Guild Wars 2

Why? why is the siege in WvW like mortars and cannons positioned in places where they can easily be killed? It makes no sense from a defense stand point.

for that reason…. the answer lies in question itself.

Well placed siege = siege glicthed in the most inner side and under the floor, where cant be hitted and sometimes kicks u out of the siege due its placement.

To balance their power. If an enemy group of 30+ camps under them then they are now under ac fire.

Defense in layers.

Justine.6351:

To balance their power. If an enemy group of 30+ camps under them then they are now under ac fire.

Defense in layers.

Well, now reverse this argument, what about the 30+ that go around killing siege when 2 or 3 defend a tower. The siege is killed and there is no way to defend against 30+.

Justine.6351, that layer is discussionable if exist or not

Hitman.5829:

Justine.6351:

To balance their power. If an enemy group of 30+ camps under them then they are now under ac fire.

Defense in layers.

Well, now reverse this argument, what about the 30+ that go around killing siege when 2 or 3 defend a tower. The siege is killed and there is no way to defend against 30+.

so you couldn’t 3v30. does math exist anymore?

Justine.6351:

Hitman.5829:

Justine.6351:

To balance their power. If an enemy group of 30+ camps under them then they are now under ac fire.

Defense in layers.

Well, now reverse this argument, what about the 30+ that go around killing siege when 2 or 3 defend a tower. The siege is killed and there is no way to defend against 30+.

so you couldn’t 3v30. does math exist anymore?

Those maths would be relevant in an open field battle, yet the thread deals with objective defense battles. So it’s more (3+siege+walls)vs30. And that’s the point of walls and siege : help a few amount of scouts/defenders hold an objective against more people. And it miserabily fails because :

• Walls obstruct line sight, so it gets impossible to shoot below, while attackers have a nice time melting you.
• Siege are death traps when they’re too close from the edge, and some sieges don’t really have a use, because they can’t shoot in all direction : they’ll hit some walls, or columns, or hanging ceiling, or whatever in the line of sight. Meanwhilst, the walls/doors are melting.

I’m totally for a small amount of people in a keep/tower being able to melt a small zerg with siege, because, from a tactical point of view, it’s common sense to use a “build” advantage in order not to loose to much of your side’s attacking force. What makes no sense is calls like : “Random keep is under attack, please send the k-train to defend”, and objective defense being reduced to “zerg fight near an objective”.

Hitman.5829:

Justine.6351:

To balance their power. If an enemy group of 30+ camps under them then they are now under ac fire.

Defense in layers.

Well, now reverse this argument, what about the 30+ that go around killing siege when 2 or 3 defend a tower. The siege is killed and there is no way to defend against 30+.

3 should lose to 30+. Siege if well used can stall for a really long time, but in the end, you will need reinforcements anyways.

Even stalling for time is useless with these options, the best option is to stealth, jump down and throw a disabler.

Walls favor the attackers in a odd way, they are just something that is there to delay the ground battle for a while. LoS requirements also makes siege aiming siege from safer spots weird, but this doesn’t make these spots really safe in any way.

You might also ask why guards continue to shoot at walls instead of trying to move to a position where they can hit their target.

Svarty.8019:

You might also ask why guards continue to shoot at walls instead of trying to move to a position where they can hit their target.

They will die if they move to a position where they can hit the enemies, just like players die when doing so. NPCs are smart.

Famine.7915:

Hitman.5829:

Justine.6351:

To balance their power. If an enemy group of 30+ camps under them then they are now under ac fire.

Defense in layers.

Well, now reverse this argument, what about the 30+ that go around killing siege when 2 or 3 defend a tower. The siege is killed and there is no way to defend against 30+.

3 should lose to 30+. Siege if well used can stall for a really long time, but in the end, you will need reinforcements anyways.

Thats not true even in real life

Nikola.3841:

Famine.7915:

Hitman.5829:

Justine.6351:

To balance their power. If an enemy group of 30+ camps under them then they are now under ac fire.

Defense in layers.

Well, now reverse this argument, what about the 30+ that go around killing siege when 2 or 3 defend a tower. The siege is killed and there is no way to defend against 30+.

3 should lose to 30+. Siege if well used can stall for a really long time, but in the end, you will need reinforcements anyways.

Thats not true even in real life

^Yup. The whole point of walls and static defenses is to magnify the force of the defender. A well defended fort or whatever should absolutely be able to win an outnumbered defense if the static defenses are used well.

For example: sending out a small group to troll the kitten out of attackers and draw them into AC range for easy pincushioning rather than pushing out in force.

Just compare how oil is positioned in DAOC (almost unreachable by attackers) and here (serves only as target for epidemic to kill defenders, and actually I never saw it having ANY impact at all as defensive tool)

Anyway, heres video of properly built castles and their defense

JonnyForgotten.4276:

Nikola.3841:

Famine.7915:

Hitman.5829:

Justine.6351:

To balance their power. If an enemy group of 30+ camps under them then they are now under ac fire.

Defense in layers.

Well, now reverse this argument, what about the 30+ that go around killing siege when 2 or 3 defend a tower. The siege is killed and there is no way to defend against 30+.

3 should lose to 30+. Siege if well used can stall for a really long time, but in the end, you will need reinforcements anyways.

Thats not true even in real life

^Yup. The whole point of walls and static defenses is to magnify the force of the defender. A well defended fort or whatever should absolutely be able to win an outnumbered defense if the static defenses are used well.

For example: sending out a small group to troll the kitten out of attackers and draw them into AC range for easy pincushioning rather than pushing out in force.

In what world do you live? are you forgetting there are shield generators? The enemies can just build 2 shield generators and they will be immune to any siege damage.

Hitman.5829:

JonnyForgotten.4276:

Nikola.3841:

Famine.7915:

Hitman.5829:

Justine.6351:

To balance their power. If an enemy group of 30+ camps under them then they are now under ac fire.

Defense in layers.

Well, now reverse this argument, what about the 30+ that go around killing siege when 2 or 3 defend a tower. The siege is killed and there is no way to defend against 30+.

3 should lose to 30+. Siege if well used can stall for a really long time, but in the end, you will need reinforcements anyways.

Thats not true even in real life

^Yup. The whole point of walls and static defenses is to magnify the force of the defender. A well defended fort or whatever should absolutely be able to win an outnumbered defense if the static defenses are used well.

For example: sending out a small group to troll the kitten out of attackers and draw them into AC range for easy pincushioning rather than pushing out in force.

In what world do you live? are you forgetting there are shield generators? The enemies can just build 2 shield generators and they will be immune to any siege damage.

Or just bring 80 vs your 15 as mag just did against BG (because previous attempt with 40 failed)

Nikola.3841:

Or just bring 80 vs your 15 as mag just did against BG (because previous attempt with 40 failed)

Every time someone from BG complain about being outnumbered, my heart feels warm. It’s almost as if it was still alive.

Almost…

By all means, move the cannons & oil to the backside of the wall.
Let me know how that goes for you. =)

~ Kovu

Not all objective siege are placed badly.

Mortars and inner cannons in ABL and EB can hit outer gate areas and most catapult spots. EB double gates’ inner oil is well protected. If the attackers do not pay attention to these weapons the assault will fail even with handful of defenders. And that is the point of siege – clear the defensive siege first or gamble breaking through before scouts spot you.

The DBL objectives are not that lucky – whoever thought the gate kill box design is any good? At least the earth keep’s inner west cannon can hit rams at the outer gate, fire keep’s top mortar can hit the south supply camp and Necropolis gate cannon can hit the glitched catapult spot through the wall.

As for the 3 defenders on a wall trying to kill off 30 attackers outside… that’s not going to work and it shouldn’t either. Use siege you silly rangers!

The built in siege is nearly worthless. It is fine to clip dumb zergs, ignorant commanders or very small groups but otherwise useless and poorly designed. A defending group should have an enormous advantage that requires strategy to defeat. None of the built in siege offers any of part of that.

As it is now, pretty much any half decent pug commander can flip a T3 tower with a moderate numbers advantage. Most guild groups can do it without any advantage.

Jeknar.6184:

Nikola.3841:

Or just bring 80 vs your 15 as mag just did against BG (because previous attempt with 40 failed)

Every time someone from BG complain about being outnumbered, my heart feels warm. It’s almost as if it was still alive.

Almost…

I came back about 15 months ago and BG is outnumbered by at least 1 server during EU timezone most of that time…sorry if its other way around for you

Hitman.5829:

Why? why is the siege in WvW like mortars and cannons positioned in places where they can easily be killed? It makes no sense from a defense stand point.

It’s fine the way it is m8. just think if mortars and cannons were super hard to kill nothing would ever flip and everything would be t3. that sounds like a lot of fun.

jamesdolla.3954:

Hitman.5829:

Why? why is the siege in WvW like mortars and cannons positioned in places where they can easily be killed? It makes no sense from a defense stand point.

It’s fine the way it is m8. just think if mortars and cannons were super hard to kill nothing would ever flip and everything would be t3. that sounds like a lot of fun.

Yes, it would be super boring if servers with huge numbers advantage should put too much effort into taking stuff…having more people should be only deciding factor

Nikola.3841:

jamesdolla.3954:

Hitman.5829:

Why? why is the siege in WvW like mortars and cannons positioned in places where they can easily be killed? It makes no sense from a defense stand point.

It’s fine the way it is m8. just think if mortars and cannons were super hard to kill nothing would ever flip and everything would be t3. that sounds like a lot of fun.

Yes, it would be super boring if servers with huge numbers advantage should put too much effort into taking stuff…having more people should be only deciding factor

What does that have to do with what we’re talking about?

Nikola.3841:

Jeknar.6184:

Nikola.3841:

Or just bring 80 vs your 15 as mag just did against BG (because previous attempt with 40 failed)

Every time someone from BG complain about being outnumbered, my heart feels warm. It’s almost as if it was still alive.

Almost…

I came back about 15 months ago and BG is outnumbered by at least 1 server during EU timezone most of that time…sorry if its other way around for you

Ahh, i see why you’re bringing this outnumbered stuff up. You have 2 EU guilds on BG that are no showing (NINE and Hel) Not our problem they’re not blobbing it up like they use to. I could say the same thing about sea for maguuma where we maybe have 1 small guild and BG k trains everything. Not much you can do. Let it all go, PPT means next to nothing in this game anymore.

Nine and hel have 40 people put together, if absolutely everyone logs up…don’t care about ppt, but didn’t have remotely fair fight at least once per week is sad thing for this old DAOC/Warhammer player

Nikola.3841:

Famine.7915:

Hitman.5829:

Justine.6351:

To balance their power. If an enemy group of 30+ camps under them then they are now under ac fire.

Defense in layers.

Well, now reverse this argument, what about the 30+ that go around killing siege when 2 or 3 defend a tower. The siege is killed and there is no way to defend against 30+.

3 should lose to 30+. Siege if well used can stall for a really long time, but in the end, you will need reinforcements anyways.

Thats not true even in real life

Terrible example. In real life there is (in programming terms) player and dead body collision. Funnelling a large number of enemies into a small area (like a gate) in real life can allow you to rain siege down on attackers. As bodies pile up, the attackers either need to find another way through or lose even more soldiers trying to pass. In GW2 there is no collision between players. Funnelling a group of enemies into a small area in-game will only spread out siege damage, limit what you can hit, and on top of that, you can rush 60+ people into the same space and not be starved for room.

Don’t start comparing siege in real life to that in the game. It makes no sense since physics between characters are nothing alike.

Famine.7915:

Nikola.3841:

Famine.7915:

Hitman.5829:

Justine.6351:

To balance their power. If an enemy group of 30+ camps under them then they are now under ac fire.

Defense in layers.

Well, now reverse this argument, what about the 30+ that go around killing siege when 2 or 3 defend a tower. The siege is killed and there is no way to defend against 30+.

3 should lose to 30+. Siege if well used can stall for a really long time, but in the end, you will need reinforcements anyways.

Thats not true even in real life

Terrible example. In real life there is (in programming terms) player and dead body collision. Funnelling a large number of enemies into a small area (like a gate) in real life can allow you to rain siege down on attackers. As bodies pile up, the attackers either need to find another way through or lose even more soldiers trying to pass. In GW2 there is no collision between players. Funnelling a group of enemies into a small area in-game will only spread out siege damage, limit what you can hit, and on top of that, you can rush 60+ people into the same space and not be starved for room.

Don’t start comparing siege in real life to that in the game. It makes no sense since physics between characters are nothing alike.

Thank you for further enforcing and explaining my opinion why gw2 wvw is bad

Nikola.3841:

Famine.7915:

Nikola.3841:

Famine.7915:

Hitman.5829:

Justine.6351:

To balance their power. If an enemy group of 30+ camps under them then they are now under ac fire.

Defense in layers.

Well, now reverse this argument, what about the 30+ that go around killing siege when 2 or 3 defend a tower. The siege is killed and there is no way to defend against 30+.

3 should lose to 30+. Siege if well used can stall for a really long time, but in the end, you will need reinforcements anyways.

Thats not true even in real life

Terrible example. In real life there is (in programming terms) player and dead body collision. Funnelling a large number of enemies into a small area (like a gate) in real life can allow you to rain siege down on attackers. As bodies pile up, the attackers either need to find another way through or lose even more soldiers trying to pass. In GW2 there is no collision between players. Funnelling a group of enemies into a small area in-game will only spread out siege damage, limit what you can hit, and on top of that, you can rush 60+ people into the same space and not be starved for room.

Don’t start comparing siege in real life to that in the game. It makes no sense since physics between characters are nothing alike.

Thank you for further enforcing and explaining my opinion why gw2 wvw is bad

No problem. Never disagreed. <3

My reasons just differ.

jamesdolla.3954:

Hitman.5829:

Why? why is the siege in WvW like mortars and cannons positioned in places where they can easily be killed? It makes no sense from a defense stand point.

It’s fine the way it is m8. just think if mortars and cannons were super hard to kill nothing would ever flip and everything would be t3. that sounds like a lot of fun.

Karma trains exists because of bad siege placements, correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t this game called GUILD WARS 2 or perhaps I got the wrong game and bought the karma wars 2?

Hitman.5829:

jamesdolla.3954:

Hitman.5829:

Why? why is the siege in WvW like mortars and cannons positioned in places where they can easily be killed? It makes no sense from a defense stand point.

It’s fine the way it is m8. just think if mortars and cannons were super hard to kill nothing would ever flip and everything would be t3. that sounds like a lot of fun.

Karma trains exists because of bad siege placements, correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t this game called GUILD WARS 2 or perhaps I got the wrong game and bought the karma wars 2?

Karma trains are not the best way to get war score. Your team would be better off defending high tier objectives and killing enemy formations.

Karma trains are good at keeping objectives at tier 0; both yours and the enemies’. They are also good at entertaining large group of fair weather players.

Karma trains happen because lack of competition.

it because mortar an cannon are god tier siege. if you could not deal with them easy it would be impossible to take anything.