Siege-camping and the negativity surrounding it

Just wondering why the negativity surrounding groups/servers that rely heavily on siege-camping.Like building open field sieges or hiding behind towers/keeps packed with siege is supposedly a bad thing.

Commanders who don't fight with all the tools at their disposal are in fact, the bad ones.They are the ones who place their men's lives at greater risk without using Sieges.Just because their 'pride' puts them above using Sieges and looking down on others who do is just...For these proud commanders who prefer to win 'fairly' man to man without using siege, they should go do their arranged GvGs in OS.

So let us applaud commanders who build sieges in open field to win fights, defend structures and preserve their men's lives.You guys are the real heroes that we need but don't deserve!

not sure if your now serious or this is another bait. anyway..

@EremiteAngel.9765 said:Just wondering why the negativity surrounding groups/servers that rely heavily on siege-camping.Like building open field sieges or hiding behind towers/keeps packed with siege is supposedly a bad thing.

more or less the same reason you play necro in roaming and are negativ towards other professions that use some tools, that you dont.

simply put: because of the inbalance of WvW (mainly due to population), many people do not compete to win the match instead about whatever they themselves want to compete over and then ask or demand of other players to play to their goal.

if you would just try to play optimally for scoring and winning the match, the match would mainly be about creating unfair situations, it would be as important as rotating in sPvP, but given the size of the map and teams it would ofc be much more complex in WvW. but if you look at most of the threads here is all about balanced encounters, something that should be a rarity in the mode when played to win it. with so many years of playing 'whatever' i am not sure if people would actually compete, if anet 'magically' was able to balance the matches (mainly populations) and reward winning them.

I'm pretty sure siegehumping is a crutch used by less-skilled populations. If you feel compelled to build ACs and ballis to fight an equal-sized force and you still get run over, you need to reevaluate what it is that you're doing.

I don't think it's coincidence that the servers showing the greatest reliance upon siege also typically display a low KDR.

@MUDse.7623 said:not sure if your now serious or this is another bait. anyway..

@EremiteAngel.9765 said:Just wondering why the negativity surrounding groups/servers that rely heavily on siege-camping.Like building open field sieges or hiding behind towers/keeps packed with siege is supposedly a bad thing.

Ouch. Just.... ouch. The truth, it inflicts 25 stacks of burning.

Siege is a good equalizer. Just don't expect me to be happy about getting blown up by a cannon, I am only human.

Lol omg the irony of this post gbless dude.

Besides PPT, it definately has its place trying to bait out a larger group to play with