Guild Wars 2

So this question has been rattling in my head. Why is there hatred for Open World siege such as ballista and arrow carts aimed at blobs? It was my understanding that this was one of their purposes. From Maguuma, I see blobs rolling around the gate of a keep out of supplies, complaining about nothing to fight (cause Dragonbrand has no idea how to commit), I put a couple superior trebs down and start hitting the gate from range. Then the yelling happens.

I sorta thought that’s the point of siege….to siege.

Could anyone clarify the mentality here or is it purely because folks just want to stomp face in hand to hand? This is the most confusing thing I have seen.

It isn’t universally hated by any means in my opinion. Personally, I am all for it. In my opinion, the folks that dislike it, have created their own idea on how to do things, and chose to speak negatively about out of the personal bias of their subjective opinion.

To those people who hate it… I just build another one and keep raining havoc on them.

There are all manner of people trying to impose gentleman’s agreements on the rest of us, be it the GvG and PvP “don’t add” brigade or the anti-siege troll whiners (no, I’m not baiting). In the end, it’s up to Anet to set the rules, and WvW is best as a near-sandbox with as few as possible.

Do what you want, that’s the joy of WvW!

For a lot of wvw players/commanders, the use of open-field siege is similar for the use of biological/nuclear weapons.
Is it effective? Yes.
Is it acceptable? Your call.

If you’re using open-field siege while fighting even numbers, it’ll destroy the fun of those ppl who likes to fight, challenge themselves. (And will make your enemy think you’re a coward.. not like anyone cares about what the enemy thinks.)
As it’s about OPEN field, it’s not about defending/attacking an objective, ‘cos it’s in the open, so the only thing you can get while mass-murdering them with siege is bags.

Maybe you can become rich with bags, but according to my experience, the same time spent in pve will give you more gold, so for me, playing wvw for fun is the only answer, therefore I’ll continue to run away from fights when there’s open field siege with even numbers, even if the siege is ours.

If you ask me it depends on who is building it.

We’ve found ourselves fighting an enemy zerg so many times, and even though they sometimes outnumber us 3-1 it is they who build ACs.
This just shows the level or rather lack of skills that zerg has. If it was us building the ACs you can understand, but when the enemy which outnumbers you greatly builds siege it’s just laughable.

But then some servers want certain victory no matter what, they do not care about giving you a fair fight, if ACs mean a faster fight and more loot, they will build them.

Open field is supposed to be the places where you can have focus on the players and combat style. If you want to play seige monkey then go to a tower and start grinding a wall with a cata, or sit in an AC out of los and make “pew pew” noises while you jam 3 buttons in one place while you pretend to be good at the game.

Aside from golems, Siege is immobile … golems are slow.
If your side is unable to take advantage of this fact, then you deserve to be mowed down.

I imagine with the winding paths, etc. coming with the new maps that we might see even more open field siege as there are likely to be more choke points.

People can learn and adapt … or they can stagnate.

There are no rules stating that siege is only for towers/keeps/etc.. There is no reason for a smart group to not take advantage they can to win.

If someone beats you … sorry … unless they used exploits, you got outplayed (or zerged down, lol)

I got in trouble for saying open field siege is bad.

So, I guess open field siege is really, really good.

Lots of people want to fight in relatively matched numbers in open terrain. They feel like this is the “fairest” WvW gets. Some folks look forward to these fights as a tst of skill. Or just a fun time, you know. Building ACs to fire into the fight violates that sense of fairness.

Anyone who’s complaining about building trebs out in the field to bypass enemy siege has likely heard the “open field siege” line too many times and picked it up from osmosis without understanding what it actually means.

Servers which reside GvG guilds typically hate open siege. You’re on Maguuma which is like the premier fights-only server making this thread hilarious.

Open field siege pretty much tells the other server that you suck so hard that you need siege to win an otherwise fair fight.

It’s super fun to sit on AC’s in the middle of the field. Looks like this for 1 hour straight

Group A————AC fire range————Group B

xo (…………………………………………………………) ox
xo (……………………………………………………………) ox
xo (…………………………………………………………) ox
xo (…………………………………………………………) ox
xo (…………………………………………………………) ox

Looks like so much fun.

Personally, I enjoy the melee this game offers better than other mmo’s … the combat style is more enjoyable. I don’t enjoy sitting on AC’s.

gricks.1897:

So … lalalala…
is it purely because folks just want to stomp face in hand to hand?

Yes. Fighting is fun. But siege is a part of the game… everyone usues it all the time. Preference and enjoyment for me though is in the battle toe to toe mano a mano.

gricks.1897:

So this question has been rattling in my head. Why is there hatred for Open World siege such as ballista and arrow carts aimed at blobs? It was my understanding that this was one of their purposes. From Maguuma, I see blobs rolling around the gate of a keep out of supplies, complaining about nothing to fight (cause Dragonbrand has no idea how to commit), I put a couple superior trebs down and start hitting the gate from range. Then the yelling happens.

I sorta thought that’s the point of siege….to siege.

Could anyone clarify the mentality here or is it purely because folks just want to stomp face in hand to hand? This is the most confusing thing I have seen.

Ehh, if you’re trebbing a structure then who cares? I think people take issue when it’s even numbers or the larger force is building siege to take out a smaller one. It just makes them look…well, pathetic and eventually they’ll be the punchline to some jokes and probably avoided in the future. People get bored and nobody wins at that point. There’s actual war and then there’s being a poor sport in a game.

The thing is, how someone beats you does not matter unless they exploited.

If we have you 10 to 1 and decide to build siege to kill you … we still killed you.

You can feel better using whatever logic you want, but:

• Using siege is part of WvW
• There are no restrictions on when/where you can use siege

If you don’t like an arrow cart standoff …

• Go elsewhere
• Use stealth and flank
• Portal bomb
• Build some longer range siege and start pelting theirs with yours.

If you actually get stuck staring across a field at someone else’s siege … neither side is really using their brains.

Fight against YB and you’ll understand how BORING the fights are. Watching a cactus grow is more entertaining.

We (my guild and I) play for large scale PvP, not facing off against siege monkeys. If you want to sit on siege, that’s your prerogative. We’re not going to give you the satisfaction of killing us with siege. We’ll simply walk away because it’s not fun for us.

When you see 50-60 man group building ACs and ballistas against 30 man group or even equal number, its just sad.

Its just zerglings complaining about it. Any decent group can ignore or move around open field siege. Its not useful apart from maybe chokes. In most cases it makes no difference anyway. But yes zerglings will be upset since their small roaming 40 man blob cant blob another brainless 40 man blob in the mid of nowhere, where each can press 1 and be safe from mighty siege that does no dmg anyway.

Basically use it when you need it. I.e. when you have a ktrain come at your keep. But in open field fights its a waste of supply. It works for trolling a bit, but wont mater.

Alice kills Bob

Bob claims that Alice:

• plays an OP class
• got lucky
• used siege
• used *hammer
• spammed an ability

… or some other excuse.

In the end … Bob didn’t kill Alice. Alice killed Bob. This is what matters.

But Bob is too busy making excuses as to why Alice’s kill wasn’t any good

• It wasn’t cool how Alice killed him
• Alice didn’t kill Bob the way people should kill (we’ll ignore that Alice got the kill, not Bob).

… or whatever imaginary rules Bob can think of.

In the end:

• Alice killed Bob by playing smarter than Bob
• Bob is being a sore-loser
• Bob is refusing to adapt and instead make excuses about why he was killed and why Alice isn’t any good (despite her killing Bob).
• Bob is not likely to get any better because of his poor mindset.

Don’t be a Bob.

It’s kinda interesting how many people are sounding off about their distaste for “open field siege” without really reading the OP’s situation. Which is… trebs on a gate.

Well, if a bigger group builds siege against a smaller group in open field , that’s just pathetic x)

but sieging up a tower or keep, why not, you defend it. Siege helps with that, easy life.

But to be fair you should not have added “open field” to the title.

KEEP BOB OUT OF THIS!!! he has done nothing wrong xD. i blame alice for qqing about the fact that bob qqes. This is how the game goes.

aquabat.2986:

Open field is supposed to be the places where you can have focus on the players and combat style. If you want to play seige monkey then go to a tower and start grinding a wall with a cata, or sit in an AC out of los and make “pew pew” noises while you jam 3 buttons in one place while you pretend to be good at the game.

False.
Open field is supposed to be the places where players can do whatever the crap they want, and you have absolutely no say what the “official” intentions for it are. I think open field siege is fantastic! You don’t like it? Noted, archived, forgotten. Don’t care, move along, cry more and whatnot. You can always go to not where siege is, right? Because y’know, siege is stationary.

It overpowers combat. So the other side has three choices. Either go directly at the siege to kill it, build counter siege and get into a siege war, or ignore the siege and try fighting in the arrow and poison fire.

Option one gives away where you’re going and lets the other zerg know where exactly to hit. This limits your movement and positioning options. You commit to the siege spot and moving out of it nullifies the point of what you’re doing.

Option two prolongs the situation. It can work but it can also end up in a lot of standing around and staring at each other across distances. The general problem with siege fights is that there’s only so much siege and so many more players. 10% of the group will be firing on siege while the other 90% are staring into the abyss, essentially not actively playing the game.

Option three tends to just get you killed. Siege damage is too much coverage to ignore.

etiolate.9185:

The general problem with siege fights is that there’s only so much siege and so many more players. 10% of the group will be firing on siege while the other 90% are staring into the abyss, essentially not actively playing the game.

The other 90% are jumping up and down in one spot right in front of your own siege weapons like rabid monkeys. (To counter ballistas.)

gricks.1897:

I put a couple superior trebs down and start hitting the gate from range.

Ugh. Don’t use a treb on a gate.

“The primary purpose of trebuchets is to destroy walls over distances too large for a catapult, although they can also deal reduced damage to gates and infantry”

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Trebuchet

ASP.8093:

It’s kinda interesting how many people are sounding off about their distaste for “open field siege” without really reading the OP’s situation. Which is… trebs on a gate.

Right?!

Come to YB and we shall teach you the superior ways of the treb!

etiolate.9185:

It overpowers combat. So the other side has three choices. Either go directly at the siege to kill it, build counter siege and get into a siege war, or ignore the siege and try fighting in the arrow and poison fire.

Option one gives away where you’re going and lets the other zerg know where exactly to hit. This limits your movement and positioning options. You commit to the siege spot and moving out of it nullifies the point of what you’re doing.

Option two prolongs the situation. It can work but it can also end up in a lot of standing around and staring at each other across distances. The general problem with siege fights is that there’s only so much siege and so many more players. 10% of the group will be firing on siege while the other 90% are staring into the abyss, essentially not actively playing the game.

Option three tends to just get you killed. Siege damage is too much coverage to ignore.

You forgot Option 4: Go somewhere else, and make the supply they dumped into said open-field siege a waste.

Chaba.5410:

gricks.1897:

I put a couple superior trebs down and start hitting the gate from range.

Ugh. Don’t use a treb on a gate.

“The primary purpose of trebuchets is to destroy walls over distances too large for a catapult, although they can also deal reduced damage to gates and infantry”

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Trebuchet

Nothing wrong with trebbing a gate if you’re already in a good position to do so and the treb will not hit walls from that position, and the enemy will not allow you to reposition.

ASP.8093:

It’s kinda interesting how many people are sounding off about their distaste for “open field siege” without really reading the OP’s situation. Which is… trebs on a gate.

Eh, read what he specifically asks and not the situation which resulted in some mapchat explosion.

Open field siege – we all got bored with putting siege down and creeping towards each other fairly quickly. It’s regressive and centralizing.

Also, a commander often wants that supply to go take objectives, so if you are not the tag then you are luring militia to throw supply at something the commander didn’t want to use it on.

Open field arrow carts and ballista are totally legit, but definitely I give no respect to groups that use them. Playing in arrow cart fire is zero fun.

waSte.8640:

Open field arrow carts and ballista are totally legit, but definitely I give no respect to groups that use them. Playing in arrow cart fire is zero fun.

If your a red name to me, your respect means nothing. Your loot bag, on the other hand, gave me Spark a few weeks ago. Wanna guess which one means something to me?

Firing the arrow cart is always fun.

You must be a YB player hehe.

coglin.1867:

It isn’t universally hated by any means in my opinion. Personally, I am all for it. In my opinion, the folks that dislike it, have created their own idea on how to do things, and chose to speak negatively about out of the personal bias of their subjective opinion.

Correct. Open field is not universally hated. There are plenty of people who have no fighting skills and siege is the best way for them to enjoy the game.

style.6173:

coglin.1867:

It isn’t universally hated by any means in my opinion. Personally, I am all for it. In my opinion, the folks that dislike it, have created their own idea on how to do things, and chose to speak negatively about out of the personal bias of their subjective opinion.

Correct. Open field is not universally hated. There are plenty of people who have no fighting skills and siege is the best way for them to enjoy the game.

I see what you did there lol

ASP.8093:

It’s kinda interesting how many people are sounding off about their distaste for “open field siege” without really reading the OP’s situation. Which is… trebs on a gate.

Found that funny myself. Most wouldn’t consider siege to knock down doors open field…. More likely than not, the people were worried the enemies would log or jump BLs if pushed too hard…..

In my view:
I don’t care for open field siege during an even fight, however I understand and accept that WvW is like war, and whatever gives someone an advantage over the enemy they are entitled to use.

ASP.8093:

It’s kinda interesting how many people are sounding off about their distaste for “open field siege” without really reading the OP’s situation. Which is… trebs on a gate.

While the situation in question was just a treb on a gate, OP did ask about open field siege, as per the thread title. Treb on a gate isn’t exactly useful anyway, however that could have easily been an AC on a cliff, or a ballista on a hill, both of which could have been open field siege.

@OP don’t treb a gate. Gates are for rams and trebs are for walls. (unless you are these bunch of wierdos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUXTZpp6nRc)

Turk.5460:

aquabat.2986:

Open field is supposed to be the places where you can have focus on the players and combat style. If you want to play seige monkey then go to a tower and start grinding a wall with a cata, or sit in an AC out of los and make “pew pew” noises while you jam 3 buttons in one place while you pretend to be good at the game.

False.
Open field is supposed to be the places where players can do whatever the crap they want, and you have absolutely no say what the “official” intentions for it are. I think open field siege is fantastic! You don’t like it? Noted, archived, forgotten. Don’t care, move along, cry more and whatnot. You can always go to not where siege is, right? Because y’know, siege is stationary.

Not false at all, and I didn’t say it was the official intentions of open field. Yes, you can build siege if you want. The point however, was that if two groups wanted to focus on player ability and guild teamwork then they find someone in open to field and do battle without having to worry about a tower or keep that is sieged up. Yes, we all know siege is stationary. People go to open areas because they know there won’t be any siege there. Instead, we get toxic ppters crying about everything all the time and just completely wrecking a good hard brawl, where player player competence matters. Not sitting on 5 AC on a gate and jamming 3 buttons at the front of a gate.

The fight focused guilds are trying to keep out of your way by taking it to open field and doing their business without siege interference. Yet they still can’t get a break with people coming in constantly and dumping siege around because they are too clueless and lack any sort of critical thinking to be able to understand the combat system and be good at fighting. If you don’t like open field fights, then don’t come out of your precious objectives. If you don’t like fighting in groups because you die in 3 seconds then stay in your objectives. Build siege when 2 groups are about to face off is the same as saying to your server friends, “hey, I really don’t think you guys are any good at this game at all so I’m going to sit here and not work in your team and try and improve my ability to play my profession”.

GvG guilds aren’t touching your objectives, so don’t touch their fights.

waSte.8640:

Open field arrow carts and ballista are totally legit, but definitely I give no respect to groups that use them. Playing in arrow cart fire is zero fun.

“Having fun” is totally subjective, just saying

Not only is open field siege a mark of being unimaginably bad at the game, it’s not even a good strategy. It’s analogous to people that sit at maximum range at a world boss like the caledon wurm despite this being less safe than getting into melee with it. In trying to go for the safe easy mode you’ve actually used a weaker strategy and made yourself more likely to lose.

When I was actively playing in a gvg guild I found that any group that used open field siege was much easier to beat than groups that would be willing to risk themselves in a real fight.

The use of open field siege is like putting a giant red flag above your groups head that your an easy target. The use of siege basically shows that you have no confidence in your ability to fight the enemy. This just basically makes you prey and the likely-hood of you getting farmed grows exponentially.

Most look at the use of siege as a lack of fighting skills. If the blob is so big you think you have to have it to beat them, chances are the siege is a waste cause they will simply steam roll you and take it out first.

So for the siege and turtle servers. Your simply looked at as a joke in open field fighting.

People usually go to the open field to get away from siege sooo dropping an arrow cart or a ballista there kinda annoys people in general.

I can understand a treb or cata being dropped to lure people out of their structures but that’s kinda not really the type of open field siege people hate on.

So this discussion leads to another, I read a lot about Trebs not being used against gates, for which I agree completely. I have only been in the wvw seen for about a month. The scenario was as follows:

1. Blob of about 40-50 in SW Keep EB just…sitting on their gate. Only about 20 of us outside. We do not ahve the numbers to push the gate, to plant rams. Every time we do, it rains bags, but theres just to many to sustain the killing so we fall back. Happens for about 10-15 minutes.
2. I want the keep. No particular reason why…I just am tired of DB’s camping.
3. Plop trebs back up the hill. Knock down gate, DB retreats.

After that we did the normal Catapulting wall from the side.

Any commanders able to provide a better strategy for future use of the scenario?

Trebs, catas and even ballistas to cap towers/keeps is something entirely different than building ACs in a zergfight.
Trebs, catas and ballistas can’t do that much damage against an enemy zerg like an AC can do as they’re rather slow. So, I guess no one despises the use of these 3 siege types “open field” even if used against enemy players although that wasn’t their original purpose – it would be stupid if it was actually, don’t ask me how many times I won a 1 vs camp vs enemy on balli.
Anyway, I don’t know if I had the luck to be on and encounter servers who didn’t use ACs to clear out tower siege in the past or if ACs have been buffed/changed – it annoys me more that a zerg can just come up to a tower, place an AC and destroy everything in that tower – we would’ve to have a “zerg” sitting in each tower to prevent that. And I wonder why Quentin Lake has been changed if this “tactic” seems to be ok.

Siege is for attacking or defending objectives. Using siege in the open field is for cowards. If you are absolutely certain you can’t take an enemy force, run. If you think you have a chance, fight them without siege and let the better player win. If you build an AC before the fight, you already lost no matter what the outcome. If you drop siege and win, it is only because you used siege when the enemy fought honorably and you will eventually lose self-respect. If you lose, you AND enemy lose all respect for you because you had an advantage and still lost.

Don’t listen to
The Scrubs

thehipone.6812:

Don’t listen to
The Scrubs

I like this guy. Hes posting an article that is just rattling around in my head through this entire discussion. I always thought it was some strategic issue about open world siege…now I am finding out its simply a bunch of “Rules of Honor” players seem to be putting on themselves.

While I can see a moral benefit of this since this is just a game, it also hampers actual strategic plays since GOOD strategies in real life have always been underhanded.

“In combat, there are no rules, always cheat; always win. The only unfair fight is the one you lose.”

gricks.1897:

While I can see a moral benefit of this since this is just a game, it also hampers actual strategic plays since GOOD strategies in real life have always been underhanded.

“In combat, there are no rules, always cheat; always win. The only unfair fight is the one you lose.”

Don’t know, you can throw an Abomb somewhere and you win – no losses on your side, the country is probably far away so your people don’t have to deal with the consequences – but wars don’t go like this. I can understand when there’s 80 vs 40 and the 40 build an AC, but we’ve had the 80 building 5 – a bit embarrassing, isn’kitten It might be that we won anyway but I hope to not see that server again any time soon.