Guild Wars 2

Hi everybody,when i play wvw i keep see the same BS over and over.

Im talking about SIEGES placement and WALLS mechanics.

Siege Placement:
Can i call it BS when i see (for example) 4,5 catas being placed under the bridge outside Veloka,damaging the far wall on the right?!

Walls mechanics:
There is no actuall benefit by being “protected” by a wall for a defender in comparrison to be in an open field for an attacker

I find it ridiculous that catapults can be used as “walls-battering rams”,being placed just right next to it.And i find it even more ridiculous that most of the times your wall is actually working against you,giving cover to the attackers instead of protecting you.

Attackers:
Can set up 4,5 catas under a wall and spam bubbles to greatly reduce damage taken
Can eaisly clear a wall from defenders and defensive siege just by AoE spammingdown there,without exposing themselves.

Defenders:
Have to protrude from walls to get the “line of sight” to single target or to AoE down
Takes way too much DMG from AoE just by walking on walls being out of sight doesnt matter
Have to rely on “safer” siege position like the supply depot or use even more distant siege like “that mortar over there at the opposite side of the fight”,turn it all the way to the selected direction and then aim…good luck with that: pillars in the way,stairs in the way,your wall in the way.
Have to aim to the closer spot OVER the wall without getting “clear hit” most of the times.
Your have to use sieges form OTHER towers to clear the enemy ones.

At this point just like we cannot build sieges in spawn areas,cant we have a minimum distance around towers and keeps where ranged siege cannot be placed?

Cant we have a sort of “buff on walls” for defenders like an x% of AoE Resistance from PLAYER AoE only?!

Tanks for your attention

As far as I know there are only two ways (historically) that you can win if you are besieged in a tower or castle. Either you keep the attackers busy until a larger friendly force arrives and wipes them out, or the attackers get bored and give up.

As a defender myself, I know that if I face a large group, I probably can’t stop them taking stuff. I can sure try to make their attempt more difficult though

I find siege disablers helpful and you can use shield generators too. A handful of players can take out a cata quite quickly. The closer it is to being able to run back in to safety the better chance you stand. If you face a force large enough to defend the catas properly – why shouldn’t they win?

There has been discussion about point-blank catas before. One suggestion was to have reduced damage at close range.

It’s hard to find a spot on the wall where siege can be placed that doesn’t get hit easily. There are a few places however – ask some veteran players or look at siege positions in a level 2 or level 3 structure that has survived attack and try things for yourself. I learned a lot about AC placement just by refreshing the siege in our Garrison and testing where I could hit as I refreshed (helpful tip – it can make a difference where you stand too).

You can also practice with mortars – I get a friend to stand where the attacking siege is usually placed and learn the power and direction to hit that spot, then we swap over so we both know.

The solutionfor catas is pretty simple, make the catas take splash from their own shots. That should solve things regarding this particular piece of siege.

Now the walls… No ideas, being on top of them is asking for being nuked by meteors and other stuff, you cannot shoot down without taking even more crap while the person on top cannot retaliate because “Obstructed” or " No Line of Sight".

For the defenders, the best bet is to use ACs and disablers to stall while a zerg large enough arrives to fight the attackers back. There isn’t much hope of holding something without reinforcements because the supply of the defenders will usually be spent faster than the attackers as they can just hump walls to protect their siege.

Yuffi.2430:

As far as I know there are only two ways (historically) that you can win if you are besieged in a tower or castle. Either you keep the attackers busy until a larger friendly force arrives and wipes them out, or the attackers get bored and give up.

As a defender myself, I know that if I face a large group, I probably can’t stop them taking stuff. I can sure try to make their attempt more difficult though

I find siege disablers helpful and you can use shield generators too. A handful of players can take out a cata quite quickly. The closer it is to being able to run back in to safety the better chance you stand. If you face a force large enough to defend the catas properly – why shouldn’t they win?

There has been discussion about point-blank catas before. One suggestion was to have reduced damage at close range.

It’s hard to find a spot on the wall where siege can be placed that doesn’t get hit easily. There are a few places however – ask some veteran players or look at siege positions in a level 2 or level 3 structure that has survived attack and try things for yourself. I learned a lot about AC placement just by refreshing the siege in our Garrison and testing where I could hit as I refreshed (helpful tip – it can make a difference where you stand too).

You can also practice with mortars – I get a friend to stand where the attacking siege is usually placed and learn the power and direction to hit that spot, then we swap over so we both know.

I totally understand what u are saying.Im a veteran player aswell and i mostly play WvW: so i know the basic information about where to put AC and stuff like that….“ive seen things since 2012”

But however i dont wanna get to the historical description of sieges and/or how they worked…This is a fantasy game not an historical simulation so i can understant and ofc forgive inaccuracies.

But when u have,i want to repeat myself,5 catapults being placed behind your wall,aiming the mud,a rock or few steps and actually damaging a door or a wall 5 meters away its BS.You r hitting a rock and damaging a IRON WALL wtf?!And in any typical scenario u will always have AoE spam,disabler everything the game provides…

While a normal way to siege a castle would be using ranged sieges to clear a wall from defensive siege while at the same time make a breach to get inside.In Gw2 we have 30 people running on foot to an Amrored Defended Castle Wall AoE spam it,to destroy defences and to prevent defenders to stay up there and occasionally build a balista to clear what they couldnt with the AoE spam.

In all this situation,who defend instead of having some perks by being inside a fortified structure or being on high ground by standing on walls is the one penalized the most.
The AoE u get on walls covers 98% of it,while an AoE in open fields are much less wors.
Spamming walls from the ground and being behind the wall covers you from baslista like defences,but if u are a defender and want to use siege disabler u have to get to the edge of the wall and u know u gonna get hit by everything: Single targets,Aoe,Siege,get pulled….

Ok u can setup some siege near the lord,ore use those other far siege but u cant actually set sieges to have a clear shot to hit those proximity catas (someties u can see catas even being built few step off the ground on the actual outer wall).A stone mist cannon on second floor cant hit it,for example.

I do undesrtand aswell u have to practice on aiming with sieges,calibrate the power(when i man siege i generally get whisper with “nice shooting,good job”…).We r not talking about landing a good shot 10 miles away,we are talking about landing a shot right over a 2 meter wall in the best spot u can,with structures on the way,shield bubbles…with a sloppy power meter.

nsleep.7839:

The solutionfor catas is pretty simple, make the catas take splash from their own shots. That should solve things regarding this particular piece of siege.

Now the walls… No ideas, being on top of them is asking for being nuked by meteors and other stuff, you cannot shoot down without taking even more crap while the person on top cannot retaliate because “Obstructed” or " No Line of Sight".

For the defenders, the best bet is to use ACs and disablers to stall while a zerg large enough arrives to fight the attackers back. There isn’t much hope of holding something without reinforcements because the supply of the defenders will usually be spent faster than the attackers as they can just hump walls to protect their siege.

Exactly.
But to be fair…to get to the point where u can actually use a siege disabler u have to pass through 3,4,5(put the number you want) catas knockback, 20 AoEs,enemy AC a balista(plus there is always that one guy waiting to pull off the wall).In comparrison attacking its way easier,when in reality shuld be the opposit.

nsleep.7839:

The solution for catas is pretty simple, make the catas take splash from their own shots. That should solve things regarding this particular piece of siege.

That’s an interesting idea.

If you make it impossible for the BS with cata/treb splash damage/supply drain going through doors making it impossible to deploy rams on well defended objectives, cata splash hurting itself is an acceptable compromise.

Dawdler.8521:

If you make it impossible for the BS with cata/treb splash damage/supply drain going through doors making it impossible to deploy rams on well defended objectives, cata splash hurting itself is an acceptable compromise.

And don’t forget the skills that pass through the gates…CoR, et al. Nothing should pass through walls or gates to hit defenders. Historically, defenders had arrow slits/loops, murder holes, battlements with merlons to hide behind, etc., where each defender could hold off 10 times their number, and yet in GW2, it would seem attackers have the advantage, even without siege.

Old way to stop cata was to use Omega / golem dome effect to disable ranged shot from seige i thought it was balanced myself because golem had to be within range of other zerg dps to pop there bubble so it only prolong the capture by quite some time.

1 person controlling 2 shield gens normal one and a superior one it offer you 98% up time on dome effect making it nearly impossible to get threw with a cata regardless of number.

In my opinion AOE should only be able to cover 50% of the top of the wall. As it is now, running along a wall is instant death (at least for my necro, it is).

Walls are supposed to delay attackers, not to make defenders win combats lol.
You’re trying to tell me that if a group has enough people to build 5 catas, rotate bubbles and protect the catas, it is wrong or unfair? I’d say that wrong is one guy in a piece of siege hold 20 people just because he’s a defender.
Siege, walls, traps, siege disablers and such are supposed to delay. Not to win. If they have enough people to nuke the wall, it’s because you’re trying to climb the wall solo against a zerg. It’s totally fair that 20 people nuke 1 if this one takes a risk.
To properly defend against attackers, to repel them for good, you need to kill them. And for this you need matching numbers and to go down and fight, instead of hiding behind a wall and complaining that the game is unfair.

I do agree that the cata splash range is totally nuts, like hitting a wall from the map and damaging the wall from a tower, though.

Pumpkin.5169:

Walls are supposed to delay attackers, not to make defenders win combats lol.
You’re trying to tell me that if a group has enough people to build 5 catas, rotate bubbles and protect the catas, it is wrong or unfair? I’d say that wrong is one guy in a piece of siege hold 20 people just because he’s a defender.
Siege, walls, traps, siege disablers and such are supposed to delay. Not to win. If they have enough people to nuke the wall, it’s because you’re trying to climb the wall solo against a zerg. It’s totally fair that 20 people nuke 1 if this one takes a risk.
To properly defend against attackers, to repel them for good, you need to kill them. And for this you need matching numbers and to go down and fight, instead of hiding behind a wall and complaining that the game is unfair.

I do agree that the cata splash range is totally nuts, like hitting a wall from the map and damaging the wall from a tower, though.

Im not saying its wrong and unfair,im saying its BS.
Im not saying a single guy on a AC shuld be able to fend off a 30+ blob.
Im saying Siege Weapons shuld be used to clear a wall
Im saying Catapults shuld not be used as “rams for wall”,those are ranged siege weapons
Im saying your walls often gives more benefits and covers to attackers rather than being usefull for defenders.

In the current state of the game u can easily build 3 catas behind any indestructible wall,get cover from it,aim for the outer wall,destory it and go for inner structures by just aiming steps,stairs or the terrain under it,while still being behind that cover.

While Attackers can bomb you from down there just by AoE spamming (covering most of the surface of any wall)while still remaining out of sight…Defenders,on the other hand,are forced to peak,to get on the edge of a wall and by the time u get to that point,u already have sustained a huge ammount of DMG in comparrison.
Defenders on walls often gets the “blocked” and the “out of sight” messages without any actual reason and to use any ground target ability,they have to lean out of the wall
while Attackers can just target the highest point on the wall and strike the wall catwalk.This where im saying walls mechanics are kittenedup.Attackers shuld be able to cast an AoE on the outer surfice of the wall(ofc if they have range to do that),but NOT on top of it.In that situation they shuld use siege to clear the catwalks

Pumpkin.5169:

Walls are supposed to delay attackers, not to make defenders win combats lol.

History shows otherwise, u know :P

Imagine if you could attack from the walls without it being suicide?
Far too much enemy aoe that can easily cover the top. Yet the defenders must stand right on the end so they can hit down usually resulting in being pulled off, cancelling skills or dying.
Arrow carts mortars and canons are pretty much useless and will be destroyed in a few salvos.
I honestly think if they made walls give actual protection it would make a lot of people happy and make defence an actual play type instead of delay for back up and if it doesn’t come just run.

These QoL issues could affect the delicate balance of WvW. That’s why I believe they have not been/will not be adjusted.