Guild Wars 2

I assume standard majority means 75%?

… why make it a consumable item when you can just add another blip for the repair mastery in WvW ranks? That would unlock an F1 skill on the siege that spends supply to repair it. It would also balance it so that the siege wouldn’t be usable while it is being repaired, and would prevent like 10 people spamming repair to keep 1 siege weapon up.

perseco.8321:

… why make it a consumable item when you can just add another blip for the repair mastery in WvW ranks? That would unlock an F1 skill on the siege that spends supply to repair it. It would also balance it so that the siege wouldn’t be usable while it is being repaired, and would prevent like 10 people spamming repair to keep 1 siege weapon up.

Now there’s a good idea. Although I don’t think this vote will go through anyways.

Xenesis.6389:

I assume standard majority means 75%?

Standard majority means… a majority. A standard, ordinary majority of grater than 50%. Despite a 75% majority being arguably the “standard” for recent WvW feedback polls, that’s not what the phrase means.

Grant Gertz.7524:

A message from the WvW Team,
The next WvW Poll is up!
guildwars2.com/feedback
Please share your thoughts and feedback on the poll in this thread!

Nerf Arrow Cart damge plz :<

They will need to severly nerf the arrow cart for this to be a good addition.

Quite alot of T1 server hump ACs all day already dont see how a blob humping ACs and forever repairing it is a good thing. If anything that makes it horrible for roamers, smaller servers and any fights heck some blob guilds never engage without a few flash built ACs behind them.

Entrea Sumatae.7830:

Xenesis.6389:

I assume standard majority means 75%?

Standard majority means… a majority. A standard, ordinary majority of grater than 50%. Despite a 75% majority being arguably the “standard” for recent WvW feedback polls, that’s not what the phrase means.

Well thank you Professor Entrea Sumatae.7830

Do something about open field siege. Bigger server throwing down 6 trebs, 4 shield gens and 5 balis on anz hill because they know there’s no way in hell we can push them off and they don’t want to actually work to take overlook. We defended in lord room anyway because they’re all scrubs but it sounds like this would make it even worse.

Stop making changes that add more advantage to numbers. The rest of us can’t repair siege anyway because 50 staff eles are bombing the crap out of it.

since the vote is close, lets average it! M W F siege hammers Tu Th Sa Su no hammers

(yes somewhat bitter 1 month vote turned into 2 months…..)

Xenesis.6389:

I assume standard majority means 75%?

That is a supermajority.

I am fairly confident that this means 50% majority decides, since the directional bias is not indicated. If it were a 66% majority they would say which side needs that majority.

Might be useful to make it an actual link like http://feedback.guildwars2.com/

Great make siege more prevalent………. I voted no.

However I must say this is a fairly major change to the way the mode is played it arguably should be a super majority.

I’m for any update as a trial period to test it out…. If it doesn’t work we scrap it at the next poll.

As someone on reddit said this will make long sieges even longer and potentially impossible assuming even just half a dozen are defending.

morrolan.9608:

Great make siege more prevalent………. I voted no.

However I must say this is a fairly major change to the way the mode is played it arguably should be a super majority.

I’d suspect that bringing in for testing would be a simple majority while making them permanent would (or should) require a supermajority.

morrolan.9608:

As someone on reddit said this will make long sieges even longer and potentially impossible assuming even just half a dozen are defending.

Before testing, all we can do is theorize on how it’d be done. Actual number balancing would heavily alter any theoretical presumption.

This would just lead to huge stalemates where nothing gets taken because siege gets repaired constantly. Please no.

The question asked: Today we are here to ask if you believe Repair Hammers should be introduced as a live beta item?

This is not a “yes, add it” to the game permanently. This is “yes, let’s try this out for a bit first before we vote on whether we want it or not”.

We’re being given the option to try this out first:
Yes, Repair Hammers should be introduced on a trial basis.
After players have had a chance to test repair hammers we will hold a follow-up poll to determine if repair hammers should become a permanent feature of the game.

Speculation on whether this is good or not is just that: speculation. This poll right here is actually giving us the opportunity to try it out before we vote on it definitively.

Nep Leet.5491:

The question asked: Today we are here to ask if you believe Repair Hammers should be introduced as a live beta item?

This is not a “yes, add it” to the game permanently. This is “yes, let’s try this out for a bit first before we vote on whether we want it or not”.

We’re being given the option to try this out first:
Yes, Repair Hammers should be introduced on a trial basis.
After players have had a chance to test repair hammers we will hold a follow-up poll to determine if repair hammers should become a permanent feature of the game.

Speculation on whether this is good or not is just that: speculation. This poll right here is actually giving us the opportunity to try it out before we vote on it definitively.

And yet most people can see the glaring problems with it at face value. Should there be an option to repair siege? Yes. Should it be anything like what was suggested in the poll? No.

This will just heighten the prevalence of siege. So no.

I think you should be able to repair cannons, mortars, etc, but don’t know how I feel about being able to repair all siege.

If you have repair hammers that would be an awful idea. If people are attacking your keep and destroying your siege on outer as you man it, if someone runs up with a hammer to repair it, then that would be wasting supply not to mention that person repairing would go down and die from people ranging and meteor showering them and etc. Keeps only have so much supply and if you have to repair outer walls, inner, and make siege then having to count the limited crucial supply toward tools, repairing a lost cause piece of siege, then obviously this is a bad idea. This is literally the worst idea i’ve ever heard of. PLease vote no. PLUS people can take advantage of this. An “enemy” can damage a piece of siege to like half and their spy friend can repair it and they can repeat this until they drain the supply and they probably would get wvw exp from it. This is a awful idea and broken before it is started.

Is it a coincidence that this is suggested when Yaks Bend is imploding? I think not. Let this forever be known amongst proper WVW players as being “ArenaCare” for siege humpers. Just think of those poor Yaks Bend players who are struggling to compete now…. What will they do if this isn’t implemented?!

I don’t see why we can’t try this out… doesn’t seem like a terrible complicated item to create, as the poll also implies. So whatever happens with it, not much of anything is wasted either way.

Voting yes for now…

its like Reh and Perseco said, the server with the biggest blob can just abuse the kitten out of this and if this thing does go through, I would like to see some sort of restriction apply to it like this siege can only be repair x amount of times or some sort of debuff on you that you can repair again after a x amount of mins.

Borderlands…2 months in the future:

Red Commander: “Need help repairing treb in Garrison! Blue blob here!”
Red Player A: “How do I join squad? No button?”
Red Commander: “Sent you invite!”
Red Player A: “Got it!”
Red Commander: “Get repair hammers at siege NPC, also get on TS!”
Red Player A: “Got hammers, don’t have TS?”
Red Commander: “Download it here…”
Red Player A: “just joined TS, need permission!”
Red Commander: “someone please give Player A permission!”

crickets

Red Commander: “there, gave you permission.”
Red Player A: “Thanks! On my way!”

System message: Blue team has taken Red Garrison!

Red Commander: “Too many! Rally! All please join squad and TS!”

crickets

Red Player B: “How do I join squad? I’m kinda new”
Red Commander: “Sent you invite! Join TS!”
Red Player B: “I don’t have TS?”
Red Commander: “download it here…”
Red Player B: “thanks! what channel?”

crickets

Red Commander: “Get repair hammers at siege NPC, also get on TS channel X!”

System message: Blue team has taken Red Tower!
System message: Living world 3 is now live!
System message: You are outnumbered!

crickets
crickets

Red Player B: “there a tag on?”

crickets
System message: Blue team has taken Red Camp!
crickets

Crise.9401:

I don’t see why we can’t try this out… doesn’t seem like a terrible complicated item to create, as the poll also implies. So whatever happens with it, not much of anything is wasted either way.

Voting yes for now…

It sounds like it would be a Traps and Tricks consumable, which doesn’t seem particularly complicated to create. I’m not a fan of voting yes though on something just because it is easy to create. I’d rather devs spend development time on deeper issues related to how we play WvW as is. Like I’d rather see commander tag visibility improved rather than commander tags disappearing behind ally health bars and of course population and scoring issues.

In non-siege scenarios, this won’t be used at all. Siege goes from 100 to 0 too fast in open field fights, and actually trying to repair siege just means you’re a sitting duck for enemy wells.

When sieging a structure, I feel like this would help a coordinated offense more than defenders. It seems like everyone above me forgot you could repair rams/catapults, or the shield gens to protect them, or your own ACs to kill the enemy ACs. Just because its siege related, doesn’t mean only siege humpers can use it.

Instead of refusing to use something new, learn to adapt and you may find that it’s actually better for you. It’s only a beta, so if it turns out to be unhealthy for the game you can vote against it later.

Cake.4920:

In non-siege scenarios, this won’t be used at all. Siege goes from 100 to 0 too fast in open field fights, and actually trying to repair siege just means you’re a sitting duck for enemy wells.

When sieging a structure, I feel like this would help a coordinated offense more than defenders. It seems like everyone above me forgot you could repair rams/catapults, or the shield gens to protect them, or your own ACs to kill the enemy ACs. Just because its siege related, doesn’t mean only siege humpers can use it.

Instead of refusing to use something new, learn to adapt and you may find that it’s actually better for you. It’s only a beta, so if it turns out to be unhealthy for the game you can vote against it later.

X_X yeah like the desert borderlands we can’t get rid of, the the bugs, and all the other junk they messed up in wvw that won’t go away.

It scares me some people have voted for this. If you actually truly think about this and its ramifications you will see it is a god awful idea. I’ve done many thousands of hours and wvw this is just so bad of an idea it’s keeping me awake worried about how bad this will harm wvw. If someone is attacking your keep and you are on a sup ac, and you are getting ranged and your sup ac starts to lose health and someone comes up to repair it, it is a horrible waste of supply and will drain the supply so fast. Plus people put siege in awful spots and repairs on their damage isn’t worth it. Supplies currently after major fights are already spoken for for out and inner wall/gate repairs. Adding in this would be awful. It is already a broken idea before it has started. We already have problems with spies and them trolling siege and supplies and if they can make siege, have someone damage it from the enemy server and they repair it, they can drain keeps supplies so fast. It’d be so unfair and trolly, and no server would benefit from it. Also It is awful for people to be running into the aoe fields to try to repair a piece of siege that is going to be destroyed, they just make it take a little longer and eat up the supplies. It will be damaging to wvw for everyone. People won’t be able to defend or attack properly if tools keep using all the supps to repair siege that was badly placed or would be destroyed anyway. Also if you try to destroy siege with a treb and someone keeps repairing it, they will have jipped their own server taking all the supplies needed for an impending fight.

Repair hammers would be a good thing for weapons like mortars canons and oil. These siege weapons have a cool down of 2 or 3 minutes before you can rebuild it.

On the other side mortars, canons and oil on outer walls are so easily to destroy that a repair is futile in many cases. Weapons on inner walls many times do not need a repair. Weapons like AC or trebs you can place at location with minimal damage. There is not much need to repair. In addition you can rebuild these weapons without any cool down.

I have the impression the repair hammers will only strengthen the attackers and dominant servers.

But I would like to test the item. We could also test accessibilty and repair costs in dependency of the server performance. For example only the weakest server can use the hammer or the dominant has much higher repair costs.

I vote yes, but there needs to be a stipulation like they cant no be used on siege that has inflicted or received damage in the last x minutes.

I don’t see the reason why not to try it before make assumptions it will be good or bad. If people bother to read the question and description of poll before whining on forums, they could also read the “live beta item” at end.

Wow, just wow. Srsly u dont need a trial to see how negative this change would be for wvw….there’s always a ton of siege everywhere but at least u kill it its over. Now everything is gonna get repaired over and over again.

Considering siege is “dummy-proof” i shouldnt be surprised at the current poll results.

This should be like ressing…. You can’t repair while its under attack. I see no problem with this then. It’s not a game changer it’s not the end of the world… It’s a trial.

Khezekiah Bellamy.5016:

I vote yes, but there needs to be a stipulation like they cant no be used on siege that has inflicted or received damage in the last x minutes.

You have clearly defined reservations yet you vote yes anyway… Thats exactly how the border vote nearly ended in disaster for the community.

But I digress. Without knowing the actual implementation, this only empowers zergs siege humping. Sometimes bring down siege just in the nick of time is critical. I dont want to see 50 people standing there constantly repairing it despite it being hit with 20 ballista bolts. We dont even know if its gonna be 1:1 drain which would be bad. I would also consider say a 3:1 drain being acceptable (ie if a ram cost 50 to build, it cost 150 to repair 0-100) but kitten if I’m going to vote yes on wishfull thinking.

Who cares about something like a repair hammer? Sounds so lame I wish the development was focused on something else like:

1) profession-balance
2) server population balance

For me would even be cool if the wvw team made some changes to wvw maps, like for example add a captureable area to skritt and centaur camps that gives score.

zoomborg.9462:

Wow, just wow. Srsly u dont need a trial to see how negative this change would be for wvw….there’s always a ton of siege everywhere but at least u kill it its over. Now everything is gonna get repaired over and over again.

Considering siege is “dummy-proof” i shouldnt be surprised at the current poll results.

I’m glad we have clairvoyants among us..
Sieges are part of defending / attacking objectives in wvw, and any addition can be good if its balanced.
WvW its not just about killing other players in open field, if you want to fight players only, do PvP or GvG.

For everyone voting yes…keep in mind that Golems are also classified as “Siege Weapons”. Have fun when the enemy zerg is at your garri with a dozen Omegas and the rest with repair hammers (until the wall/door is down).

i can’t believe we have this poll…
moar sieges please…
sieges everywhere…
one siege for every player.

The more QQ the more I want it… This is how I will base the rest of my votes. People take this unbalanced game mode way to seriously. #golemwars2016

Aezyr.5304:

For everyone voting yes…keep in mind that Golems are also classified as “Siege Weapons”. Have fun when the enemy zerg is at your garri with a dozen Omegas and the rest with repair hammers (until the wall/door is down).

What if repair doesn’t stack? What is siege its disabled for repair duration? What if golems can’t be repaired?
Why people don’t wait to see how Anet plan to implement this in BETA then vote to another poll if its good to keep it or not?

Calendra.9074:

Aezyr.5304:

For everyone voting yes…keep in mind that Golems are also classified as “Siege Weapons”. Have fun when the enemy zerg is at your garri with a dozen Omegas and the rest with repair hammers (until the wall/door is down).

What if repair doesn’t stack? What is siege its disabled for repair duration? What if golems can’t be repaired?
Why people don’t wait to see how Anet plan to implement this in BETA then vote to another poll if its good to keep it or not?

Eh what? If this passes I assure you its going into WvW as Anet has already designed it. There are no what ifs and there is no beta test with a vote to keep it. This is the vote. Yes or no, choose.

I’m on the fence with this one – can see some major potential downsides but it does depend on implementation. If this weren’t a trial, I wouldn’t want to risk it. But I can’t see it breaking the game too much over a trial period so I’m willing to see how it pans out.

For me a lot depends on the actual implementaion. If you can repair siege only when it took no damage and was not used for something like 20 seconds (to account for treb vs treb) I see no problem with repair hammers.

Well, such a thing would require certain limitations:

• It must have certain costs. As a consumable, it’ll cost at least badges of honor. And as it has been already stated, it’ll cost supply.
• It should not be possible to repair disabled siege.
• I would not go with disabling repairing while under attack altogether, but the number of people who can repair a single siege at the same time has to have a limit so a massive zerg can’t outrepair damage from defenses. I would go with no more than 5 people at the same time, and the repair from those 5 people should not be able to keep placeable siege up permanently under attack of 2-3 superior arrow carts used by players with maxed masteries, only extend the time they will last. For location defenses such as cannons and oil, that could be a bit more.
• And, of course, using the repair hammers should require training a WvW skill, and be affected by either the Repair or Build Masteries in some way, or use a new trick & traps mastery along other consumables.

We have extra action buttons now thanks to raids, so it could be possible to use those extra buttons for actions like this, so hammers could be trained with a WvW skill instead being a consumable, but since we have the portable provisioner now, making it a consumable would make it more clear how many badges of honor you are spending on repairs, and make it count for the Big Spender daily. So I would stick with the consumable.

I think that about sums it up – I’m ok with the idea of repairing defensive siege, just not with it making offensive siege invincible. Siege shootouts are what make defending against larger numbers possible, and if you can’t effectively do that we’re going to be restricted to attrition and choke points.

Dawdler.8521:

Eh what? If this passes I assure you its going into WvW as Anet has already designed it. There are no what ifs and there is no beta test with a vote to keep it. This is the vote. Yes or no, choose.

That is for the next vote to decide.
Not this one as it clearly says:
“After players have had a chance to test repair hammers we will hold a follow-up poll to determine if repair hammers should become a permanent feature of the game.”

For repair hammers to work (which means trial basis) the use of them needs to be balanced as a % of the of the siege repaired.

i.e. if it take 3 treb shots to kill another treb, the repair hammer should only repair 1/3rd of the treb at most (probably less). So while it is more cost efficient from a supply point of view to use a repair hammer, it also should only delay the inevitable to allow for 1-5 more uses of siege under attack. A manned Shield Generator should be more efficient.

Also – I would rather it not be an item at all and be a “repair wall” option built into a WvW track (repair mastery or some such) – Xenesis idea.

How about we add something more beneficial instead – why not allow siege to give some supply when destroyed (ye old dolyak chance)? This would then potentially discourage open field siege and mass placement of siege in small areas (i.e. 5 fully built rams at a T1 tower).

Forum bug

/15charr