Prolly would help to start with a goal in mind then. Example: "We want to increase player engagement. After noticing 50% of the players don't get to interact while sieging/being under siege. This is our priority."

Id like to see a standard siege duration. Example after it is built, it lasts 1.5 hrs. Then expires. This way it eliminates endless siege stacking. If a objective is under siege and needs more, gotta come out and fight or protect sentries and camps. This way it makes supply and camps more of a point of combat , not just easy flips. Could even see a rise of havoc teams with this option. An objective shouldn't be held endlessly with tons of siege, if you wanna keep it gotta pvp for it.

Siege has been so since first year, not sure what is the issue with siege.

@"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:Hey everyone!

We're currently looking to make some siege revisions. We'd like your feedback! I know several posts have been made in the past, but we'd like to get the feedback in one thread for review.One note on our part: Siege should continue to be an important part of World vs. World. We don't want to make a change that would make siege useless.

So let us know your thoughts on the current state of siege and what you'd like to see differently!

Yeah, what do you guys have in mind? It would help to have some context of what your objectives are with a siege revamp because the vast majority of the responses will be "remove all ACs" or "make ACs do 75% less damage" despite you saying "Siege should continue to be an important part of World vs. World. We don't want to make a change that would make siege useless."

A quick couple points, if I may throw them in:

Keep siege incredibly effective against structures and other siege.

Lower siege's impact, namely damage done, against players.

Not specifically siege related, but it would be nice if the squad UI could display each player's individual supply count as a number over their tile in the squad window rather than only allowing the commander to use /squadinfo for individual supply counts.

@"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:Hey everyone!

We're currently looking to make some siege revisions. We'd like your feedback! I know several posts have been made in the past, but we'd like to get the feedback in one thread for review.One note on our part: Siege should continue to be an important part of World vs. World. We don't want to make a change that would make siege useless.

So let us know your thoughts on the current state of siege and what you'd like to see differently!

This was one of those discussions from the past, that I took part in - > https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/32362/anet-siege-changes-i-think-we-strongly-need-for-the-alliance-change/p1

I've said all that I wanted to say in there. Talking about... "5 weapons (sites or completed weapons) can be set within any 1000 unit radius."

@Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:Hey everyone!

We're currently looking to make some siege revisions. We'd like your feedback! I know several posts have been made in the past, but we'd like to get the feedback in one thread for review.One note on our part: Siege should continue to be an important part of World vs. World. We don't want to make a change that would make siege useless.

So let us know your thoughts on the current state of siege and what you'd like to see differently!

Siege is fine Ben, please stay focused on the Alliance update.

auto-repairing for structural siege weapons

Since we didn’t get our repair hammers, how about auto-repairing burning oil pots, cannons, and mortars once the objective reached tier 3? (like the water gates from green world lowlands)It’s always “fun” to stick with the 5 % cannon from the siege 1 hour ago. :s

The auto-repair should be something like 5—10 % for every 5—15 min.My first thought was, that the auto-repair only applies, if the objective isn’t under siege (white swords). But getting an objective into attack mode is much to easy and already exploited constantly, so I scrapped this idea.

If you are going to be modifying siege, may I humbly suggest that you modify the drop options to NOT allow siege within a certain distance of other interactables? This would end griefing by dropping siege on tactivators/npcs/etc.

(obviously while taking into consideration still being able to place siege close enough together to be useful for gates, etc).

First define siege... If it's about the siege weapons, revise how they are aimed, maybe. Give better options to them, for example:

• shield generators should be directional, not bubbles.
• Catapults and such should probably be aimed more like arrow carts to make it more appealing, at least gravel shot.
• Treb is fine

If you mean the whole activity... Then there's more to it:

• Revise the hit box on walls so defenders don't have to stand at the very edge to target someone that can hit them with AoEs all across the wall.

• Give PPT for successful defences (scaling down with tier, and up with outnumbered, also a local outnumbered algorithm might be nice, instead of map-wide), this would also require a better detection for actual attacks, to prevent a small group of spies tagging and dying on purpose.

• Scale drop rewards to attacking players with the tier of defences (capturing higher tier keeps should have better rewards).

• Add randomized "sortie gate" locations (can be an upgrade) that allow defenders to come out without having all the enemies waiting at the gates.

• This one might not be great, but: have a "respite" timer between outer and inner walls where Siege can be built and destroyed, players can portal in, but not out, and you can't attack players within the walls (except if they attack your siege).

• This would work as a way to allow both groups to fight at their "prime" on larger objectives. Maybe guilds can use a new "Tactic" to disable this so they can capture stuff stealthily. Also if the attacking group is less than a certain threshold, they should be allowed to accept or decline Respite (to still allow small groups using stealth and guile to claim big objectives).

• Revise tactivators, not only to prevent spies (although this will be less likely in the future), but also in terms of balance.

For the new guild/alliance-centric version of worlds coming up (but still applicable now):

• Add "rush" options to objective upgrades that spend Aetherium and Favour.
• Add a Aetherium and/or Favour rewards for holding claimed objectives either per tick or per skirmish.
• Add a "guild reward track" that either rewards items out of a "wishlist" of required items for guild upgrades directly to the guild storage, or one that gives Commendations (or other rewards) to players actively in WvW. All these tied to holding claimed objectives.

All these will make guilds care more about the stuff they claim, and about holding them.

If you are going to make siege less effective you might as well remove it. 1 siege doesn't do much damage, its the quantity of the siege that makes it effective. Rather than reduce the siege cap, which would just be a way of reducing overall effectiveness of it, use a standard siege duration that way it increases the value of supply and it sources and promoting player combat at the sources of supply. 1.5 hour siege duration max, no more refreshing.

@Crazy.6029 said:If you are going to make siege less effective you might as well remove it. 1 siege doesn't do much damage, its the quantity of the siege that makes it effective. Rather than reduce the siege cap, which would just be a way of reducing overall effectiveness of it, use a standard siege duration that way it increases the value of supply and it sources and promoting player combat at the sources of supply. 1.5 hour siege duration max, no more refreshing.

Then might as well just add a hard-cap of siege at a location (like guild decorations), enforce that for both ends, and improve its effectiveness overall.Because while 10 arrow carts might be a great deterrant (if you have them on the right spots, don't forget that a lot of keeps can be attacked from all sides), nothing prevents the attackers from doing the same, and - like all aoes - it's easier for attackers to aim and hit defenders than vice-versa.

Reduce range of catas. I think they should still be able to hit walls from out of range of ac's and w/e. What I don't think they should be able to do is be fired from the third floor of smc to hit whatever's at one of the inner gates. Their splash damage can take out shield gens even though the gens can be covered by their bubble.

@"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:So let us know your thoughts on the current state of siege and what you'd like to see differently!

Burning OilThis is still a death trap nobody uses. You have to make it more effective to use an the user to survive the AoE attack from below:

• increase the basic radius of the splash from 240 to 320 (and from 300 to 360 with the mastery)
• apply Stability and Restistance for 2 seconds everytime the user uses a skill (recharge is 3 sec, so you can't perma the effect without a build with boon duration extensions; also, the boons can still be stripped or corrupted)
• reduce the recharge on Burning Shell to 20 sec (from now 40 sec)

TrebuchetI am a supporter of the current mechanic (and not the PvP ground target one), but I still want improvements

• replace the charge up bar/channel with a percentile value, so you can give more consistent follow up shots

BallistaeThe worst thing about the ballista is it hitting the rim of the tower walls when it has to shoot down at a slight angle

• can you please raise the point of origin of the bolt a bit, so you start shooting from a "tripod" kind of perspective

CatapultsCatas could get a similar treatment to Trebs + Gravel improvements

• replace the charge up bar/channel with a percentile value, so you can give more consistent follow up shots
• Increase the raw damage of Gravel shots by 100% and add 2 seconds of Cripple on top of the bleeding effect

Mortars

• replace the charge up bar/channel with a percentile value, so you can give more consistent follow up shots

The more advanced changes I would like to be tried out are:

• Use minimum range for catas so you can't put them right next to a wall
• Add a special action key to reset the siege decay timer when you are close to the siege (320 radius?), perhaps tied to a new mastery? This would make taking care of siege a lot easier for stewards of the land.

I think siege needs to be better defined in it's roles.

Catapults - are often are placed close to structures while being a mid range anti-wall tool. It also has anti-personnel tools built in for some reason (Gravelshot should probably be removed)

Ballista - serve almost no purpose despite their purpose of being good at anti-seige, this is limited due to LoS and Height restricting targeting. My concern is that any change to fix this would ultimately make them far more potent against players and fortifications so i'd probably remove them entirely.

Arrow Carts do their job and one might argue a bit too well. I think these need to be moved into their own build cap so as to not make taking objectives a game of clearing out 100's of AC. Otherwise i'd like to see it changed that these are only able to be built in/around fortifications and not camps.

Trebs - I don't see much a problem with them or how they function.

Cannon - These could arguably be buffed, they are a fair bit weak for the effort needed to get them. Perhaps increase their HP a bit.

Golems - Fine as is

Burning Oil - Fine as is

Mortars - Fine as is

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Crazy.6029 said:If you are going to make siege less effective you might as well remove it. 1 siege doesn't do much damage, its the quantity of the siege that makes it effective. Rather than reduce the siege cap, which would just be a way of reducing overall effectiveness of it, use a standard siege duration that way it increases the value of supply and it sources and promoting player combat at the sources of supply. 1.5 hour siege duration max, no more refreshing.

If you add a hard cap at locations then you make it easy to be trolled. Let's say the location has a hard cap of 10. Then it will end up being 10 flame rams inside the walls endlessly being refreshed. The only way I can see to end the huge amounts of endless siege without breaking the integrity of the sieges purpose is to make siege duration limited, it could vary from siege to siege but it shouldn't last longer than 1.5 hours max. This way if you want to have lots of siege you have to fight to keep it.

Fundamentally, siege should encourage player vs player combat. Siege vs player and seige vs siege combat is not fun for the people involved.

Example: Trebbing East Keep (hills) from Northeast Camp on Alpine Borderlands.

• Attacking group sets up trebs on camp hill and starts firing at the keep in the hopes of opening the outer wall
• Defending group sets up counter-trebs and starts firing back
• Attacking group sets up shield generators to defend the trebs
• Defending group sets up shield generators to defend the wall

Eventually, stalemate is reached as both groups are just trebbing into shield generators. No progress is made, attackers get bored and leave. 30 minutes may have passed, and no player attacked another player in that entire time. This is boring.

Suggestion: Shield generators do not prevent siege damage to walls + gates, but do prevent damage to players and siege. In this situation, the defenders should have to run outside the keep and engage the attackers at the camp in order to prevent the wall from going down.

I propose that for all objectives, trebbing ought to be a guaranteed (although slow) way of taking the wall down from range. It ought to force the defenders to engage in combat or else lose the wall.

Edit: but overall, siege is all right. Would MUCH prefer alliances / restructuring happen as soon as possible

Arrow carts (ACs) are a hard to balance because they're supposed to be anti-infantry siege, but people hate ACs in general. Decreasing AC damage would make ACs useless.

Catas are weird because the most optimal use of catas is to stack them right next to the walls (highest wall DPS), but that seems counter-intuitive to the actual role catapults should play (medium range siege).

Trebs are probably the best balanced siege weapon right now. It takes some skill to correctly land trebuchets, but once a treb gets going, it's hard to counter if it's correctly placed.

Rams have a definitive role, however gate buffs/ram nerfs make it the least used siege.

Ballistas are good anti-siege weapons, but more often than not, ballistas are used for high single target DPS against players.

Shield generators were a welcomed new siege item, but currently the power of shield generators is imbalanced. For attackers, a well placed (outside of enemy fire) shield generator has no counters besides a stealthed player running in for a disabler or a large zerg running them down. For defenders, shield bubbles are practically useless except for the rare case of absorbing trebuchet shots.

Burning oil has the same issues as flame rams.

Stealth disrupter traps are hardly used. Same goes for supply traps. They have the potential to be devastating to infantry (zergs), but are too hard to place, waste too many resources, and can often be avoided.

Cannons are the best defensive siege in the game. However, their potency is best against lower numbers, and practically useless against zergs.

Mortars are budget trebuchets. What role does mortar actually fill?

Change how siege is placed. ACs and trebs should only be placed on walls. Make shield generators have decreased effective range. Ballistas should only damage siege weapons (if you are on the cata, ballistas should hurt you as well). Increase cata damage based on how much it charges (while decreasing the base damage). Decrease the range of cannons, while increasing its scaling HP based on nearby enemies.

Delete mortars. It doesn't play any role in defense or offense.

Flame rams should take down gates at the same rate as catas take down walls. Increase burning oil damage on players, but give flame ram users some resistance against it (increase condition damage that can be mitigated with flame ram mastery?)

Either increase the number of supply/stealth traps you can place, or decrease the required supply to deploy those traps.Using traps should put a revealed buff on the player, so no more stealth -> siege disabler. Tankier builds can deploy siege disablers, but at the cost of dying.

What about a minimum placement distance between siege pieces, it could be varied by type so as not to interfere with the purpose ( thinking mostly rams here with limited gate space). While limiting excess spam ( ac's and triple stacking trebs come to mind) that way you wouldn't have to hard cap the number per objective, but meant that the dimensions of the objectives ( probably not the camps granted) would limit the number of "useful" siege you could deploy.

@Gorani.7205 said:

@"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:So let us know your thoughts on the current state of siege and what you'd like to see differently!

• increase the basic radius of the splash from 240 to 320 (and from 300 to 360 with the mastery)
• apply Stability and Restistance for 2 seconds everytime the user uses a skill (recharge is 3 sec, so you can't perma the effect without a build with boon duration extensions; also, the boons can still be stripped or corrupted)
• reduce the recharge or Burning Shell to 20 sec (from now 40 sec)

• replace the charge up bar/channel with a percentile value, so you can give more consistent follow up shots

• can you please raise the point of origin of the bolt a bit, so you start shooting from a "tripod" kind of perspective

• replace the charge up bar/channel with a percentile value, so you can give more consistent follow up shots
• Increase the raw damage of Gravel shots by 100% and add 2 seconds of Cripple on top of the bleeding effect

I like your idea of showing percentage values. That's a good QoL change, though I think the charge bar could still be useful. They could change it to a range meter with tick marks for every 5% or 500 units and breakpoints at 25%/2500, 50%/5000, and 75%/7500.

Arrow CartRemove the ability to freely build arrow carts in WvW and add a arrow cart spots to towers, keeps and sm. Basically change them to be more similar to mortars.

• players won't be able to abuse the unreachable spots,
• it will limit the amount of arrow carts on the side of defenders,

Oil PotIncrease the durability of this siege and radius of burning oil field. It's way too easy to destroy it.

Shield GeneratorRemove it from WvW completly. It makes capturing & defending objectives not fun. Exactly the same way as arrow carts do.

I suggest adding Medical Post in place of Shield Genarators - players who died in the nearby area can respawn at medical post for the low price of 15 supply.

PS. This is an important topic and I would really like to point that Arrow Carts and Shield Generators lead to prolonged fights which last for hours, are boring and cause players to leave.

The oil will be useless as long as scourgeses can plop instant death under your feet.

The operator should be invulnerable. Easy fix

I would really like to see per objective siege limits. Towers can only have X amount of siege inside/on their walls, keeps can only have Y amount of siege, and SM can only have Z amount of siege. Considering that the attack range on arrow carts is more than double the radius that is used to limit local siege, you can still stack pretty high numbers of arrow carts at each entrance to keeps/SM without ever worrying about the local siege limit. A per objective cap would mean that if you wanted to stack huge amounts of AC at one entrance, you wouldn't be able to do the same at the other entrances to the objective.