Guild Wars 2

Dear Anet,

I would love to play a game that didn’t have BS splash damage that went THROUGH walls. Mag has been guilty of abusing this method on lower level walls in overlook keep to breach inner walls ON THE TOP LEVEL.

Not only that, but siege out of the way of the additional BS range that ele has is killed by these wall humping catas ny simply turning them.

REDUCE THE RANGE ON SPLASH AoE AND REDUCE THE RANGE THAT ELE/CHRONO HAS TO PULL PEOPLE OFF SIEGE PUT IN PLACE TO DEFEND OBJECTIVES! This has made defending near to impossible with limited supply and manpower!

Don’t worry these are game ‘features’.

IT’S OKAY NOW! THE PROBLEM HAS PROPERLY BEEN LABELLED AS ‘GAME FEATURES’! CRISIS ABORTED! EVERYTHING IS GONNA BE OKAY!

Splash damage on catas is fine. Defending isn’t supposed to be possible with “limited manpower”. If limited manpower could defend against a larger zerg, siege bunkering would completely take over, which one wants and everyone knows is dull. A small group is supposed to be able to delay a larger group taking an objective. Not completely stop it.

Right now, it’s difficult to stage a meaningful defense whatsoever. If a siege consists solely of plopping down a cata somewhere an AC can’t target (as in right next to the wall) and laughing at the defenders, we end up with a ktrain meta where defending is all but ignored. Anet claims to want to make holding structures more important to scoring points. The yak changes were a great way to accomplish this…now make defending feel less like BS by giving both sides obstacles and options to overcome them.

Attackers should have to build siege somewhere that they can protect it and should have to make choices about whether to add defensive siege to their assault.

That means removing bubbles from catapults and replacing the 5 with some sort of offensive skill (preferably something with fire that can harm siege/defenders on walls but not walls themselves).

With that change, shield generators (which really shouldn’t be HoT only—maybe to drop, but not to use) have a clearly defined assault role.

Also, walls should have spikes or a moat or such around them to prevent enemies from being able to waltz right up to them. The wall/moat could also block splash damage so that catapults would have to actually hit the wall to damage it.

That shouldn’t change anything about taking an unguarded tower, but will require a bit of thinking to take something with a defender and prebuilt siege. It won’t be make structures impervious but it does make the siege more interactive.

Or… Wait for it…. Build a ballista.

A single defender can deter a group of 20, 3 or 4 defenders can stop a large group if they know what they’re doing.

Think outside of siege besides Arrow Carts. Ballistas, shield gens, counter catas and trebs are needed as well if you want a full defense.

Ballistas can’t hit a proxy cata. They’re very good for hitting things that are at mid-range, but they can’t hit a max range catapult either. If you’re able to take out enemy siege with a balli, it was not well placed imo.

That said, I love sending 2 men behind enemy lines to flash build a balli and take out siege that way. I also routinely use them on walls when enemies play into it.

Counter catas are decently useful (and I want to explore them more), but they also can’t hit proxy catas. Trebs are great long range defense but are largely nullified by cata bubbles. If the enemies have 2 catas, you need 2 trebs capable of hitting their position. Trebs, too, are useless against proxy kittenhield generators are, of course, wonderful for defense. However, given their CD, they have very limited use against proxy catas because their fire rate is comparatively high. They also have no potential to stop an assault—just delay it.

See a pattern? Proxy catas are fairly cancerous…but they’re just about always the right choice.

Ballistas can’t hit a proxy cata. They’re very good for hitting things that are at mid-range, but they can’t hit a max range catapult either. If you’re able to take out enemy siege with a balli, it was not well placed imo.

That said, I love sending 2 men behind enemy lines to flash build a balli and take out siege that way. I also routinely use them on walls when enemies play into it.

Counter catas are decently useful (and I want to explore them more), but they also can’t hit proxy catas. Trebs are great long range defense but are largely nullified by cata bubbles. If the enemies have 2 catas, you need 2 trebs capable of hitting their position. Trebs, too, are useless against proxy kittenhield generators are, of course, wonderful for defense. However, given their CD, they have very limited use against proxy catas because their fire rate is comparatively high. They also have no potential to stop an assault—just delay it.

See a pattern? Proxy catas are fairly cancerous…but they’re just about always the right choice.

Sviel.7493:

Counter catas are decently useful (and I want to explore them more), but they also can’t hit proxy catas. Trebs are great long range defense but are largely nullified by cata bubbles. If the enemies have 2 catas, you need 2 trebs capable of hitting their position. Trebs, too, are useless against proxy kittenhield generators are, of course, wonderful for defense. However, given their CD, they have very limited use against proxy catas because their fire rate is comparatively high. They also have no potential to stop an assault—just delay it.

Counter catas are completely useless now – shield generators have superior range and completely block the use of catas. They dont even need to do damage or use their big skills.

Personally though, I just think its a matter of supply cost balance and fire rates of normal/superior. Arrowcarts and shield generators should cost much more to build. All superior siege should cost more while normal cost less but is also weaker/faster than now. “Flash building” siege rather than a planned assault or defense should only be possible with the “cheap” and “weak but fast” siege. For example, how 1 player builds a superior AC to defend a paper wall against a couple of guys is ridiculous. Up the cost to 150 sups, at least allow us to bleed the keep.

In the time it takes to build a sup AC, a paper wall being hit by a cata will be down to ~60%. Given that the tower is, at best, secured, it will be hard-pressed to have the supply to both build the AC and repair the wall.

I don’t think it needs to be any easier to bleed supply, honestly. It only takes 2 passes to open the tower and that’s assuming someone was there to see the catapult being built in the first place.

Shield generators were mentioned, if an enemy group is throwing down multiple catas and a shield gen then they are putting well over 150 supply into attacking, meaning they have a decent sized group that are all building when the commander asks. Why should one single person in a keep be able to hold them off indefinitely? While realistically it may make sense, from a gameplay perspective that is simply giving too much power to 1 player and encourages more blobbing.

Time to build was also mentioned. Siege is meant to be placed beforehand, not as a reactionary measure. That’s why during tournaments people were paid to sit in towers and keeps building and refreshing siege. I’ll definitely agree that commitment like that is unreasonable with population levels at what they are.

The fact is that anet can’t balance defense around 2 or 3 people in an objective when potentially 40 people can be defending it.
I do agree with the OP about uncounter able siege, but that goes for defensive siege as well. I do think that defending is easier than people say, it just takes scouting and preparation which many people find tedious and boring.

If there as an enemy zerg build catas and shield gens and not kittened up bubble rotations it´s ok that there is no counterplay with siege for it. just grow some balls and push and cata .
always this mimim i cannot completly stop 30+ attackers as a solo player

defending is way to easy in this game it´s just pointsless, if we where in a season right now and a server had full forces defending it would bee nearly impossible to take any t3 atm with all this stupid new siege/guld buffs.

defending is easy just l2p

@clayton
If the enemy group is throwing down multiple (let’s say 2) catas and a shield gen, provided they are outside of ballista range or can pressure the wall where the ballista is, they’re going to take the keep. To kill that, even if catas didn’t have bubbles, you’d need at least 2 trebs. With cata bubbles, you need 4-5 trebs and your enemies to have spotty timing. Also, unless you want your wall to go down before you can pierce their bubble rotation, you need another 2 people on shield generators. That’s ~600 sup of defensive siege. Assuming it’s pre-built, we can expect there’s even more sup worth of siege that can’t hit the chosen assault location.

I don’t think anyone’s asking for one person to be able to defend against that. If we pretend catas didn’t have bubbles and reduce the needed defensive siege to ~300 sup (twice the attacker’s amount) then it actually seems reasonable.

Siege -should- be placed beforehand in a perfect world, but even then there’s not time to fully siege an objective (see: defensive siege costs) and one often has to improvise. If you’re the sole defender of a paper tower, which was the situation where build times were referenced, it’s even more likely that you’ll have to build it first.

It is useless to think in terms of people. Think in terms of supply. 40 people in an objective can’t build more siege than the objective has supply for. Attack one place to force them to build siege there, then move to another. Every catapult hit drains almost a yak’s worth of supply. It seems fitting that a populated objective that has been allowed to accumulate supply will take some actual sieging to flip—what’s the point of having walls if they don’t let the few put up a fight against the many?

I don’t think there’s a such a thing as uncounterable defensive siege. All of it is limited by range (assaulters can step back some) or fire rate (bubbles! bubbles galore). Unlike assaulters, the defense is also unable to replenish their supply. The only time things get silly is when a proxy catapult (the epitome of uncounterable siege) gets countered by the rare unhittable AC. If that happens, hope no one saw you make a fool of yourself and move to one of the many locations where it can’t happen.

I doubt there’s anyone in all of WvW that is as enthusiastic about scouting/defense than I am. I’ve written 2 essays on it and spend virtually all of my WvW time doing it. To date, I’ve stopped several assaults by groups of 20+ because they were foolish and didn’t know how to siege beyond throwing down rock hurlers and spamming 2. The 2 most recent instances of that were 2v20 and 2v25. I’m also that charming person that hits you with 2 supply traps (and possibly a cow) anytime you resupply or when you break outer and run to inner. I have a folder of screenshots of whispers from enemy commanders that got angry that I foiled their raid (death threats are my fav <3). That said, scouting and preparation go a long way. I still think that doing away with proxy catas and giving attackers more choices but less all-in-one solutions will make the siege more fun for both parties.

The outnumbered defense is characterized by being unable to replenish supply (unless the assaulters are nimwits). Every attack is characterized by how much supply the party has to throw down. I wish the game was more about using supply efficiently and draining it from your enemies unless you have vastly overwhelming numbers.

@Olli
Sadly, balls alone don’t let 5 men win against 25. In that situation I prefer to grab the nearest thief/mesmer and flash build a balli behind the enemies.

@sviel

I agree with a lot of your post but I think you may of misinterpreted what I was saying. If a group is throwing down 2 catas + shield gens then yes if only 2 or 3 people are defending the group should definitely take the keep. I believe that is a proper situation in the game mode.

I believe this may be where you and I disagree. Attacking an objective IMO is to draw an enemy to you, to draw them into a fight. I don’t think it should be siege v siege to determine the fate of a large objective. I can understand smaller towers but a t3 keeps fate shouldn’t be the hands of just a few defenders soley. Supply traps, siege disables, destroying siege with ACs, these are just methods to stall. You’re right the enemy can run back and get more supply. But you can run yaks into the keep. You can call a group from another BL to come help. This happened at the beginning of the game but isn’t seen too much now; however, I believe that is the defense style the wvw should follow. Sorry if I’m not too clear in my opinions.

All siege damage except AC should be remade, Cata, Treb, Balista should do damage were they hit not 100m around were they hit. And remove 80% off a player AOE.

Defense?……you mean the thing power staff elemenalist kill in 1.3 seconds with meteor shower and there is no use to defending anymore? You mean that move where 10 mesmers use pull and everyone aoe’s the hell outta a ledge so you can’t defend a tower? Yeah…….defense LOL

Once you know where to place catas, pretty much any tower is easy to take. Ballistas are line of sight so staff eles remove those with ease. ACs on walls are easily destroyed and those not on walls easily avoided.

Only Aldons in EBG is relatively safe as it has no natural barriers against keep counter trebs. Lang, Jerri, Vel are tough takes but there are places for catas that are extremely difficult to counter (back wall of Lang and Vel and under the bridge at Jerri). Every other tower is ridiculously easy to take by a larger force including those on the BLs.

@clayton
I’m with you, sort of. Siege vs. siege is all about stalling. If the defenders are outnumbered, they won’t be able to escort yaks into the objective so they will, eventually, fall. If the enemies are persistent, there will come a time when you have to call for back up—but sometimes they’ll go away after their initial attack is rebuffed.

If the assaulter is clever, they’ll do more supply damage faster or perhaps even breach the defense before supply is completely drained. That accelerates the ‘call for help’ phase.

Well if you want to remove catas dmg going though walls why should aoe attks from players go though walls? I do not think its in there programming to stop that and its not “that” bad to let ppl do these things.

Unless you are playing on minimum field of vew and minimum vertical camera, there is a very good AC spot on the back part of a set of stairs that can very easily see that cata spot. The problem there is not the splash damage. The problem is the shield generators they can build on offense and negate the AC damage that can reach that cata spot.

RodOfDeath.5247:

Defense?……you mean the thing power staff elemenalist kill in 1.3 seconds with meteor shower and there is no use to defending anymore? You mean that move where 10 mesmers use pull and everyone aoe’s the hell outta a ledge so you can’t defend a tower? Yeah…….defense LOL

What are you, only playing on EB? GG trying to do that on inner bay.

Dawdler.8521:

RodOfDeath.5247:

Defense?……you mean the thing power staff elemenalist kill in 1.3 seconds with meteor shower and there is no use to defending anymore? You mean that move where 10 mesmers use pull and everyone aoe’s the hell outta a ledge so you can’t defend a tower? Yeah…….defense LOL

What are you, only playing on EB? GG trying to do that on inner bay.

according to these forums nobody plays on the new bls.

briggah.7910:

Dawdler.8521:

RodOfDeath.5247:

Defense?……you mean the thing power staff elemenalist kill in 1.3 seconds with meteor shower and there is no use to defending anymore? You mean that move where 10 mesmers use pull and everyone aoe’s the hell outta a ledge so you can’t defend a tower? Yeah…….defense LOL

What are you, only playing on EB? GG trying to do that on inner bay.

according to these forums nobody plays on the new bls.

I think you meant to say, according to these forums nobody plays WvW.

Dawdler.8521:

briggah.7910:

Dawdler.8521:

RodOfDeath.5247:

Defense?……you mean the thing power staff elemenalist kill in 1.3 seconds with meteor shower and there is no use to defending anymore? You mean that move where 10 mesmers use pull and everyone aoe’s the hell outta a ledge so you can’t defend a tower? Yeah…….defense LOL

What are you, only playing on EB? GG trying to do that on inner bay.

according to these forums nobody plays on the new bls.

I think you meant to say, according to these forums nobody plays WvW.

ops yup that’s what i actually meant

claytonmorby.3751:

Or… Wait for it…. Build a ballista.

A single defender can deter a group of 20, 3 or 4 defenders can stop a large group if they know what they’re doing.

Think outside of siege besides Arrow Carts. Ballistas, shield gens, counter catas and trebs are needed as well if you want a full defense.

What does building a ballista have to do with anything on outlying objectives? At the time of posting, I was specifically talking about defending Mendon, with Speldan gone and T1 walls, which leads to the bottom quote. Outliers are far harder to defend because of all the open space around them and being easily spotted by enemy groups. And consider this, allllll that open space and the cheesiest way to take the objective is to throw a cata ON the wall? Or consider Jerrifer’s. There’s a spot on the back side of the tower closest to spawn that you can still take down the wall by cata proxy EVEN THROUGH the natural wall!

Sviel.7493:

In the time it takes to build a sup AC, a paper wall being hit by a cata will be down to ~60%. Given that the tower is, at best, secured, it will be hard-pressed to have the supply to both build the AC and repair the wall.

I don’t think it needs to be any easier to bleed supply, honestly. It only takes 2 passes to open the tower and that’s assuming someone was there to see the catapult being built in the first place.

This is exactly in conjuction with the above quote, it seems that Sviel is one of few who gets the problem in “big picture mode” rather than small “case-by-case basis”

Olli.9028:

If there as an enemy zerg build catas and shield gens and not kittened up bubble rotations it´s ok that there is no counterplay with siege for it. just grow some balls and push and cata .
always this mimim i cannot completly stop 30+ attackers as a solo player

defending is way to easy in this game it´s just pointsless, if we where in a season right now and a server had full forces defending it would bee nearly impossible to take any t3 atm with all this stupid new siege/guld buffs.

defending is easy just l2p

I don’t know what to say to this except [Insert Jackie Chan hands on head .jpg here] English is easy for native speakers, l2E

claytonmorby.3751:

@sviel

I agree with a lot of your post but I think you may of misinterpreted what I was saying. If a group is throwing down 2 catas + shield gens then yes if only 2 or 3 people are defending the group should definitely take the keep. I believe that is a proper situation in the game mode. (<—-If you’re playing with this mindset go back to EoTM)

The problem with your zergling argument here is that there are a few of us with an actual brain who know proper siege placement and can definitely deter larger groups. The other problem is that because there is such a thing as proper siege placement, there are not many who think about that and throw down siege that can easily be destroyed, which wastes time and supply. There have been numerous occasions where minimalism has saved the day because of proper siege placement. Servers suffering from a population imbalance shouldnt have to suffer with a blob running through and resetting towers whenever they decide to and then defending those said towers with little to no supply; it should be harder for those blobs to take anything. Anet went and made it easier for the cheese to go and dominate (cheese being power ele and chrono period) by wiping siege because of kittened AoE range, and now its even more apparent that things that worked fine in the past are now being abused in the present to win (like proxy catas).

The bottom line is that Anet once again got lazy with core aspects and did a kitten job by restricting siege placement on the INSIDE of towers and did not even consider how it would affect defense and siege placement on the OUTSIDE of towers. Throw in their “improvements” to AoE and splash, and it’s even worse. The same way there is a restricting buffer on the inside of towers and keeps is the same way there should be a restrictive buffer on the outside of the objective!!

briggah.7910:

according to these forums nobody plays on the new bls.

According to in game play, ten players can flip most BLs with little resistance. Very few want to be on those maps and the servers that do make a point of playing on the BLs typically win the weeks. Just look at YB in T1. A small force keeps the PPT very high for YB because few JQ or BG players give a crap about the BLs.

FugueState.3842:

Anet went and made it easier for the cheese to go and dominate (cheese being power ele and chrono period) by wiping siege because of kittened AoE range…

What does a chronomancer do to AoE wipe siege? Maybe I have benched my chrono build too hastily.

There are 2 skills to pull enemies off siege, but both have only 900 range.
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Gravity_Well
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Temporal_Curtain