Guild Wars 2

Can we have a poll about removing siege disablers? It would be the best poll ever.

Can we get one to remove arrow carts as well?

(ok probably wouldn’t pass, but I would be curious to see the numbers)

I doubt if a siege disablers poll would succeed right now, especially with the addition of repair hammers and cannon blueprints in open field.

Teon.5168:

I doubt if a siege disablers poll would succeed right now, especially with the addition of repair hammers and cannon blueprints in open field.

Repair hammers are mostly useful where you would be unable to hit with siege disablers anyway?
Not that I support repair hammers or cannons, I think both are stupid ideas.

I guess I give you a scenario. You’re a roamer, you see 5000 JQ coming to bay and your home BL is dead and you know the ktrain is in EB. You can buy your server those precious few moments to disable, whisper the EB commander for help and give your server time to respond.

My question is why remove the siege disablers?

RodOfDeath.5247:

I guess I give you a scenario. You’re a roamer, you see 5000 JQ coming to bay and your home BL is dead and you know the ktrain is in EB. You can buy your server those precious few moments to disable, whisper the EB commander for help and give your server time to respond.

My question is why remove the siege disablers?

One player should not have that much impact. Map jumping needs to be discouraged.

If you ask me WvW was a lot better before things such as WvW masteries and siege disablers were introduced. The downfall of the game mode started with it.

RodOfDeath.5247:

I guess I give you a scenario. You’re a roamer, you see 5000 JQ coming to bay and your home BL is dead and you know the ktrain is in EB. You can buy your server those precious few moments to disable, whisper the EB commander for help and give your server time to respond.

My question is why remove the siege disablers?

So we get a decent fight in the lord room instead of the blob showing up before we can even get a wall down, running straight in, instantly repairing the gate/wall, and then hitting the siege cap with AC’s.

Things are severely skewed in favor of defense right now, and it just isn’t any fun.

There should at least be a cooldown involved so the same siege can’t be repeatedly disabled. I’d go so far as to say that gates and walls shouldn’t even be repairable, or at the very least, a repaired fortified wall should come back as paper, or some flimsy barricade. Anything to punish the practice of defending a map (or in the given example, multiple maps) with a single blob. They just shouldn’t be able to both play that way and respond in time—they should have to choose one or the other.

I like one person making a big impact though.

There’s really only two things I like involving siege. Getting a ballista up to snipe enemy siege (especially enemy ballistas) and disabling siege 4-5 times in a row. Stuff like sitting on a treb makes me ill and I don’t understand people that sit on cannons firing at passersby all dayYea, it’s not very skillful, but frustrating enemy attacks is always a good thing.

I suppose I could just not bother at all.

P.S. Disablers are pretty easy to counter. If your group is too lazy to bubble/toss reflects/use projectile destroying skills/mark the walls/yank people off the wall then maybe you don’t deserve the champ bag 30 seconds earlier.

k-trainers get mad when their siege is disabled by 1 defender.. how dare that 1 guy keep wasting supplies and disabling siege when he is going to lose the tower anyway. how dare he lower my karma per hour and slow down the train.. shame shame shame

Are you kidding me? NO!

Best thing they ever introduced to game. Anything that stalls the mindless ktrain.

briggah.7910:

k-trainers get mad when their siege is disabled by 1 defender.. how dare that 1 guy keep wasting supplies and disabling siege when he is going to lose the tower anyway. how dare he lower my karma per hour and slow down the train.. shame shame shame

Nah man. We want fights. That’s why we beat down the doors to an empty keep and kill the poor kitten trying to defend it because they are a coward for refusing to fight 1v30 and have an epic fight against the keep lord; bursting it down before the enemy zerg arrives to defend it which would lead to an actual fight, but screw that.

briggah.7910:

k-trainers get mad when their siege is disabled by 1 defender.. how dare that 1 guy keep wasting supplies and disabling siege when he is going to lose the tower anyway. how dare he lower my karma per hour and slow down the train.. shame shame shame

1 person shouldnt be able to waste the time of 50. If you manage to use 2 siege disablers you wasted 50*2*35s = 3500s. So 70 seconds of your time wasted almost 1 hour of other peoples time. Its not like siege wars is already the most boring and tedious part of WvW, things like siege disablers and shield baubles make it even more boring.
All I am asking is a poll about this, then we can see what the majority thinks.

Remove siege disablers, increase wall and gate health by 25%

Siege disablers are stupid, but so is the speed at which you can pvd a t3 tower with sup rams

RodOfDeath.5247:

My question is why remove the siege disablers?

The scenario you give is the reason for siege disablers, but with all things like this, it can be abused.

Instead of the above, you see zerg outside ramming, whilst the enemy zerg, having suffered wipe and wipe, even though they outnumber the enemy zerg, hiding inside the keep spamming disabler after disabler after disabler. In the meantime they can use acs or aoe to slowly destroy the rams.

It’s the same issue with cannons. Why have them when the enemy zerg can lay down a dozen aoe fields on it to prevent anyone for taking more than 1 shot before it gets destroyed.

Malediktus.9250:

briggah.7910:

k-trainers get mad when their siege is disabled by 1 defender.. how dare that 1 guy keep wasting supplies and disabling siege when he is going to lose the tower anyway. how dare he lower my karma per hour and slow down the train.. shame shame shame

1 person shouldnt be able to waste the time of 50. If you manage to use 2 siege disablers you wasted 50*2*35s = 3500s. So 70 seconds of your time wasted almost 1 hour of other peoples time. Its not like siege wars is already the most boring and tedious part of WvW, things like siege disablers and shield baubles make it even more boring.
All I am asking is a poll about this, then we can see what the majority thinks.

Learn 2 math man. If 2 siege disablers only last for a combined 70 seconds then you are only “wasting” 70 seconds of other players lives, not an hour or more. There’s no logical way you got to an hour from that……..

And guess what, its not like you have to just sit around doing nothing if someone used a siege disabler. You complained about siege making WvW boring and somehow still simultaneously complained, in the same sentence mind you, about how disabling siege also makes WvW boring. That’s an incredible feat. Either siege makes WvW boring or not being able to use siege makes WvW boring. But if you honestly think its boring either way then its not the game mode for you

Yay….those 1 man defenders are just useless huh?

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/06/02/soldier-cited-for-holding-off-up-to-30-taliban-by-himself/

RodOfDeath.5247:

I guess I give you a scenario. You’re a roamer, you see 5000 JQ coming to bay and your home BL is dead and you know the ktrain is in EB. You can buy your server those precious few moments to disable, whisper the EB commander for help and give your server time to respond.

My question is why remove the siege disablers?

In your example here you’re using siege disablers to compensate for a larger problem: population imbalance.

If population was balanced properly then siege disablers definitely should be removed as they encourage map hopping and blobbing.

If JQ had 200 players and FA had 200 players then you should be punished for not having a defensive force on your home BL.

However, because JQ has many more players than FA at the moment (during SEA anyway) – the siege disablers make sense. Having said that, JQ players make extensive use of siege disablers so it makes the job of your smaller guilds trying to ninja objectives much more difficult also.

TL;DR – what you really need is a more balanced population.

Meh blobs just want to roll through stuff. They don’t want real fights. Most of the zerglings drop instantly if they get too close to the edges. I enjoy disabling their stuff 2 or 3 times just to mess with them.

They get so mad when the train slows down. They deserve the inconvenience for balling up into a blob despite being terrible at the game. Seriously rolling with 3 to 4 times the numbers of the next largest group and strutting around after knocking over paper towers.

They’ve turned wvw into eotm and they deserve whatever inconvenience a brave soul can dish out to them.

dzeRnumbrd.6129:

RodOfDeath.5247:

I guess I give you a scenario. You’re a roamer, you see 5000 JQ coming to bay and your home BL is dead and you know the ktrain is in EB. You can buy your server those precious few moments to disable, whisper the EB commander for help and give your server time to respond.

My question is why remove the siege disablers?

In your example here you’re using siege disablers to compensate for a larger problem: population imbalance.

If population was balanced properly then siege disablers definitely should be removed as they encourage map hopping and blobbing.

If JQ had 200 players and FA had 200 players then you should be punished for not having a defensive force on your home BL.

However, because JQ has many more players than FA at the moment (during SEA anyway) – the siege disablers make sense. Having said that, JQ players make extensive use of siege disablers so it makes the job of your smaller guilds trying to ninja objectives much more difficult also.

TL;DR – what you really need is a more balanced population.

I agree, no arguments here.

RodOfDeath.5247:

dzeRnumbrd.6129:

RodOfDeath.5247:

I guess I give you a scenario. You’re a roamer, you see 5000 JQ coming to bay and your home BL is dead and you know the ktrain is in EB. You can buy your server those precious few moments to disable, whisper the EB commander for help and give your server time to respond.

My question is why remove the siege disablers?

In your example here you’re using siege disablers to compensate for a larger problem: population imbalance.

If population was balanced properly then siege disablers definitely should be removed as they encourage map hopping and blobbing.

If JQ had 200 players and FA had 200 players then you should be punished for not having a defensive force on your home BL.

However, because JQ has many more players than FA at the moment (during SEA anyway) – the siege disablers make sense. Having said that, JQ players make extensive use of siege disablers so it makes the job of your smaller guilds trying to ninja objectives much more difficult also.

TL;DR – what you really need is a more balanced population.

I agree, no arguments here.

I disagree. Your 200 FA were fighting those JQ on another map. JQ zerg map hops to try to pvdoor a keep on another map. Brave scout disables enabling your zerg to follow and continue to fight.

Its not the defenders fault their equal pop was on a different map because thats where the attackers were 4 minutes earlier.

Siege disablers are one of the few additions to the game that actually helps the defender as much as it does the attackers imo.

Personally i dont mind disablers that much. Just stop stacking your siege in one spot and keep pressure on walls to disable the disablers.

Now shield generators……

Siege disablers, shield gens, any bullkitten that perpetuates a siege longer and longer makes the game worse. I say this coming from a server that gets near 0-50 ppt overnight. If you are defending a keep 5 vs 40, then at this point you’re forcing the 40 to pay a “tedium tax” to take the keep. To make the 40 pay the tedium tax, the 5 will also go through tedium of playing with siege. There’s no winners in escalating and drawing out siege fights.

Siege disablers are one of the few things added that stall the blob. They are critical in havoking. Removing disablers and increasing wall or door stats would be taking active and heroic play out of the game and replacing it with static and boring defense.

Dear Anet,

When I’m running around with zerg it is annoying when that one enemy throws a disabler on our rams. We have to stand around for 30sec and then sometimes they do it again! This is unacceptable. Please consider a poll to remove disabler so I can go about my world vs champion loot bag gameplay undisrupted.

Sincerely,
Zergling

Considering population balance is a bad joke at the moment especially in EU below your precious T1 zergfest OP, no, let’s not have a poll wasting a full week of my time and the time of the 2000 more people that play WvW.

Which by your maths would be 2000*604800s = 1,209,600,000s wasted.
Which is a staggering 38.35 years by your math!!

Celsith.2753:

RodOfDeath.5247:

dzeRnumbrd.6129:

RodOfDeath.5247:

I guess I give you a scenario. You’re a roamer, you see 5000 JQ coming to bay and your home BL is dead and you know the ktrain is in EB. You can buy your server those precious few moments to disable, whisper the EB commander for help and give your server time to respond.

My question is why remove the siege disablers?

In your example here you’re using siege disablers to compensate for a larger problem: population imbalance.

If population was balanced properly then siege disablers definitely should be removed as they encourage map hopping and blobbing.

If JQ had 200 players and FA had 200 players then you should be punished for not having a defensive force on your home BL.

However, because JQ has many more players than FA at the moment (during SEA anyway) – the siege disablers make sense. Having said that, JQ players make extensive use of siege disablers so it makes the job of your smaller guilds trying to ninja objectives much more difficult also.

TL;DR – what you really need is a more balanced population.

I agree, no arguments here.

I disagree. Your 200 FA were fighting those JQ on another map. JQ zerg map hops to try to pvdoor a keep on another map. Brave scout disables enabling your zerg to follow and continue to fight.

Its not the defenders fault their equal pop was on a different map because thats where the attackers were 4 minutes earlier.

Siege disablers are one of the few additions to the game that actually helps the defender as much as it does the attackers imo.

I think the population imbalance is solid argument, no question there. Right now JQ has entirely way too many players and resources to belong in T2. I’m hoping Mag and CD move in if they really have the numbers they claim to compete because the server linking sucks.

But you are right, it does help the defender as much as the attackers. The smaller server today had 15 players, one enemy guy in the keep disabled over and over while he called on his 40 man zerg to chase down the smaller server. It slowed down the little guys from competing in a sense.

It all comes back to population balance like others have said and I’m not sure anet has the mentality to solve it.

Siege disablers have:

• a supply cost
• a radius, so space the siege apart and they won’t all be hit
• a proximity requirement, so the person using them is likely to be murdered

I don’t know how many times I’ve cleaned up after a 50-man mag zerg attacked something to see 10-12 rams all on top of each other. Building that close together should have risks.

apharma.3741:

Considering population balance is a bad joke at the moment especially in EU below your precious T1 zergfest OP, no, let’s not have a poll wasting a full week of my time and the time of the 2000 more people that play WvW.

Which by your maths would be 2000*604800s = 1,209,600,000s wasted.
Which is a staggering 38.35 years by your math!!

you dont know what man hours are?

time spent * amount of people

Hesacon.8735:

Siege disablers have:

• a supply cost
• a radius, so space the siege apart and they won’t all be hit
• a proximity requirement, so the person using them is likely to be murdered

I don’t know how many times I’ve cleaned up after a 50-man mag zerg attacked something to see 10-12 rams all on top of each other. Building that close together should have risks.

It is already discouraged because all sorts of aoe and sieges can destroy the rams easier if you stack them.

They aren’t gonna stop a ktrain blob with golems, the nerfs it got stopped it from being spammable, now it’s mainly a troll and or stall tactic, otherwise it’s a legit tactic to stall for defenders.

Malediktus.9250:

briggah.7910:

k-trainers get mad when their siege is disabled by 1 defender.. how dare that 1 guy keep wasting supplies and disabling siege when he is going to lose the tower anyway. how dare he lower my karma per hour and slow down the train.. shame shame shame

1 person shouldnt be able to waste the time of 50. If you manage to use 2 siege disablers you wasted 50*2*35s = 3500s. So 70 seconds of your time wasted almost 1 hour of other peoples time. Its not like siege wars is already the most boring and tedious part of WvW, things like siege disablers and shield baubles make it even more boring.
All I am asking is a poll about this, then we can see what the majority thinks.

Last I heard, one was not entitled to an enemy objective.Having 50 people doesn’t make it more valid. It’s not anyone’s problem if people are too lazy to use skills which would save them time and would rather fold their arms while they wait for the walls to go down. If you really want it, put down 6-7 catapults and a shield generator which 50 people should have 0 problem building and rotate bubbles; everything will go down.

Wasting the enemy’s time is a good thing. If they feel like the train isn’t moving fast enough, or if a group of 50 can’t handle a few defenders, there’s always EOTM.

ArchonWing.9480:

Wasting the enemy’s time is a good thing. If they feel like the train isn’t moving fast enough, or if a group of 50 can’t handle a few defenders, there’s always EOTM.

Oh, I loved to troll and defend on EotM… I hope it ever become a thing again…

Jeknar.6184:

ArchonWing.9480:

Wasting the enemy’s time is a good thing. If they feel like the train isn’t moving fast enough, or if a group of 50 can’t handle a few defenders, there’s always EOTM.

Oh, I loved to troll and defend on EotM… I hope it ever become a thing again…

You’re slowing my 15s bag for 30 seconds. How could you do such a thing? >.>

ArchonWing.9480:

You’re slowing my 15s bag for 30 seconds. How could you do such a thing? >.>

Honestly, sometimes I would defend Arid Fortress so hard that people would start to ignore it for the entire match… It was always fun to rain down AC upon the zerglings thinking their scorpions are invencible.

But then people started making these EotM guilds that tell other teams about defenders and also put people to sit on your AC when enemy zergs are comming so you cannot defend. That was awful and killed my EotM fun time.

There is a difference between actively defending an objective and trolling the enemies with siege disabler spam

Malediktus.9250:

There is a difference between actively defending an objective and trolling the enemies with siege disabler spam

Sorry, I cannot actually defend with my AC because your 50man blob rained down Meteor Showers that cover the entire walltop on it. The only thing I have are disablers.

Doesn’t removing siege disablers actually promote ktraining? I’m trying to understand both sides of the argument here, but I see no way which removing siege disablers promotes fights.

If you really wanted to fight, you’d just contest it, drop some fluff siege which you don’t really care about and park your fight group between bay and garri licking your lips. Who gives a kitten about what the 1 guy in the keep is doing because that’s not your objective if you actually care about fights.

You only take objectives once you’ve wiped the opponents a few times and they cower back a bit anyway. I don’t know … maybe that;s just me but we tend to poke the bear until we get the fight. In fact, we often get people in voice comms complaining that we aren’t ppt’ing hard enough (even though we are clear about our objective being to go find groups around our size and fight, win some lose some – don’t care).

Disablers aren’t used by even matched groups, it’s only ever a scout or sentry who is literally volunteering to keep an eye out for those larger forces. Punishing the little guy who offers to help out the many (server) is just moot. Swords don’t go up for what 30 seconds after an objective is hit, if your server only has 40 players, you need eyes and ears to find/follow enemies.

If you want to get rid of sentries, then you may as well get rid of upgrades, and your basically opening the door to ktrains.

Can someone please explain it a little better, the above posts supporting to get rid of the disablers all have a undertone which supports ktraining. Which is weird because i think some of the above posters are in fact from fight guilds.

Also … removing the disablers basically says if you are on a server with little people, don’t even bother coming into WvW because you won’t be able to help.

I don’t know, are there map blobs that actually sit in towers and not actually fight enemies? My experience has always shown me otherwise on every server i have ever been on, and the only time I ever used siege as the first option of defense was when we had maybe 5 guys defending a keep against an OCX/SEA blob of 50. Yes, we will lose the objective, but at least we are able to get a few more ticks out of it before letting the ktrain scratch face on door. And those 5 guys ARE the ones you actually want in WvW who put it all on the line knowing they will go down with the ship.

This shouldn’t apply to primetime battles. Most groups fight eachother. it only ever applies to when you are severly outnumbered.

Can someone provide me an example of say … what it would look like for those 5 guys without siege disablers? Or better yet … an example of what servers have equal numbers but fail to use both siege and timing to engage or just don’t engage at all? I know people say … server ‘x’ siege humpers all day prime time with equal numbers… but I’ve rarely ever seen a server do that with maybe the exception of a garri strike, where the defenders have already wiped multiple times to the force.

I mean no disrespect, but I’d like my eyes opened to both sides of the argument.

Hexinx.1872:

I don’t know, are there map blobs that actually sit in towers and not actually fight enemies?

You’ve clearly never played against TC or YB

Blix.8021:

Hexinx.1872:

I don’t know, are there map blobs that actually sit in towers and not actually fight enemies?

You’ve clearly never played against TC or YB

Actually, I am on TC and fight every night for roughly 4 hours against other groups around our size, of course its a thumb in the air guess but we know when we bite off more than we can chew. I have never once used a disabler, I don’t even know how to operate half the new crap like shield gens – I kinda avoid them like the plague. I just log in, jump on with my guild and we go fight whatever we find. But some others do like that stuff, and I’m not gonna knock them for playing how they want to play.

To give a general idea … last night DB was attempting to take a WP bay, what did they do? Pop up on the wurm gate hill and build 2 trebs and 2 shield gens, sat and waited. does that mean DB bunch of siege humpers? No. I sat down and skirmished the other skirmishers while the mass just afk’d. Had to kill time until our guild raid anyways. When our raid started, we went to EBG, had some good battles, with DB. Went over to poke BG at overwatch and there keep…. what did they do? Sat on siege, or ran back to the portal. Does that class BG as siege humpers? No. A while later, eventually there was a group who decided to fight us, and we made a positioning error and got sandwiched. Sometimes that happens, no skin off our backs.

The problem here, is the atypical individual who stereotypes servers based on the actions of say scouts … is what? Prejudice? Doesn’t seem to fit. I’ve battled BG for a long time now and still to this day they have as many people who hop on siege and use disablers as the rest. It’s really a moot point.

I’ve played against YB as well, I only started seeing them retreat like BG’s ppt’ers do in recent months when they were going down hill. if we wanted to find a YB group to fight, we used to be able to. I could also attempt to attribute that to more of their commanders being more the RTS style of play, but then I’d be no better than you. I prefer to just find groups around our size and fight with my guild.

A few nights ago, DB had Hills WP on our BL, we had to break it. Both groups had equal numbers, the hills had 1100 supply? Did we expect them to just jump out and fight us and let it flip? No, we knew it was going to be a long battle, where by the end they successfully used all 1100 supply before we were able to flip it. I don’t call them siege humpers for trying to protect there WP, I give them props for making it a gruelling and tough challenge.

We tend to stay away from objectives unless there is something to fight there, but not everyone plays like you or me. Some people like to capture, upgrade, and defend a tower and scout or whatever. All the power to them. This game has many varieties of play styles in WvW. Limiting it to one sole purpose will never happen. But that doesn’t mean we can’t go out and find our fights, or play the way we prefer to. Some days it may take more time or effort to find the battles, other days the battles are plentiful.

Hexinx.1872:

We tend to stay away from objectives unless there is something to fight there, but not everyone plays like you or me. Some people like to capture, upgrade, and defend a tower and scout or whatever. All the power to them. This game has many varieties of play styles in WvW. Limiting it to one sole purpose will never happen. But that doesn’t mean we can’t go out and find our fights, or play the way we prefer to. Some days it may take more time or effort to find the battles, other days the battles are plentiful.

Whole post is really good. But yea, I totally agree different strokes for different folks.

I am also on TC. I am one of these people that burn through siege disablers. I use them all the time, because I am the one who spends time taking those camps, walking those yaks, calling out those blobs and defending. Why? because its fun, it is where you find most of the small scale fights. However, often I am greeted with zergs and that is just the nature of tier 1. Still that doesn’t mean I am going to roll over. I’m going to fight tooth and nail with everything at my disposal until an actual approachable fight is there.

Frankly on the topic of wasting peoples time. I can totally make the case that Zergs destroy my preferred type of game play. They make hours of walking yaks seems pointless, flipping camps & defending a laughable joke. Fighting them is impossible without calling for large amount of backup. The only way to stall for backup is a siege disabler. Your 35 seconds of sorrow equates to nothing compared to the 2 hours I spent walking yaks on bay.

I get that it frustrates some people that they can’t just get there bag, or ppt because of siege disablers, but in contrast it frustrates me even more to have to stall a blob of 40 people solo and its only for 35 seconds. If the people placing the siege had half a brain they would spread it out and aim in the same spot. To the people that argue that you are looking for fights, I can see that if you just opened up the objective and waited, but to just storm the place and port afterwards just shows how disinterested you actually are in fights and how interested you are in sweet succulent pve bags/karma.

The only way I’d be happy if they removed disablers is if in turn they gave us a tool that forces a zerg to split up. I’d love to see a mechanics introduced that have no target limit but scale damage based on the number of targets in an area. That way I could actually fight back rather than using this crutch of a delay item.

Hexinx.1872:

Doesn’t removing siege disablers actually promote ktraining? I’m trying to understand both sides of the argument here, but I see no way which removing siege disablers promotes fights.

If you really wanted to fight, you’d just contest it, drop some fluff siege which you don’t really care about and park your fight group between bay and garri licking your lips. Who gives a kitten about what the 1 guy in the keep is doing because that’s not your objective if you actually care about fights.

That is very true, and considering kills give 2 points now, killing 4 people would yield as many points as capturing the keep for one tick, so attacking a structure with the intent of just killing people who try to defend it is a fairly good strategy.

I think the hate towards it is generally directed against tower/siege “h… mounting” because it is very annoying to play against and possibly harder to counter. It is true in many games such as RTS or fighting games, that bad players often use “turtling” or using defensive advantages as a crutch. This is because their lack of skill often leads to them quickly being rolled and thus they find ways to “not lose”, since prolonging defeat would yield result that are apparently better. It’s also why you see people bragging about brick builds that survived a zerg fight but did little else and laugh at people that do despite the fact that the lack of contribution might of resulted in a wipe.

The big thing is, that, they may run into equally as bad players that lose patience and die as a result, making angry posts on the forums afterwards. I mean sure, it’s really lame to only fight in cannon fire, but then again, what about the people that walk into such a blatantly obvious trap?

So there’s the hate against defense, because some players rely on it. But that doesn’t mean defense itself is bad.

If siege disablers are really that big of a problem, which I don’t think they are, then limit the amount of siege they can hit, like one disabler can only de-activate two pieces of siege.

Some of U speaks like there is no defense against siegue disablers….. but IT IS!

U can CC the hero, use catapult bubbles, reflects etc… U are a zerg, U should have plenty of that. I undestand that is more confortable to just wait doing nothing waiting the door is open and take Ur “well deserved” loot, but Siegue disables promote the active play, promote the zerg attackers to do something till the gate/wall is down, promote defenders to do something (hero mode), not just run from zergs.

Is the only way that roamers can fight zerg, slowing them…. if a group of roamers attack a tower and same sized group are defending, they dont need disablers…. they can fight, and they will do it, its more active and entertaining.

If a zerg is on your gate and U cannot fight (1vs50 is not entertainig) disablers give the chance to both group to do something… not just wait or run.

Blaydyn.5871:

If siege disablers are really that big of a problem, which I don’t think they are, then limit the amount of siege they can hit, like one disabler can only de-activate two pieces of siege.

Awful idea. Negates the siege of a havok group, but only a minor inconvenience for bobbers, who are going to drop four to six pieces of siege. Makes it not worth bothering with at all.

Blaydyn.5871:

If siege disablers are really that big of a problem, which I don’t think they are, then limit the amount of siege they can hit, like one disabler can only de-activate two pieces of siege.

Place your siege intelligently and that’s already the case unless you’re dropping a dozen rams on a gate, then you run out of room, but you’ll still have half of them going.

Let’s all just agree that PvD Karma-trainers whine at just about everything. Pls don’t give them any (more) credence ANet.

Next siege poll : what do you think about adding …. studded FACE MASKS !!!

Blaydyn.5871:

If siege disablers are really that big of a problem, which I don’t think they are, then limit the amount of siege they can hit, like one disabler can only de-activate two pieces of siege.

Zergs can easily do this. Just stop stacking all your siege in ONE spot and SPREAD em out.

All great comments but really they know how stupid their design is and it can’t be fixed so try anything frosty leavers, Balloons that fly around. WvW is broken and they will let it play out like a rusty car until it is done and nobody shows up. If you have a addiction to this you just fuel the bad design worst I have ever played.