Ways to make the using of siege rams, catas and trebs more appealing? — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Ways to make the using of siege rams, catas and trebs more appealing?

EremiteAngel.9765EremiteAngel.9765 Member ✭✭✭
edited December 1, 2018 in WvW

I think most will agree that siege rams, catas and trebs are not very appealing to use especially when there are substantial defenders on the tower/keep.
It is tedious to use, it exposes you to enemy fire, you tend to be the first to die if the enemy zerg rushes out, or if you are all the way behind on the treb you miss out on all the zerg fight actions.

It can be so unappealing to use that I can see rams, catas and trebs being built but nobody steps forward to use them. Myself included.
This can be detrimental to a zerg's attempt to take an objective as the faster you take out a wall/gate, the more options you have when engaging the defenders and you allow less time for defenders to shore up their defenses.

Rams/catas/trebs users are the unsung heroes of any server like the scouts/siege-refreshers and more should be done to reward them for their effort, bravery and self-sacrifice.
So...what would be a good way to make siege rams, catas and trebs more rewarding/appealing?

A Hermit's Tale - To The Edge of the Mists [Link Here]

Ways to make the using of siege rams, catas and trebs more appealing? 19 votes

Give substantial WXP for using ram/cata/treb to damage walls/gates (without having to destroy)
0%
Increase WXP gained from destroying walls/gates
5%
FitzChevalerie.1035 1 vote
Add WvW mastery abilities to ram/cata/treb to improve survivability of user
10%
Roy G Biv.1625oOStaticOo.9467 2 votes
Enable user option to auto cast skills on ram/cata/treb off cooldown
5%
wanya.1697 1 vote
All of the above
10%
Carbi.6357Victory.2879 2 votes
None of the above (Others)
68%
XenesisII.1540borgs.6103Nimrod.9240Dawdler.8521LetoII.3782Caedmon.6798Malavian.4695Gemnaid.4219ThunderPanda.1872Amrothian.3721DamiVlad.2689hunkamania.7561Ghostof Luzifer.6159 13 votes

Comments

  • None of the above (Others)

    By nerfing or deleting shield generator

    Power > Condition

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 1, 2018
    None of the above (Others)

    None of the above definetly. You are working solely from a siege perspective instead of an objective perspective. What we need is less drawn out sieges instead of 2-3h just to cap T3. More action, less slugfests. More broken walls, less bunkering. What should instead happen:

    • Reduce supply capacity for towers and keeps, say 1100->800 as a T3 keep example - this will reduce the defensive buffer of uncontested objectives
    • Increase supply delivery of dollies and camp upgrade speed to compensate for above - this will increase the need for escorts and camp attacks when seigeing
    • Add a supply cost to all tactivators, for example an all-important EWP or chill would cost say 200 supply to use - if a server choose to port in a zoneblob, it has a price
    • And finally on the siege part... buff treb penetration vs the armor of T2/T3 walls significantly - this will actually make them usefull for high tier siege
  • borgs.6103borgs.6103 Member ✭✭✭
    None of the above (Others)

    @Dawdler.8521 said:
    None of the above definetly. You are working solely from a siege perspective instead of an objective perspective. What we need is less drawn out sieges instead of 2-3h just to cap T3. More action, less slugfests. More broken walls, less bunkering. What should instead happen:

    • Reduce supply capacity for towers and keeps, say 1100->800 as a T3 keep example - this will reduce the defensive buffer of uncontested objectives
    • Increase supply delivery of dollies and camp upgrade speed to compensate for above - this will increase the need for escorts and camp attacks when seigeing
    • Add a supply cost to all tactivators, for example an all-important EWP or chill would cost say 200 supply to use - if a server choose to port in a zoneblob, it has a price
    • And finally on the siege part... buff treb penetration vs the armor of T2/T3 walls significantly - this will actually make them usefull for high tier siege

    Agreeing with all of this, and also add:
    Increase the repair cost of walls.

    Hi.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭
    None of the above (Others)

    @borgs.6103 said:

    @Dawdler.8521 said:
    None of the above definetly. You are working solely from a siege perspective instead of an objective perspective. What we need is less drawn out sieges instead of 2-3h just to cap T3. More action, less slugfests. More broken walls, less bunkering. What should instead happen:

    • Reduce supply capacity for towers and keeps, say 1100->800 as a T3 keep example - this will reduce the defensive buffer of uncontested objectives
    • Increase supply delivery of dollies and camp upgrade speed to compensate for above - this will increase the need for escorts and camp attacks when seigeing
    • Add a supply cost to all tactivators, for example an all-important EWP or chill would cost say 200 supply to use - if a server choose to port in a zoneblob, it has a price
    • And finally on the siege part... buff treb penetration vs the armor of T2/T3 walls significantly - this will actually make them usefull for high tier siege

    Agreeing with all of this, and also add:
    Increase the repair cost of walls.

    I didnt really include the repair cost of walls/doors as I dont think it would be necessary to change it with reduced supply capacity/the cost for tactivators and much more effective trebs. Repairing walls is actually decently expensive now - 200-350 supplies or something like that, cant remember exactly. Now imagine if a keep has 800 supps... you pull chill you got 600 supps left. You pull EWP you got 400 supps left. Thats enough to bring 1 wall back up.

    Combine this with more effective trebs that will also force the besieged out (or build expensive counter trebs) and give us the ability to break more walls without needing so darn long time and I think it would be alright.

  • None of the above (Others)

    I think the whole system isnt very fun more stale and boring. I hope they revamp it somehow. It should be more interactive and action orientated imo

  • XenesisII.1540XenesisII.1540 Member ✭✭✭✭
    None of the above (Others)

    Do you really want more noobs getting on siege they shouldn't be using?

    You should get on a piece of siege if you have the mastery for it.
    You should get on a piece of siege especially rams and catas if you are melee and can soak damage.
    More importantly your Commander should be calling for heals, shields, and reflects on those siege to help mitigate the damage.
    If your Commander is too dumb to support the siege users, your group deserves to lose that fight and get chased away from the structure.

    Here's the number one incentive to using siege like rams or catas, if you want to get into the structure as fast as possible, if you know you can survive, if you have mastery, then get on it right away. If you're ranged or squishy don't even think about it, you should be bombing the wall.

    I could agree giving trebs more wxp, but then you have smc 3rd floor problem, not totally impossible to kill them up there, but it's a major pain sometimes if smc is upgraded and supplied.

    Lastly I get a good laugh when people use catas but can't use the shield on it, people just rely so much on shield gens these days it's sad, wish they never made those.

    Another derailing post. ^^
    EBG North Keep: One of the village residents will now flee if their home is destroyed!
    Maguuma: Free ppt, come and get it!

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @EremiteAngel.9765 said:
    I think most will agree that siege rams, catas and trebs are not very appealing to use especially when there are substantial defenders on the tower/keep.
    It is tedious to use, it exposes you to enemy fire, you tend to be the first to die if the enemy zerg rushes out, or if you are all the way behind on the treb you miss out on all the zerg fight actions.

    It can be so unappealing to use that I can see rams, catas and trebs being built but nobody steps forward to use them. Myself included.
    This can be detrimental to a zerg's attempt to take an objective as the faster you take out a wall/gate, the more options you have when engaging the defenders and you allow less time for defenders to shore up their defenses.

    Rams/catas/trebs users are the unsung heroes of any server like the scouts/siege-refreshers and more should be done to reward them for their effort, bravery and self-sacrifice.
    So...what would be a good way to make siege rams, catas and trebs more rewarding/appealing?

    We don’t need to incentivize seige use anymore than it already is... We don’t need to encourage even more participation and pip “farming”... We don’t need the devs to continue to waste previous time and resources working on stuff that’s not an issue, especially when there are tons of real issues that need to be addressed...

    You should start thinking about important improvements, not stuff that wastes time for devs and players.

    "It's that sorta mentality that prevents progress from actually being made and the game from being fun for everyone and not the minority." -TexZero

    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/9804/idea-wvw-only-movement-skills

  • None of the above (Others)

    I think siege should be more mobile like golems. It should also be repairable. Yes, the shield generator is a bit...overpowered especially in zerg fights when you fight at the center of a dome.

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.