller than green,i bet even server population limit on map isnt the same.

And, sorry for the bad english… :<

Menaka.5092:

Jim Hunter.6821:

Only made it about a quarter of the way through the book you are writing before I got tired of seeing the same common theme in all your ideas which is basically “bring a blob”.

Your ideas seem better suited for eotm than they do for WvW.

I don’t get your point: nobody defends in EOTM.
My idea is: siege counters siege and slows down the attackers. If you want to kill the attackers, you need people. If you don’t have people to defend, you lose the objective.

And that’s why your suggestions sound like they should be in eotm. Making blobbing even more rewarding than it already is doesn’t help WvW.

Ac’s won’t stop a superior force unless they are stupid or to lazy to commit. Making rams stronger by having multiple people man them makes small groups less effective.

If the only way to get things done is by blobbing harder you will only end up with more people quitting when there is no tag running, more bandwagoning to the bigger servers and more k-trains without resistance.

How would this improve WvW?

Blobing in wvw is cancer. Even more so with boonshare creating omniblobs that require 0 skill

Menaka.5092:

Let’s admit it: having 20 (or 50) people sitting on the side watching 3 people flinging rocks to a wall is NOT a lot of fun. At the same time, being under the focused fire of a few superior arrowcarts and cannons is definitely not fun as you’ll probably die in seconds.

WvW is a Player vs Player game mode, siege primary role should be to get rid of the enemy’s siege and hinder the enemy players, not kill them. It feels wrong to me that a tiny force is able to scatter a huge blob only because they have a lot of superior arrowcarts. They should not to kill the blob, but they should be able to slow down the attackers for long enough for reinforces to arrive.

If you want to defend an objective against a blob, Bring Your Own Blob!

These are the changes I would make to siege.

Changes to siege

• Reduced the maximum target limit across all siege, with the exception of ballistas and cannons
• Normalized the damage so that is not affected by player stats
• Siege disablers have a larger radius, but can only disable one siege at a time and only cost 5 supplies to use.
• Reworked Flame Rams, Catapults and Trebuchets so they can be used by multiple players, increasing the damage dealt.
• Streamlined the skills on Rams, Catapults and Trebuchets to make them easier to use and better reflect their role.
• A new mechanic has been introduced: the Power Bar is used by Flame Rams and additional players on Catapults and Trebuchets. A cursor moves around the bar and the player needs to activate the “special action” button at the right time to stop the cursor inside the highlighted area (by default 1% of the bar width) to get the best possible Power Score. This is used to calculate the damage increase for the hit.
• All projectile-based siege now has a limited amount of charges and can be refilled with supplies.
• A new “Siege Refill” mastery line has been introduced to make the refilling of various siege more efficient (uses less supplies, increases number of charges gained per supply, etc)
• Inactive, friendly siege located inside an objective that is not under attack will be automatically refilled by workers using spare supplies from the objective’s supply depot. Killing the workers prevents the automatic refill from happening.

“WvW is a Player vs Player game mode, siege primary role should be to get rid of the enemy’s siege and hinder the enemy players, not kill them”

No, wvw is a RvRvR war that includes weapons of war…

Spvp is designed for a more pure pvp experience without the extras.

My biggest problem with the current siege mechanics is how it effects the mentality of players basically encouraging people to sit on acs instead of engaging enemies, and relying on siege whenever they engage. Siege is supposed to be a tool, it is not supposed to replace players. It should not be made useless, nor should blobs be empowered.

The mechanics need to be overhauled and this is something I have called for many times, not to make blobbing or ktraining easier, but to promote better gameplay. There was a time in wvw, where we didnt have ac’s every 5 feet inside structures. The current siegecap is absolutely useless, we have all seen structures filled up the you know what with siege, honestly it is disgusting to look at. This needs to be changed and actually work properly so people cannot just mindlessly throw down and build siege all over the place. Same with groups being able to throw down 5 rams/catas in one place and melt gates/walls.

Siege like ac’s need to have a defensive emphasis, so increase its damage against other siege like rams and catapults, especially now that they have had their hp’s increased. And lower its damage against players to discourage to much use in fights, seeing people throw down ac’s in fights is pathetic, same as with those that run into structures to just sit on ac’s and avoid fighting.

WvW needs to encourage players fighting each other, that is the main selling point MASSIVE FIGHTS, siege should not be there to replace players, it should be there to be used as a tool. Adjusting the siegecap to be actually useful, the damage against players and other siege/structures would go a long way towards promoting better gameplay.

X T D.6458:

My biggest problem with the current siege mechanics is how it effects the mentality of players basically encouraging people to sit on acs instead of engaging enemies, and relying on siege whenever they engage. Siege is supposed to be a tool, it is not supposed to replace players. It should not be made useless, nor should blobs be empowered.

The mechanics need to be overhauled and this is something I have called for many times, not to make blobbing or ktraining easier, but to promote better gameplay. There was a time in wvw, where we didnt have ac’s every 5 feet inside structures. The current siegecap is absolutely useless, we have all seen structures filled up the you know what with siege, honestly it is disgusting to look at. This needs to be changed and actually work properly so people cannot just mindlessly throw down and build siege all over the place. Same with groups being able to throw down 5 rams/catas in one place and melt gates/walls.

Siege like ac’s need to have a defensive emphasis, so increase its damage against other siege like rams and catapults, especially now that they have had their hp’s increased. And lower its damage against players to discourage to much use in fights, seeing people throw down ac’s in fights is pathetic, same as with those that run into structures to just sit on ac’s and avoid fighting.

WvW needs to encourage players fighting each other, that is the main selling point MASSIVE FIGHTS, siege should not be there to replace players, it should be there to be used as a tool. Adjusting the siegecap to be actually useful, the damage against players and other siege/structures would go a long way towards promoting better gameplay.

Agreed.
I think lowering the siege cap all around would be healthier for the game.
There shouldn’t be 20+ people sitting on ac’s instead of fighting. On the flip side there shouldn’t be massive blobs throwing down 5 proxy kittenhield generators and ac’s to flip something.

It would be interesting to do a trial with lower siege caps. Something like 2 catas/rams. It might encourage groups to split up and attack multiple objectives (or split the group and attack a structure from multiple sides) instead of blobbing so hard. If nothing else it slows down the massive PvD blobs that attempt to ninja things with 40+ people and WP whenever they meet resistance.

Jim Hunter.6821:

It would be interesting to do a trial with lower siege caps.

Would it be interesting? Or would it be like when the only siege people knew about was vanilla and nobody had masteries?

@OP, I understand you have this vision and good intentions but there are some major flaws with your direction. Your changes forcibly lock people into blobs, and if your server does not have a large group going there would be no value in any game play as you would not be able to do anything objective wise other than camps on the entire map.

Take AC’s for example. They are needed for a number of reasons:

a) used to destroy other siege.
b) used to suppress groups.
c) the only mechanic that can safely allow you to fire from a height advantage.
d) used to fight outnumbered fights.

While your solution does help with a) and b) it completely removes c) and d) from the game play.

Currently until they fix walls so that you can’t fire further uphill then downhill, arrow carts are the only way to attack downwards without getting absolutely shrek’d in a half a second. The damage is on par on a normal ac with that of a normal ranged aoe that any class could put out but can’t because of the amount of uphill aoe cleave there is that shouldn’t be possible.

Currently ac’s are the only way you can get value out of a fight vs larger groups. Some servers just have higher populations. Combating them with your own blob isnt always possible. Sometimes you just have 20 people, and they have 40. On arrow carts that group of 20 can currently fight tooth and nail, vs 40 for a good while, but eventually they’ll run out of resources. That’s where I think this is balanced out. The larger group can spread out snip its supply line and starve the structure. That’s interesting game play and mechanics at work. It also forces smaller encounters which are healthier for the server and the experience.

What your changes would in contrast do would rip the option of defending for the 20 or so people on that structure. Give them the option to delay the opponent, and then hopelessly watch as the other group just steamrolls the objective. That isn’t interesting. That makes me just want to avoid defending and ktrain their objectives in similar fashion.

For something like ac’s, I’d like to see them do less damage at base, have a much larger radius, and do additional damage based on how many targets are inside with no target limits. Limit to 1 every 2400 units. That would force people to spread out. Then I could actually make picks and see value in some fights.

I could go on about each different siege item and how you’ve done similar things. What we need is siege that forces people to spread out, so that people could engage in small individual battles. Which would add up and decide the outcome of a structure. Your directions the opposite, it forces people into small clumps and removes any kind of counter play. So for me OP idea is a no.

The structures are filled with ACs, trebs and catapults because weapons like hot oil, cannons or mortars on outer walls are most of the time useless. You cannot use them under attack without dying. They have a CD after destruction. Inner cannons are only useful for shooting at doors to destroy weapons behind them. A would kill each architect of fortresses who is presenting such useless designs

The whole siege system needs an overhaul and then we can remove AC & Co from structures. Sieges were the main selling point for me. I am still missing well planned sieges that take a while to succeed.

Svarty.8019:

Jim Hunter.6821:

It would be interesting to do a trial with lower siege caps.

Would it be interesting? Or would it be like when the only siege people knew about was vanilla and nobody had masteries?

So…… pre power creep? Back when the game was in a much healthier state?

YOU DON’t always have a blob to go against another blob, so sometimes siege can help. I wouldn’t change the defensive siege aspects. When a blob comes it still is hard to stop them even with siege. You have to move quick and do certain things very quickly and on point. Like if they start cataing your wall with a crap ton of guild catas and have necros, eles, rangers, dragonhunters who can hit you when you are on the wall or pull you or destroy your counter sup ac and you then that already blows so lessening in anyway the defensive siege and that hurt defenders and their purpose.

Menaka.5092:

Let’s admit it: having 20 (or 50) people sitting on the side watching 3 people flinging rocks to a wall is NOT a lot of fun. At the same time, being under the focused fire of a few superior arrowcarts and cannons is definitely not fun as you’ll probably die in seconds.

WvW is a Player vs Player game mode, siege primary role should be to get rid of the enemy’s siege and hinder the enemy players, not kill them. It feels wrong to me that a tiny force is able to scatter a huge blob only because they have a lot of superior arrowcarts. They should not to kill the blob, but they should be able to slow down the attackers for long enough for reinforces to arrive.

If you want to defend an objective against a blob, Bring Your Own Blob!

These are the changes I would make to siege.

Changes to siege

• Reduced the maximum target limit across all siege, with the exception of ballistas and cannons
• Normalized the damage so that is not affected by player stats
• Siege disablers have a larger radius, but can only disable one siege at a time and only cost 5 supplies to use.
• Reworked Flame Rams, Catapults and Trebuchets so they can be used by multiple players, increasing the damage dealt.
• Streamlined the skills on Rams, Catapults and Trebuchets to make them easier to use and better reflect their role.
• A new mechanic has been introduced: the Power Bar is used by Flame Rams and additional players on Catapults and Trebuchets. A cursor moves around the bar and the player needs to activate the “special action” button at the right time to stop the cursor inside the highlighted area (by default 1% of the bar width) to get the best possible Power Score. This is used to calculate the damage increase for the hit.
• All projectile-based siege now has a limited amount of charges and can be refilled with supplies.
• A new “Siege Refill” mastery line has been introduced to make the refilling of various siege more efficient (uses less supplies, increases number of charges gained per supply, etc)
• Inactive, friendly siege located inside an objective that is not under attack will be automatically refilled by workers using spare supplies from the objective’s supply depot. Killing the workers prevents the automatic refill from happening.

You have some interesting ideas, but I don’t agree with a lot of them. And the following statement is why

Menaka.5092:

WvW is a Player vs Player game mode, siege primary role should be to get rid of the enemy’s siege and hinder the enemy players, not kill them

WvW is not a PvP game mode. Its a realm versus realm mode, which comes with some elements of PvP (fighting other players), some elements of PvE (fighting guards etc) and some unique elements (siege and gates/walls). If you want a PvP experience you need to go to PvP. The mentality that WvW is a PvP game mode is incorrect and people should stop spreading it around. Once people get over that preconceived notion they will find that WvW is more enjoyable because they aren’t trying to bend it to their will instead of enjoying the mode like it was designed. Furthermore if siege should only be used to get rid of other siege that begs the question of why have siege in the first place?

As to your suggestions, like I mentioned I don’t agree with most of them. What they do is encourage blob wars (something that you mention several times in this thread as being better than using siege), which is not the playstyle that everyone likes, and hurt newer WvW players by locking current functionality behind higher grade mastery traits.

Yes siege wars is a problem (but so is blob wars FYI), the game mode needs to be more balanced on teh siege side and I appreciate that you are trying to get it there. However I don’t agree with a lot of your ideas.

1 – Siege should be 1 person per siege, no more.

2 – Defensive siege needs an overhaul, but that overhaul should focus on defending in general. Ideally people using defensive siege should only be able to be hurt by offensive siege from the attacking force (so no AOEs or projectiles hitting them). But it shouldn’t be a skill granted to the defensive siege user, rather just a rework of the walls. Otherwise attackers could just load up so many AOEs and marks around the siege that you die before you reach it, or the conditions you get kill you within seconds of taking over. If players were able to use defensive siege without having to worry about AOE spam then it would actually be in a pretty good place currently. Your rework however grant it far too large of a target area on the ground, as well as doesn’t address the actual problem of defending a walled objective.

3 – AC spam is real, and AC could use some nerfs. But unless you nerf them into the ground you are just dodging the issue of AC spam in that you can just build too many in too small of a space. Trying a specific AC limit per objective (which would obviously be balanced with some tweaks after feedback from the community) could reduce the amount of spam without gutting the AC and making it completely innefective in helping to stop a blob. I admire that you want to give them a more CC oriented goal towards blobs, but with resistance + boonshare spam and ridiculous condi clears that just won’t do anything to stop blobs, not even slow them down. AC have a place as a deadly deterrent, we just need to limit how many you can have per objective.

4 – Ram spam is real too sometimes. I like your idea of allowing more people to use a ram in order to cut down on the amount of rams used, but I don’t think it would work in the game. With 1 extra ram you could double your DPS against the gate. Under your proposal, 1 other person sharing the ram could at best increase the DPS by 10%. No one would do that. So give it the same treatment as AC, limit the number that can be at any 1 gate at a time (2 or 3, the limit could even increase with the level of fortifications I guess). This way blobs can’t mow down a gate in 30 seconds, and it could also encourage them to spread out and attack multiple gates at once using the 20 some odd ram blueprints that they usually drop.

Other than these 3 things, I would have to wait until they are implemented and re-evaluate how siege is doing. Your post offers changes to a million things regarding siege, and falls prey to the same thing that ANet frequently does when playing with the economy, it changes too many things at once. Not only does that make it near impossible to tell what actually had the desired effect, but it also means that the changes you make usually go too far and result in just as many problems as when you started (eg look at leather prices. ANet changed too many things at once and took it from cheaper than vendor price to one of the most expensive materials in the game right now. Which is not an improvement in a lot of people’s opinions).

Menaka.5092:

WvW is a Player vs Player game mode, siege primary role should be to get rid of the enemy’s siege and hinder the enemy players, not kill them. It feels wrong to me that a tiny force is able to scatter a huge blob only because they have a lot of superior arrowcarts. They should not to kill the blob, but they should be able to slow down the attackers for long enough for reinforces to arrive.

I have always agreed with this principle and its one of the failings of anet that they have made siege so prevalent in terms of damage. One of the biggest mistakes anet made was when they increased AC damage. I do think you shouldn’t have referred to having to bring a blob to defend though, its an easy hook for people to dismiss your ideas as they are doing

Jim Hunter.6821:

Only made it about a quarter of the way through the book you are writing before I got tired of seeing the same common theme in all your ideas which is basically “bring a blob”.

Your ideas seem better suited for eotm than they do for WvW.

Thats funny given his/her ideas revolve around player combat rather than siege conbat.

Aeolus.3615:

“If you want to defend an objective against a blob, Bring Your Own Blob!”

That would be interesting but, blob gameplay is awfull in this game, group who has more aoe spam capabilities wins.

I would argue that siege gameplay is far worse that blob vs blob.

Swagger.1459:

“WvW is a Player vs Player game mode, siege primary role should be to get rid of the enemy’s siege and hinder the enemy players, not kill them”

No, wvw is a RvRvR war that includes weapons of war…

S/he is not talking about getting rid of siege but putting it in its rightful place. ESO pretty much adheres to these principles and is better due to it.

Jim Hunter.6821:

Menaka.5092:

Jim Hunter.6821:

Only made it about a quarter of the way through the book you are writing before I got tired of seeing the same common theme in all your ideas which is basically “bring a blob”.

Your ideas seem better suited for eotm than they do for WvW.

I don’t get your point: nobody defends in EOTM.
My idea is: siege counters siege and slows down the attackers. If you want to kill the attackers, you need people. If you don’t have people to defend, you lose the objective.

And that’s why your suggestions sound like they should be in eotm. Making blobbing even more rewarding than it already is doesn’t help WvW.

Ac’s won’t stop a superior force unless they are stupid or to lazy to commit. Making rams stronger by having multiple people man them makes small groups less effective.

If the only way to get things done is by blobbing harder you will only end up with more people quitting when there is no tag running, more bandwagoning to the bigger servers and more k-trains without resistance.

How would this improve WvW?

You know what always leaves me scratching my head when people complain about AC’s?

Why can the players not devise a more constructive way to approach a defended objective?

“Can’t ram it, too many AC’s. Can’t cata it, too many AC’s.”

I’ve said this many times, the attacking force almost always has the advantage of resources. If something is well defended – whittle it down. You don’t need to crack a structure within 60seconds of attacking it unless there’s a massive enemy blob that you’re trying to outpace. In which case, you might want to plan your attacks more carefully.

There are a lot of players who love to sit in towers or keeps with AC’s and there are a lot of commanders who are very aggressive and will rush to anything they see that’s contested so that they can wipe what ever is attacking it. A lot of people try to brute force things, drop half a dozen rams/catapults and tank the AC’s. Others try a similar strategy but pull off when people are taking too much damage. Both things incredibly basic/one dimensional and a huge waste of time.

As the attacking force, you have resources. You can run to supply camps, you can choke their supplies, you can bait the offending zerg elsewhere. It takes time and strategy but why is that a bad thing? Why is everyone obsessed with nerfing siege and defences when all it’s going to do is further promote karma farming and brainlessness?

People seriously need to start looking at WvW as a strategy based format and not a race against time. Sure, there will be times when you’ll need to beat the clock but for the most part, it should be about trying to figure out how you can outsmart your opponents instead of how many rams you can throw. Why do players consider it “boring” when they can’t get inside a structure right away? Is it not fun having to use your head? I suppose that’s more of an opinion so it’s not really valid but my point is that reducing the effectiveness of defences is only going to make WvW even less strategic.

Some what off topic here but when I command in EOTM, I love it when I can’t just tear something open. When I have to think more carefully about how we’re going to approach something. That’s why 90% of the time when I tag up, I do it when we have less than 20 people on the map and Outnumbered buff. Because I know it’s going to require me to do things other than throwing rams and running circles around the map. I’ll have to consider what the enemy commander wants; do they want bags? Do they want to protect what’s theirs? Are they a newbie and just want XP? I’ll have to consider what both sides will be attacking so that we’re not caught with our pants down; Will red zerg be here when we attack this? Is blue zerg defending that? And if there’s defensive siege, I have to think of ways to counter it; Eg just this morning, blue side had prepared AC’s and cannons outside Forge wall and pushed us off when we tried to attack it with Siege Scorpians. I was happy about that because it meant I had to come up with a plan. I distracted the blue zerg by contesting an objective of theirs, I took our zerg to capture something else, we circled around and built ballistas to kill their siege then WP’d home and came back again. It takes longer but again, I don’t see why this is a problem. It should be fun to have to use your head. But apparently most players just want to remove the middle man entirely so they can slaughter each other all day or get XP with no resistance, both of which would get repetitive and boring very quickly.

So personally my vote is to leave defences just the way they are. I would even be in favor of buffing defences to further promote strategic play on the offensive side. It would need to be very precise buffs however or you would risk making defence so desirable, it would be all anyone would do. You get my point though I hope.

Also this isn’t directed specifically at you by the way, Jim. Just the topic at hand.

Menaka.5092:

If you want to defend an objective against a blob, Bring Your Own Blob!

No. Please No!

SpellOfIniquity.1780:

People seriously need to start looking at WvW as a strategy based format and not a race against time. Sure, there will be times when you’ll need to beat the clock but for the most part, it should be about trying to figure out how you can outsmart your opponents instead of how many rams you can throw. Why do players consider it “boring” when they can’t get inside a structure right away? Is it not fun having to use your head? I suppose that’s more of an opinion so it’s not really valid but my point is that reducing the effectiveness of defences is only going to make WvW even less strategic.

This is all well and good when there are multiple pins running but with the population issues the strategic choice becomes do I spend an hour trying to take this objective which is defended and lose other objectives elsewhere or do I try another objective which might not be so well defended.

morrolan.9608:

SpellOfIniquity.1780:

People seriously need to start looking at WvW as a strategy based format and not a race against time. Sure, there will be times when you’ll need to beat the clock but for the most part, it should be about trying to figure out how you can outsmart your opponents instead of how many rams you can throw. Why do players consider it “boring” when they can’t get inside a structure right away? Is it not fun having to use your head? I suppose that’s more of an opinion so it’s not really valid but my point is that reducing the effectiveness of defences is only going to make WvW even less strategic.

This is all well and good when there are multiple pins running but with the population issues the strategic choice becomes do I spend an hour trying to take this objective which is defended and lose other objectives elsewhere or do I try another objective which might not be so well defended.

So…. do you fight for something or PvD an empty structure?

Jim Hunter.6821:

Menaka.5092:

Jim Hunter.6821:

Only made it about a quarter of the way through the book you are writing before I got tired of seeing the same common theme in all your ideas which is basically “bring a blob”.

Your ideas seem better suited for eotm than they do for WvW.

I don’t get your point: nobody defends in EOTM.
My idea is: siege counters siege and slows down the attackers. If you want to kill the attackers, you need people. If you don’t have people to defend, you lose the objective.

And that’s why your suggestions sound like they should be in eotm. Making blobbing even more rewarding than it already is doesn’t help WvW.

how does reworking siege make blobbing more rewarding?

Jim Hunter.6821:

Making rams stronger by having multiple people man them makes small groups less effective.

you need supplies from 5 people (without mastery/+5 supplies upgrade) to build a superior ram, then those 5 people man it, how would a small group be punished by this?

Jim Hunter.6821:

If the only way to get things done is by blobbing harder you will only end up with more people quitting when there is no tag running, more bandwagoning to the bigger servers and more k-trains without resistance.

How would this improve WvW?

it wouldn’t and it’s definitely not what I would want for the game
I still don’t understand what brings you to think these changes would make blobbing even more rewarding

Menaka.5092:

Jim Hunter.6821:

Menaka.5092:

Jim Hunter.6821:

Only made it about a quarter of the way through the book you are writing before I got tired of seeing the same common theme in all your ideas which is basically “bring a blob”.

Your ideas seem better suited for eotm than they do for WvW.

I don’t get your point: nobody defends in EOTM.
My idea is: siege counters siege and slows down the attackers. If you want to kill the attackers, you need people. If you don’t have people to defend, you lose the objective.

And that’s why your suggestions sound like they should be in eotm. Making blobbing even more rewarding than it already is doesn’t help WvW.

how does reworking siege make blobbing more rewarding?

Jim Hunter.6821:

Making rams stronger by having multiple people man them makes small groups less effective.

you need supplies from 5 people (without mastery/+5 supplies upgrade) to build a superior ram, then those 5 people man it, how would a small group be punished by this?

Jim Hunter.6821:

If the only way to get things done is by blobbing harder you will only end up with more people quitting when there is no tag running, more bandwagoning to the bigger servers and more k-trains without resistance.

How would this improve WvW?

it wouldn’t and it’s definitely not what I would want for the game
I still don’t understand what brings you to think these changes would make blobbing even more rewarding

Your saying nerf defensive siege, nerf offensive siege when used by 1 person, buff offensive siege when used by multiple people……
Are you seriously asking how this doesn’t promote blobbing?

Jim Hunter.6821:

morrolan.9608:

SpellOfIniquity.1780:

People seriously need to start looking at WvW as a strategy based format and not a race against time. Sure, there will be times when you’ll need to beat the clock but for the most part, it should be about trying to figure out how you can outsmart your opponents instead of how many rams you can throw. Why do players consider it “boring” when they can’t get inside a structure right away? Is it not fun having to use your head? I suppose that’s more of an opinion so it’s not really valid but my point is that reducing the effectiveness of defences is only going to make WvW even less strategic.

This is all well and good when there are multiple pins running but with the population issues the strategic choice becomes do I spend an hour trying to take this objective which is defended and lose other objectives elsewhere or do I try another objective which might not be so well defended.

So…. do you fight for something or PvD an empty structure?

Siege wars aren’t fights. I’m talking about a situation where the defenders just turtle on siege and don’t come out and engage the attacking force directly.

morrolan.9608:

Jim Hunter.6821:

morrolan.9608:

SpellOfIniquity.1780:

People seriously need to start looking at WvW as a strategy based format and not a race against time. Sure, there will be times when you’ll need to beat the clock but for the most part, it should be about trying to figure out how you can outsmart your opponents instead of how many rams you can throw. Why do players consider it “boring” when they can’t get inside a structure right away? Is it not fun having to use your head? I suppose that’s more of an opinion so it’s not really valid but my point is that reducing the effectiveness of defences is only going to make WvW even less strategic.

This is all well and good when there are multiple pins running but with the population issues the strategic choice becomes do I spend an hour trying to take this objective which is defended and lose other objectives elsewhere or do I try another objective which might not be so well defended.

So…. do you fight for something or PvD an empty structure?

Siege wars aren’t fights. I’m talking about a situation where the defenders just turtle on siege and don’t come out and engage the attacking force directly.

Then you break in to force the fight…. unless you prefer fighting empty towers?

Jim Hunter.6821:

morrolan.9608:

Jim Hunter.6821:

morrolan.9608:

SpellOfIniquity.1780:

People seriously need to start looking at WvW as a strategy based format and not a race against time. Sure, there will be times when you’ll need to beat the clock but for the most part, it should be about trying to figure out how you can outsmart your opponents instead of how many rams you can throw. Why do players consider it “boring” when they can’t get inside a structure right away? Is it not fun having to use your head? I suppose that’s more of an opinion so it’s not really valid but my point is that reducing the effectiveness of defences is only going to make WvW even less strategic.

This is all well and good when there are multiple pins running but with the population issues the strategic choice becomes do I spend an hour trying to take this objective which is defended and lose other objectives elsewhere or do I try another objective which might not be so well defended.

So…. do you fight for something or PvD an empty structure?

Siege wars aren’t fights. I’m talking about a situation where the defenders just turtle on siege and don’t come out and engage the attacking force directly.

Then you break in to force the fight…. unless you prefer fighting empty towers?

Already answered, you’re pretty much trying to create a straw man.

morrolan.9608:

Jim Hunter.6821:

morrolan.9608:

Jim Hunter.6821:

morrolan.9608:

SpellOfIniquity.1780:

People seriously need to start looking at WvW as a strategy based format and not a race against time. Sure, there will be times when you’ll need to beat the clock but for the most part, it should be about trying to figure out how you can outsmart your opponents instead of how many rams you can throw. Why do players consider it “boring” when they can’t get inside a structure right away? Is it not fun having to use your head? I suppose that’s more of an opinion so it’s not really valid but my point is that reducing the effectiveness of defences is only going to make WvW even less strategic.

This is all well and good when there are multiple pins running but with the population issues the strategic choice becomes do I spend an hour trying to take this objective which is defended and lose other objectives elsewhere or do I try another objective which might not be so well defended.

So…. do you fight for something or PvD an empty structure?

Siege wars aren’t fights. I’m talking about a situation where the defenders just turtle on siege and don’t come out and engage the attacking force directly.

Then you break in to force the fight…. unless you prefer fighting empty towers?

Already answered, you’re pretty much trying to create a straw man.

Yeah your answer was you can’t be bothered to slow down your karma train

I concur with others. Most of the suggestions will favor a larger force over the smaller and would in turn encourage more blobbing. If a smaller force has no way to deal with the blob they will not bother playing which in turn will accelerate the decay of players on lower population servers.

There is a reason castles and keeps were built. They were so a smaller number of soldiers could hole up in them when faced with superior numbers and yes , if you study sieges from history a force many times smaller could delay or even thrwart one much larger than them in a battle.

That is what a siege should be. If anything it still too easy to flip an objective.

Suggesting a system where 1 guy is "forced’ to come out and fight 10 just to give th 10 a fight is rather asinine. if the larger group wants a fight they can send 9 of their guys away and maybe that one guy will want to fight the one that remains.

There were 5 of us trying to defend a keep against a blob of 50 just the other night. Why on earth should the 5 be “forced to come out and fight”? The 5 of us had no problems when backflipping with fighting equal or similar numbers but when the blob shows we are not just going to charge in to “give them a fight”.

Here is a tip. If you want fights and are battling a lower population server, do not roam around in a blob of 50 and you will get them.

I think only one thing needs to be done to fix siege.

1. Eliminate Superior Siege

Bam, everything overpowered about siege fixed in one stroke.