Guild Wars 2

Here’s an idea.
Why don’t we make it so when siege is laid down or even after it’s built, it has the owner’s name attached to it. So everyone knows who’s siege it is. And then add a special report button for “Trolling” (which would be nice for all forms of gameplay, sadly) and anyone who has received say….15 reports in a 30 minute period becomes restricted in the following ways; (1) No placement of siege for the next three resets. (2) No usage of siege for the next three resets. (3) No ability to affect capture zones (PvX). (4) Unable to enter TPvP. Stuff like that. (5) Inability to use commander tag in WvW (see paragraph 3).
*And the owner of siege golems needs to be able to boot people out of the golems. We’ve had entire sieges ruined or spoiled because some troll snagged a golem and couldn’t be kicked out until he ran all the way across the map and stood in front of an enemy keep and let them kill him. Omegas are not cheap. Stop letting them be so easy to steal.
Both of these ideas together take “Exhaustion” out of the picture as it wouldn’t be necessary. Or like I saw someone say earlier, about only commanders being able to lay siege.That’s a great idea. And to improve on it, why not make it an established feature within the game. The only one’s affected would be the two man roaming groups where neither has a tag. And not to down the little groups (because I enjoy them meself) but a very small roaming group is a small price to pay for saving a zerg or entire server the aggro that siege trolls bring. And it would be a fix as simple as buying a commander tag and not getting your tag blacklisted.
*Blacklists – Players with enough tally marks against them should have no usage in the map other than attacking! If you get reported for trolling, 1 tally. 10 tally marks later, you can’t do anything but attack. Sorry, come back next week. Bye bye trolls.
**Obviously from my post you can see I’ve dealt with a lot of trolls and I’m not against a total crackdown on these people bent on ruining a video game for everyone. The siege trolls must be stopped. And btw, some of this topic’s punishments might have been slightly off topic, but i was making a point of the severity these people need to be dealt with. Enjoy.

Soul SilverRose.6351 problem with that is then 15 friends can have fun and block so no one can place siege that is scout.

I would like to see the devs earn the community’s good will by blocking or banning the siege trolls we’ve had for months or years before attempting to develop some kind of gameplay mechanic. The number of players doing this action are extremely small: I only know of about three people on my server who do this as a dedicated action, and I’m on a T1 server. How long would it actually take to investigate and ban players with months-long evidence listings? Why should we implement any mechanic when players have been recording play, screenshotting, and submitting evidence for months with no results?

We do not need changes to WvW play. We need the GMs to actually investigate. Ban everyone players have been reporting for months and come back a few months after that if there’s still a problem. I suspect there will not be.

Problem:

• Dropping siege on top of legitimate siege build sites

Solution:

• The F key text “Build” should show the name of what’s being build. For instance “Build Trebuchet”.
• It should be possible to use the tab key to cycle through all the F options available at the players position. This will make it easier for the player to choose the right F option.

Argument:
Most WvW players know whats needed to be build. But today its hard to identify what you are building. You have to click on the build site and that can be almost impossible when there are many players standing around it.
I don’t think there is a way today to cycle through the F options available. When stuff are being build very close or on top of each other that would be very handy.

Not only make newly deployed siege sites smaller, but make them more distinguishable in the no supply initial state. And as others have said, change the F Build generic prompt to Build Arrow Cart or Build Trebuchet or Build Catapult.

Easy to fix the problem of ppl dropping the wrong siege on top of the right one. Allow the player to select the type of siege they will build. in a ui pulldown or even add that function to the commander tag. Only this siege can be built in a radius of x around the commander tag.

That way a balista dropped onto a ram in front of a door would not get built.
Next, allow siege to be salvaged. make it a wvw skill with more salvage per point. To control supplies attach a hidden counter to any siege that diminishes the supplies that can be salvaged based on the amount of damage it does. That way genuinely used siege return a little, unused siege returns a lot.

Finally, remove the siege cap.

The best way to fix the troll problem is not a simple task Your looking at several very glaring issues here.

1. Placement type of objects, and limiting to being only being able to be placed within x.distance of thing like ram.door. preventing people from placing rams where they aren’t useful. or to close to something like making a way to place arrowcarts/ballista ontop of walls but not to close to them.

2. Having a visual of the thing being built in like a progress. a fully built but transparent blue ghost of the item built as it grows fully colored and no longer transparent.

3. Make a new UI prolly limit people to 10 siege. sadly this would affect commanders too. But give this new UI the ability to see who is on their siege, and have the ability to KICK them off of it, even if your on the other side of that map. edit*also make it so if you kick them out more then 3 times in 20 secs they get blocked from getting back into that siege for up to a minute so you can try to reclaim it or have someone else, and show your siege on the map so you know where it is at all times.

4. going on with 3, would be if your capped out like say you used all rams. the ability to dismantle your siege yourself and even get back say 10-30% of your blueprints used if they didn’t get destroyed by someone else.

5. make new siege for towers and keeps that can only be placed in specific locations separate from land siege, where this siege cant be placed anywhere else but may occupy say of zone type 1-5 maybe zone 1 or 2, or 1 and 4. this siege would be stuff like Cannons, mortars, and Oil buckets, and could add several new maybe more powerful versions of arrowcarts and stuff.

I doubt that any single change alone will ever fix the problem of trolling in wvw, but supplementing several changes would go a long way to help fight the problem.

Also consider making siege that isn’t actually manned but more like engineer turrets, that have fixed placements and auto fire on enemies. Could be interesting specially if your defending a tower on a low pop and using your own trait points to upgrade that siege.

Problem with specific places for siege is that the enemy change were they attack so then you can end up were you cant build defense.

Rams its easy they can only be place next to enemy gate, but rest is hard.

As someone who used to play as a scout (sitting in a keep for hours, sometimes all day, refreshing siege etc) any kind of debuff you put on placing or building siege will make the job of loyal defenders harder. Sadly the most tedious work is often the least rewarded, so it’s common for just one person to end up having to place and build the majority of siege in a keep. On smaller servers that fight higher pop ones, siege placement and amount is the difference between success and failure, and further discouraging normal players from participating in siege prep will only make that worse.

Also there is sometimes the need for players to speed-build 3-5 catapults, acs, ballistas, etc on the commander’s order. Crippling that could limit the strategic value of siege.

Having come from a server plagued by saboteurs I agree that the best and most effective solution will be a reporting system that gets them out of the game so the rest of us can continue playing it. I was shocked from the very beginning there isn’t already such a system in place.

Allow for an option that when siege is placed.. after it’s built. another player or the same player, can convert the siege item to another item siege item. (for the cost of that siege item + any extra supply needed).

So if a player drops a siege Ram on top of the wall.. another player can walk over to it, use it, and use the convert ability, and change it to an arrow cart. It can’t be converted for another 3 mins, and also the cool down to convert another item can’t be used for another 3 mins.

So with that, 1 troll, can’t out convert siege, and the proper siege would end up in placed based on population

i want to give a suggestion too. how about the guild that controls the tower/keep ‘own’ the supply or even have power/control over siege placement within the territory. they cannot hoard the siege but they are able to ‘prevent’ siege griefers from taking supply and/or dismantle those that he builds.

but this will become just a race between siege griefer vs guild claiming tower/keep. my suggestion to this would be that it should take more than 1 person to claim an objective. maybe 10?

Swinging the olde banhammer? That sounds like a funny thing, because I came back 7 months later to find that banhammer hasn’t been used at all. I rather have a thorough fix of banning people who waste supplies/moving defensive siege (some trolls shift defensive trebs to opposite directions).

This griefing has been going on for 2 years. Coming up with a “nice” solution doesn’t fix things. You ban them from coming back into wvw.

LoneWolfie.1852:

Swinging the olde banhammer? That sounds like a funny thing, because I came back 7 months later to find that banhammer hasn’t been used at all. I rather have a thorough fix of banning people who waste supplies/moving defensive siege (some trolls shift defensive trebs to opposite directions).

This griefing has been going on for 2 years. Coming up with a “nice” solution doesn’t fix things. You ban them from coming back into wvw.

Agreed on banning. It is one of the better ways to get rid of trolls for good.

Banning them sounds silly. Everyone should be able to play whatever playstyle they want. If they want to use supplies let them. If they play around with your golems its your own fault for letting them stand around etc.

I think banning is all bark, no bite from ANET.

Reporting siege tho is probably the simplest most efficte way. To bad there’s no follow through.

Most likely solution that will be implemented will be some kind of nerf making siege irrelevant.

Seriously players, this is real life. Players play unfair. They play to win. Deal with it. I don’t like it either, I try to play honorably, but realize I won’t win – much like Ed Stark. When Anet listens to us about something unfair it will most likely end up as a nerf with loss of content and simplified gameplay.

I know how it sounds but I’m really hoping that if they solve this issue it offers greater diversity of gameplay in WvW. That is what we need. If you look at their first post regarding this problem you can see what I mean. They tend to solve issues with limits and locks simplifying gameplay eliminating their original intent.

I like the exhaustion idea but I think 3 min is too long. Commanders need to be able to pop out 2-4 of something very quickly. Now if you are limited to 4 every 2 min I think that will help. Another thing I would like to see is object and body blocking! Make it so they have edges and cant be put over each other. Do the same for people! Friendly players can go through you or push you aside slowly but enemies are stopped! Make it so shield warriors and guardians can body block a gap in a wall or gate just like in real castle sieges! would be freaking sweet!

Typical Anet, rather than come ingame and deal with the reports, they come up with some really bad ideas, highlighting their lack of any knowledge of how wvw is run.

On EU, the comm drops the siege generally. But that’s not the real problem. The real problem is the people who get reported day in day out for months, who build siege that is obviously useless.

Easy solution is to actually have a GM to deal with these and who can make a value judgement. You know, someone who actually answers all the reports of siege trolls, hackers, etc that currently get ignored.

The other solutions are to have the siege carry the name of the person who drops it, and have golems so that the owner can kick out the troll. or better yet, if someone tries to get in a golem the owner gets a message saying ‘xyz is attempting to board your golem, allow y/n’

These are simple, workable solutions. Some form of ‘exhaustion’ just shows how badly informed you are to even think of it.

GMs aren’t a solution to wide spread practices, at least not an immediate one, you don’t need to ban people doing this (banning has legal implications and won’t be done rashly so it won’t be widely felt quickly), you need to make what these people are doing less effective.

Working around blue prints being dropped on top of other BPs is trivial. They already know who dropped it, just display their name, and add an option to ignore BPs from this user. Simple mechanism, easy to implement and use, and makes this tactic much less effective in a very short time. You will need a dialog to display whose siege you have ignored so you can remove people from the list if you gaff.

Not only does this mean you can ignore “trolls” it means you can ignore people who just need a clue stick applied

Siege cap is another story, anything you can do will require balance and will be game breaking if you don’t do it right, so KISS should be the motto for this.

I think recycling is the least problematic solution, so

1: A player should be able to recycle their own siege.
2: A commander should be able to recycle siege for anyone in their squad.
3: The greater of 5 or 1/10th of the people on a team, on a map, should be able to recycle any siege on the map (so if there are 80 people on a map you need 8 people, but 50 or less requires 5 people). If >10% of the people on a map are trolling you have a bigger problem than a game mechanic can fix.

Recycling means the siege is destroyed and in a building supply is returned to the building, in open field supply is returned to the recycler, the amount should start out low and should be affected by one of the WvW skills.

This won’t be as effective as the other change, but it’s that way because it shouldn’t be powerful enough to break the game if the balance is wrong.

Baldrick.8967:

Typical Anet, rather than come ingame and deal with the reports, they come up with some really bad ideas, highlighting their lack of any knowledge of how wvw is run.

On EU, the comm drops the siege generally. But that’s not the real problem. The real problem is the people who get reported day in day out for months, who build siege that is obviously useless.

Easy solution is to actually have a GM to deal with these and who can make a value judgement. You know, someone who actually answers all the reports of siege trolls, hackers, etc that currently get ignored.

The other solutions are to have the siege carry the name of the person who drops it, and have golems so that the owner can kick out the troll. or better yet, if someone tries to get in a golem the owner gets a message saying ‘xyz is attempting to board your golem, allow y/n’

These are simple, workable solutions. Some form of ‘exhaustion’ just shows how badly informed you are to even think of it.

Who decides which siege is useless? You can open walls and doors with ballistas. You can use rams defensively. Not everyone wants to play serious ppt. Some just want to have fun doing random stuff.

Malediktus.9250:

Who decides which siege is useless? You can open walls and doors with ballistas. You can use rams defensively. Not everyone wants to play serious ppt. Some just want to have fun doing random stuff.

I’m not sure what sort of world you live in, but just take a moment to bring this into real life. Say if you’re working for a company, and there’s someone intentionally sabotaging the company, like, cutting off the electricity for 1 day, spoiling the air-con, ruining raw products by unleashing kittenroaches/worms into flour that was meant to bake cakes and cookies.

Maybe you’re working for a company that creates parachutes, and then you decided to use paper instead of rope to tie the parachutes together. Any idea what will happen?

Someone dies. People get sick. Something gets ruined.

This is how things work in real life. The cause determines the effect and outcome. When people intentionally “trolls” in the game, something of a negative outcome happens. Your idea of fun is based on someone’s misery, suffering and pain.

There is a word describing this. Schadenfreude.

It is the feeling of joy or pleasure when one sees another fail or suffer misfortune. It is pleasure, derived from the misfortunes of others. You, are harming someone in order to gain pleasure.

This is something I despise. Tremendously. This game had infuriated me in ways that I cannot imagine. I had escorted dolyaks to upgrade a T1 tower for 2 hours, gotten it to T2, only to have some random player turn the defensive treb I built into a different direction in order to troll the server, and lost the tower in 2 minutes. He went on to defend his actions because he felt he can do anything he wants.

1 year ago, I posted a youtube video uploading actions of a player who intentionally wasted the supply by building meaningless trebuchets next to the supply hut, submitted a ticket reporting him, and I never receive word that action was taken against him. I still saw him for the next 6 months putting down ACs/ballista next to the commander, until he probably got tired of trolling the server/players and went off to another bandwagon server (guild name suddenly appeared in the enemy server).

You say fun? Fun to whom? Their own pleasure of trolling the players? If your idea of fun is correct, and legally bounding, I imagine the serial killers out there who derive their fun and pleasure will be happy because it’s the same principle you are trying to defend right now. The only difference is the magnitude of these incidents.

In any case, I wrote enough of my share. Banning is the best solution. Servers need to police their own servers if the devs can’t do it. Even a temp ban of a few hours is critical via community votes if they are caught trolling.

I think we have 2 major issues on why it happens:

1. They are under the assumption that they are doing nothing wrong.

2. Hard to prove that it is them doing it, so as long as they think they are invisible they will continue.

Of course this does not count for every siege troll, but a large portion of them. So any methods is just as good as getting rid of them.

1. Evidence – Make siege placement a map wide addition to the chat system, similar to combat log but in main channel. “Twinny Todd Deployed Balista.”

a. If a tagged Commander placed siege it would say something like: “Commander Twinny Todd Deployed Balista.”

2. Action – Make it reportable with screen shot of given evidence from the chat window, and announce it’s a ban-able/suspend-able offence.

How will it help? – It will partially help as a deterant, in the troll knowing that he is now visible to all on that particular map of his actions. This alone will reduce trolling considerably, and in addition making it reportable will reduce trolling even more.

To avoid people getting reported when they shouldn’t be, for example small Havoc groups/defenders etc (who do usually communicate in map chat what their upto), the report will need to be made but multiple people to be flagged.

Each Siege unit can be dismantled/recycled supplies back into the structure, or to the recyclers if at enemy structure or in open field, but to avoid trolling of dismantling well placed siege, each siege requires 3 separate individuals to interact with it to recycle it.

In addition to this each siege could have the persons name prefixed infront of it, for example looking at the siege built or unbuilt on the ground would be named “Twinny Todd’s Superior Balista.” So you could even see for example, if I was the troll and their are 5 x balista’s and and 2 x rams at a random indestructible wall, all with my name infront of them, weather im still on the map or not u have screen shot evidence that I have been trolling.

I mean things like this are much more simple to implement and may not get rid of every troll, (imo nothing will get rid of all of them), but will certainly make them near non existent in time.

btw this recycling siege business could even add some fun tactics to the game recycling rams on a outer gate to use on an inner gate.

Nightingale.8364:

I do believe that the simplest and most satisfactory solution to this problem has actually been solved by Anet without thinking about it.

The adopt a dev scheme has worked to put anet devs on almost every server, playing in wvw guilds that have welcomed them with open arms. These devs have seen for themselves exactly what happens with siege trolls.

Goodbye Fla********x

So do we have to wait for another event to get rid of his replacement?

At least we should have a report feature, theres nothing worse than seeing 5 omegas walked off a cliff because someone thinks thats a fun way to play and nothing as demoralising for everyone else that is helpless whilst he does it apart from sit in a golem until he gets bored.

This topic had dropped to page 3.. so im really asking what is going to be done.
(This is not a necro of an old post but and ongoing problem.)

How about a system similar to skill points… if enough people commune with the siege, maybe it will turn into a yak???

Kinda late addition to this ,didnt had noticed there was a discussion over siege.
For starters lets not forget that this problem caused an unfair title removal from legitimate defenders and there was a lot of progress lost.
A defender has really minimal income already,removing the only title they could progress daily and erasing all previous progress without a word been a blow that a lot of defenders still hate anet for.
Back to subject:
Sure siege trolling is an act of sabotage,but that could be fixed by adding a vote for self destruct skill on the siege itself requiring a number of votes with a modifier of 1/3rd of current map population needed.
That way a commander driving a force will be able to do clean up while the siege troll wont be able to delete siege that are usefull.
A recycle button would had been usefull as well because even experienced siegers do mistakes,but that may disrupt the economy.
Siege definately should have the placer’s name and guild tag on it if any,visible only to allies.
Thats my 2 cents for whatever they matter.

I hope we get an update on this soon its been a real problem lately.

Any update on this? We have one at the moment who does it everyday

I liked the idea of siege being color coded to the commanders tag.

Nice necro. I think we should wait until Marmat makes his official thread about this soon™.

We have proheals who posted about several siege trolls who he issued suspensions to in just the last day or two. He is posting how he handled it even today. I don’t know how much more of an update you could have.

The new necro specialization must be forum based…:x

Ohh is it a greatsword skill?

What if you could right click the siege and see the name of the person who place it and the ability to report the player for trolling.

Siege trolling might be catchable, but what about supply wasting? Since devs have to catch someone in the act, it’s nearly impossible to punish someone for this.

From what I’ve heard, some are buying during the 75% off sale for retaliation purposes if/when they get griefed. Seems the only possible action when Anet’s not going to do anything about it. (I do not condone this, but do see why people are doing it.)

What about adding a suffix to the end of the Seige…

example
Superior Flame Ram by name.1234

This way you can identify the individual who committed the crime

I like any idea that shows ownership. Both to identify troll, as well as the positive aspect of seeing who put the effort in on useful or well placed siege.

One suggestion I have for dropping siege on top of each other, is to color code the siege build sites. For instance ram build sites should be white, ballistas green, catapults blue, trebs yellow, omegas purple. This will help give people quick info about what is there and looking for colors they should be building so if someone drops a cata on top of a bunch of rams, it will stand out as a different color. Faster gameplay and easier communication.

Many of those suggestions are really good. But i would go with a previous one. That Exhaustion debuff idea is pretty kitten cool. I think the solution is not banning the trills, but discourage them and pinpoint them, forbidding them from entering WvW for a certain period of time. As for the Exhaustion, it would be nice if it was modified like this:
1 stack of Exhaustion for every single siege placed.
At 3 stacks, the individual is prohibited to put siege buildsites for 3 minutes.
If bearing a Commander Tag this is modified by squad members and range;
6 seconds linear reduction for each individual squad member within a radius of 1500.
That would result in Exhaustion being obsolete in a Squad bigger than 30 individuals.

This can be modified towards stacks taking effect as well though, based on “per squad member” parameter (based on small teams that want to properly siege up a fort);
A 10 member squad Commander, would have a limit of 2 or 3 stacks of exhaustion, where the 20 member squad commander would have 4 or 5, etc.
Also, the disassembling of troll siege should be initiated by commanders and voted as well and return a normal siege back to the commander that has more than 30 or 40 people in squad. Because if anyone can initiate a disassembling, then they can even disassemble a properly placed siege, just with some guild help. This could help pug commanders as well, and prevent trolls from completing their goal.

Any update on this? We have more seige trolls on our server

One time i did shoot cows inside GvG match in EotM and some dude whispered me and called me siege troll.

John Corpening.9847:

To kick off the brainstorm I’ll throw out this idea:

1. When a player places a piece of siege they receive a stack of “Exhaustion”
2. A stack of “Exhaustion” expires after three minutes
3. If a player has three stacks of “Exhaustion” they can no longer place siege

I think this is a good idea — the first two at least. How long is “no longer” for the third though?

I can think of instances where there’s an incoming attack and you and your teammates are manically building siege to defend and if there’s only a few there at the time of the attack, you could hit the exhaustion triple fairly easily.

Same goes with offense. Often it’s just the commander dropping the rams to be built. He’d hit that third level pretty quickly.

As for solutions: I don’t think it’s a good idea to limit who can place siege — defensive siege tends to be built and monitored by server scouts/loyalists, who are not necessarily in a big guild, or run a commander tag.

I do think, if it’s at all possible, to limit the number of pieces of siege any one player can place within the 5-limit cap. So I can place three pieces, but no more within that zone — effectively not allowing me to cap the area.

As for supply draining, it’s not the issue it used to be. With the coming auto-upgrades, the biggest reward for supply draining was ordering a “useless” upgrade minutes before an enemy attack. Using supply to build siege as a form of draining it is not really effective (except on reset) because most often the dolly’s are coming in faster than the troll can drain by building. (This is due mostly to people being lazy about killing incoming dollys, so perhaps that strategy will see a resurgence).

Also, oh gosh necro. lol.

I wasn’t around when this thread was first posted, so thought it was new .. silly me. ><

If possible, include the name of the person who deployed the siege in the name of the siege build site.

i.e.

Superior Flame Ram [Bobthebuilder]

Djamonja.6453:

If possible, include the name of the person who deployed the siege in the name of the siege build site.

i.e.

Superior Flame Ram [Bobthebuilder]

Y’know I was against this idea forever because I could see it lead to griefing the person who was new and mistakenly dropped a piece of siege in the wrong spot (there are people who go berserk over stuff like this, lol).

But on consideration, it might give people an idea of just how much one person spends on siege daily — which actually may cause its own fights, hrm.

I don’t think people would give them grief — it would actually be much easier to explain to them why we usually let the Commander place siege. Its main benefit is that it would be very easy to know who was trolling, and people could look at the name of the person on the build site and know that they shouldn’t build it. Not everyone would pay attention obviously, but it would help.

Why not create:

Dishonor Flag

1) Let the WvW community of players flag the player(s) they think are Trolls.

2) Put limitations on how this flag is applied to prevent abuse.

3) Then decide on what the Dishonor flag does to these Trolls.

Heather.4823:

Any update on this? We have more seige trolls on our server

They have terrible communication with their playerbase, but from their actions we can infer that they don’t want to spend the money to have people handle these problems. They want it all automated: just look at the ideas the dev was floating. Look at the automation of upgrades incoming to HoT.

Of course, it won’t work, trolls will always find a way to troll, and with no humans taking reports, they’ll never go away.

how about not changing anything .. cause its not that big a problem….happends here and there ..but no big deal ..

How about this

Have a range cap around certain destroy-able structures (for example a gate) that only a certain type of siege can be thrown. So to throw a ram you need to be within 500 range of a gate?
a catapult can be thrown anywhere between 200-3000 range of a destroy-able wall
and treb can be thrown anywhere EXCEPT THE PREVIOUSLY MENTION RANGE CAPS.

Just a suggestion that can be obviously worked around.

This isnt just a necro’d post.

It’s a necro’d post of a necro’d post!
Double necro!

But if I recall correctly of of this month, it is now a bannable offence to siege troll.
That’s right, at game launch it was “we cannot control how a person plays”, not it’s bannable.

This brings up greater issues of which deployed siege is a troll siege?
At launch my guild was one of the few who used rams in the middle of an open field zerg fight. If you dont know why yet, they arent a proper WvW player. Point is that siege was useful to us, even if half the server thought is was troll siege!

Orochimaru.4730:

This isnt just a necro’d post.
But if I recall correctly of of this month, it is now a bannable offence to siege troll.
That’s right, at game launch it was “we cannot control how a person plays”, not it’s bannable.

This brings up greater issues of which deployed siege is a troll siege?
At launch my guild was one of the few who used rams in the middle of an open field zerg fight. If you dont know why yet, they arent a proper WvW player. Point is that siege was useful to us, even if half the server thought is was troll siege!

If it is now bannable, them maybe just attaching the name of the player who placed the siege so that it’s visible is sufficient, as has been suggested. Report troll siege, and Anet can message the player asking them to explain their placement(s). I they don’t have a legit explanation, hit ’em with the ban hammer. I also like idea of the builders of siege getting credit for their work. Maybe others will be more inclined to send them defensive siege.

Adding the name could be augmented also with a commander hat on siege build sites for siege that was dropped by a commander. It would be really easy to identify which siege to build first. Hat can be on or off, depending on style or even toggleable, after the siege is built. That hat could also match the color of the commander’s tag so you know which one dropped it.