Guild Wars 2

I feel that the distance between towers and keeps are often too close to each other. So close that one can use superior trebs to hit towers/keeps nearby from inside another tower/keep.

The problem with this is it never happens in real life.

In real life an army would need to carry siege supplies with them. Once they get to an enemy castle, they would set up siege equipments outside of the walls.

In no case would an army be able to siege an enemy castle from inside the “comfort” of their own castle. If they want to protect their siege equipments, they would need to build a mini fort themselves.

What I suggest is to change the map so the towers/keeps are further apart from each other, so even a superior treb cannot hit from inside the walls. So to siege an enemy fort/keep, the army would need to place siege equipments outside the safety of their own fort/keep.

At the same time, add a new siege weapon call “wooden walls”. This can be built by an attacking army to defend their siege equipments.

I actually like this idea. It’s annoying that often times there’s no real way to defend against a trebbing unless you are prepared to take another keep. Setting up a mini fort would be a lot of fun too.

But consider that the borderlands are Home locations and belong to that server. They’re placed in a defensive position.

Eternal is another story all together.

Really, there’s almost never a spot you can’t counter treb, or beat it in some way. More siege options would be nice though.

I agree… and in order to keep with the real life theme I think that Heavy Armor jobs should not be able to swim, staffs should not fire magic energy and the name changed to “stick”, Charr should not be able to speak or walk on two legs, and guns should do more damage!

Meh, I hope they don’t listen to the above suggestions. This is a fantasy game. Please don’t make it so much like reality.

Willkiller.3019:

I agree… and in order to keep with the real life theme I think that Heavy Armor jobs should not be able to swim, staffs should not fire magic energy and the name changed to “stick”, Charr should not be able to speak or walk on two legs, and guns should do more damage!

But castle to castle sieges NEVER existed even in fantasy books. That’s because it would be ridiculous.

CHIPS.6018:

The problem with this is it never happens in real life.

I live in a castle and am at war with my neighbor across the street. I assure you we siege each other from the comfort of our own ramparts every day.

EB is far too bunched up I agree, 2 trebs in your home keep can hit all four towers around it, and overlook and SMC can treb each other to death which the towers aren’t needed for that.

I think your playing the wrong game if you want realism.

The concept is cool, but it opens up griefing opportunities. 4 catapults beating on a wall? Build your own wooden one in front of them to block projectiles. Since they are your allies they wouldn’t be able to hurt the wall either.

We could turn this into a sci-fi game where we shoot lasers at each other, but keep all of the game elements the same. If someone still didn’t like siege location in that sort of game, they might argue that it produces too much heat within our safety domes, or that a projectile shouldn’t be able to exit the force field.

But game design is dictated on what the developers think will be fun, not what makes the most sense. Arguing for game rule changes based on immersion is a dead end — that type of argument can only lead to immersion changes.

In other words, the developers didn’t first decide to set forts and keeps apart at these specific distances and elevations on a historical basis. They did it because they wanted you to be able to build siege within the walls. It creates a constant incentive to continually push against enemy holdings to prevent the loss of your own.

This isnt a book, and the reason that you can treb from a fort is because its your home borderland – you are supposed to be able to defend it and apply pressure to invaders. Also, trebs dont do alot of damage and the damage to walls can easily be outdone by an even mildly competent group of players running supply.

What the OP really is asking for, whether he even realizes it or not, is a simply a collection of several mini maps that are essentially independent of each other. That isn’t the WvW I bought this game for. I want there to be strategic advantages of holding other objectives. I want the map to be interconnected. I want the loss or gain of a particular objective to make a difference elsewhere. That’s where strategy comes into play instead of simply attacking isolated structures. It’s called “position”.

Honestly I’m fine with towers being able to siege keeps and keeps able to fire back. The only issue I have is keeps fireing on other keeps where no retaliation is possible. Garison to bay is one example. Garrison cant hit hills but there is this tiny window where it can hit bay which is very difficult to countersiege. Only way to stop it is to either take garison or to very slowly wittle it away from below while abuseing the odd LOS rules of the balista 2 shot and sometimes arrow carts.

Personaly I’d love to see the borderlands redesigned slightly so that garison can bombard the two northern towers but neither keep. The two northern towers can hit either garison or their closest southern keep but the keep cant retaliate. The southern keeps and towers can mutualy bombard their closest neighbor.

It is much more reasonable to break into one of the towers to stop a siege than the garison particuarly when only one side is vulnerable to garrison and not the other. The defending team should have an advantage hence why the towers should be able to hit the keeps. While this can work agianst them at garison it is also much easier for the defending team to bum rush the northern towers and take them back than it is for the enemy to hold them. In addition the home team advantage isnt so lopsided that they can afford to casualy bombard for hours with minimal effort spent to defence of their siege. Leave siege in a tower with only the operators and eventualy a zerg will show up with 4 rams, bust down the gate in under a minute and wipe out that siege. do that at garison right now and the trebs may stay up for hours hiting bay with only the operatiors and a spoter calling out for a mini zerg to wipe out the counter siege attempt down below.

My server has this thing called counter trebbing. Its pretty magical. What we do is build a treb and destroy theirs. No need to take their keep in order to do it. Sit back casually with your ele and talk about how blue the sky is today.

sostronk.8167:

My server has this thing called counter trebbing. Its pretty magical. What we do is build a treb and destroy theirs. No need to take their keep in order to do it. Sit back casually with your ele and talk about how blue the sky is today.

You can’t counter treb garrison from bay.

Either way castle to caste sieges sucks in my opinion.

CHIPS.6018:

sostronk.8167:

My server has this thing called counter trebbing. Its pretty magical. What we do is build a treb and destroy theirs. No need to take their keep in order to do it. Sit back casually with your ele and talk about how blue the sky is today.

You can’t counter treb garrison from bay.

Either way castle to caste sieges sucks in my opinion.

You can’t counter treb hills from bay either. I guess we are screwed.

sostronk.8167:

CHIPS.6018:

sostronk.8167:

My server has this thing called counter trebbing. Its pretty magical. What we do is build a treb and destroy theirs. No need to take their keep in order to do it. Sit back casually with your ele and talk about how blue the sky is today.

You can’t counter treb garrison from bay.

Either way castle to caste sieges sucks in my opinion.

You can’t counter treb hills from bay either. I guess we are screwed.

Screwed? I am not even talking about game balance. I am saying how ridiculous it is to have a castle to castle siege war. Name me one fantasy story that involves castle to castle sieges.

The complaint is only valid if you could treb an enemy tower from your own tower at the start of the match, without taking an enemy tower or keep beforehand.

Which you cant. So it isnt valid.

Yes keeps and towers start close to each other, but keep in mind who they belong to at the start of the round.

This thread is like complaining that the enemy is trebbing your castle from the city gates after you lost the city gates.

CHIPS.6018:

sostronk.8167:

CHIPS.6018:

sostronk.8167:

My server has this thing called counter trebbing. Its pretty magical. What we do is build a treb and destroy theirs. No need to take their keep in order to do it. Sit back casually with your ele and talk about how blue the sky is today.

You can’t counter treb garrison from bay.

Either way castle to caste sieges sucks in my opinion.

You can’t counter treb hills from bay either. I guess we are screwed.

Screwed? I am not even talking about game balance. I am saying how ridiculous it is to have a castle to castle siege war. Name me one fantasy story that involves castle to castle sieges.

I could probably find one, even if it was obscure, but this is beside the point. Lets play out a scenario. I am a book author of fantasy books and your a publisher. I write this fantasy book and send it to you in an attempt to publish it. You knock it back because it involves an element in the book that has not been in any other fantasy book. It may have been the most enjoyable read ever and sell millions of copies. Enforcing precendent in any fantasy entertainment is completely contradictory to the whole concept of fantasy. Otherwise today, every game we play could be something like homer and the oddysey and every single fantasy aspect has to be precisely the same. Then again, even these ancient fantasy books wouldn’t be around because they didn’t conform with some other previous fantasy.

Merendel.7128:

Honestly I’m fine with towers being able to siege keeps and keeps able to fire back. The only issue I have is keeps fireing on other keeps where no retaliation is possible. Garison to bay is one example. Garrison cant hit hills but there is this tiny window where it can hit bay which is very difficult to countersiege. Only way to stop it is to either take garison or to very slowly wittle it away from below while abuseing the odd LOS rules of the balista 2 shot and sometimes arrow carts.

This so much.

Just taking a little off that cliff at Garrison so it can’t treb Bay would be a nice improvement.

That and adding a way for the SE tower to treb Hills…somehow.

counter treb or get rid of it?

If you can’t get 100 supply and 1-2 ele to counter treb.. you don’t deserve that tower/keep.

Arena Net has said that they do not plan on scrapping the current maps and I’d imagine ‘editing’ them would fall under the same lines. A more likely (though I suspect both these ideas are far fetched) would be to simply reduce the range of trebuchets.
—————————————————————————————————————————————-
I guess the core goes down to, is Arena Net advertising a large scale multi-map battlefield in the design of ‘Helms Deep’ or are they advertising a leap frog/siege simulator with a baseball element (catch the boulder and win!)

Cause if its the leap frog then yes, the game is working fine and I need to go preorder Elder Scrolls online while dropping this for Planetside.

If you can’t tell I’m one of the skeptical ‘on the fence’ players waiting to see if the February patch is going to be as ‘amazing’ as they claim.

Don’t know. I like that we can treb towers from Garrison and take it with 3 people. Don’t need zerg to get stuff done.

Trebbing towers from keeps is fine, and trebbing keeps from towers if fine, no probs with that. But SMC to overlook or overlook to SMC shouldn’t work, and Garrison to Bay is the same

CHIPS.6018:

But castle to castle sieges NEVER existed even in fantasy books. That’s because it would be ridiculous.

I’d love it if they patched in 100 mile treks to plunder enemy keeps just to meet the standards of your fantasy books.

You might also want to visit Europe, particularly the Rhine river region in Germany and the mountains in Austria. Those castles are very close to trebbing distance IRL.

IDC about treb from inside walls as long you can counter it… Bay can’t counter Garisson and Colorlake can’t counter Hills (maybe there is more, but I haven’t noticed yet)… All you can do is watch as the enemy team slowly take your base…