NERF guild siege

[Magnuzone.8395]

I got the answer to end all the frustration, the grief and all the complaints about skills and professions that are too weak or too strong. Nerf everything. Just cut everything in half. Damage, defense, buffs, stats, everything. 

You can thank me later.

[ArchonWing.9480]

On 7/15/2022 at 10:57 AM, TheGrimm.5624 said:

 

But as Archon and others have said and will agree with, it hurts the havoc and roamer more than the zerg. With guild siege and supply capacity increase and claim rights a roamer can apply pressure while outnumbered on an enemy map and potentially impact a larger force. A havoc actually has a chance to address more numbers with hit and run attacks while potentially giving their side a more even fight elsewhere. The zerg is going to get the wall down with or without guild siege. 

Big zergs can literally pvdoor the gate down. They're not breaking in because they have guild siege lol. Like I can disable the rams but if the gate is at 20-25% it's going to collapse anyways.

In all fairness though, I don't think people usually care to attack structures with less than 5 people  so that's probably where the confusion is coming from.

Nobody that actually defends would call for nerfs to siege anyways.  These days building regular arrow carts is griefing and honestly I don't even know why I'm carrying the purple ones.

Sometimes a good way to stop an attack is to leave the keep or tower and try to build a ballista on a cliff behind the enemy. Naturally if someone can build guild siege this is much more effective because we will have no time to resupply assuming the camp nearby is even ours still and not camped by yet another enemy group. So you only have a few seconds to pull this off before they unceremoniously send the entire zerg to give you a free trip back to spawn  and that's where guild siege matters.

(And of course, the enemy zerg has perma superspeed meaning you have to be on something mobile to begin with, so not everyone can do this)

Edited July 16, 2022 by ArchonWing.9480

[Riba.3271]

Almost all guild siege itself is quite balanced but note that Anet reduced wall/gate hp considerably after they introduced claim buff, tactics and reduced upgrade times in the game (all with HoT).  It was classic case of them forgetting to nerf what was introduced so now everything is either too weak or too strong in the game.

 

Another weird change anet did was when they doubled siege HP and made them affected by conditions and crit damage but didn't adjust siege vs siege damage. So arrow carts and trebs take forever to kill enemy siege.

 

The outlier is guild golem that costs 50 supplies and is identical to Alpha golem (100 supply). Absolutely busted. 200k+ HP and affected by boons these days. Should be at least 80 supply. Can't stop 10, or even 5, of those.

 

What they actually need to do is partial revert by increasing following: Siege vs siege damage, guild golem supply cost, required dolyaks and wall/gate hp. In additon to this they should nerf claim buff and rework shield gens by removing their ability to block siege fire damage fully (50% damage reduction to both players and siege is enough)

Edited July 17, 2022 by Threather.9354

[Xenesis.6389]

They reduced wall and gate health because they wanted fights to happen on inner more often. 🤷‍♂️

[SoftFootpaws.9134]

I'd rather they reduced the supply cost of basic siege.

 

No one uses it because it costs almost as much for way lower damage, whereas it should be a strategic decision in every siege to blow supplies for more damage or play conservatively as a safety buffer.

Edited July 17, 2022 by Mariyuuna.6508

[Dawdler.8521]

1 hour ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

They reduced wall and gate health because they wanted fights to happen on inner more often. 🤷‍♂️

Yeah people seem to have forgotten that time when WvW almost ground to a halt because no one except large zergs could even be bothered to build siege anymore - too expensive, too little damage on the insanely buffed defenses. Anet was literally forced to change it to keep the mode alive.

 

[Riba.3271]

3 hours ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

They reduced wall and gate health because they wanted fights to happen on inner more often. 🤷‍♂️

They added HoT with T3 gates, faster upgrade times, shield gens, massive increased supply amounts and claim buffs first. Only after that wall/gate hp became a problem. Wall/Gate HP nerf was "balancing" for other defensive buffs introduced.

I mean of course since they added shield gens, trebbing keeps/towers wasn't option anymore since it only takes 2 shield gen users to block all trebs. So groups were forced to go hug their faces to walls/gates and got farmed by claim buffs in fully supplied keeps.

WvW was much more competitively originally designed but for some reason anet thought that "if we let attackers in, let defenders win all fair fights and give everyone massive amount of supply and t3 objectives to defend, everyone will be happy". In reality attackers don't want to go inside just to die.

You could see same carebear mentality when they were too afraid to remove excess servers and now transfer costs and population statuses don't do anything. At least they are consistant at something, even if it is incompetency. Whose idea was to balance PvP gamemode like there aren't 2 sides fighting each other?

Can you imagine Anet office being like "hmm, towers, keeps and castles all require different amount dolyaks and are designed in such way. This is overly complicated. Lets make everything upgrade at same amount of dolyaks. Who cares about balance anyways, I am sure it is not a big deal. Oh yeah, and lets add a siege weapon that blocks all other siege weapons. Amazing ideas!" and proceed to quit WvW themselves within 6 months of HoT hitting the shops.

Edited July 17, 2022 by Riba.3271

[TheGrimm.5624]

1 hour ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Yeah people seem to have forgotten that time when WvW almost ground to a halt because no one except large zergs could even be bothered to build siege anymore - too expensive, too little damage on the insanely buffed defenses. Anet was literally forced to change it to keep the mode alive.

 

 

Was in GW2 during beta, but still was in Warhammer Online's RvR when GW2 launched till they shut WAR's servers down, when they couldn't renew the IP and had to find a new RvR games. What was the time frame for this and what was the cost if you don't mind me asking? 

[Dawdler.8521]

4 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

 

Was in GW2 during beta, but still was in Warhammer Online's RvR when GW2 launched till they shut WAR's servers down, when they couldn't renew the IP and had to find a new RvR games. What was the time frame for this and what was the cost if you don't mind me asking? 

Problem is that the wiki keep poor track of WvW changes so I couldnt tell you the exact patch dates but it was after defense had been buffed through the roof (guild buffs, not to mention T3 armor that cut the damage by like 80%), catas had no power based increasing damage and the difference between guild and superior was pretty extreme (I think catas cost 25 for guild and 60 for superior or something?). Not sure guild trebuchets even did anything, didnt they cost as much as superior? Dont think the traits buffed damage either. Keep in mind that this was around the time when 15 supps was still normal, not 20 or 25 because guild claiming was still new and locked behind a 10,000g+ gate so small guilds didnt have it. I believe AC damage was still high at that point too so it wrecked any siege that was placed.

My memory is still fuzzy but at the end of the day, the siege cost was too high and it did too little damage which meant that small groups stopped bothering to siege objectives. And when they did that, everything turned T3 and that just made people care even less about attacking objectives. Objectives where simply too strong. As I said, it made WvW grind to a screeching halt outside of the narrow 50 man primetime zerging. Anet was forced to update all the siege for less cost, more damage and reduce defense buffs so that WvW actually remained playable (and I would still argue they failed miserably with trebuchets, no power boost and still too expensive to build).

Must have been at least 6 years ago? Maybe 8. Around HoT.

People complain about "PPT" and flipping objectives but without it WvW is just a dull, boring gank fest that no one want to run through as if it's a gauntlet. If it had only been about fights as so many wish it to be it'd be dead half a decade ago and there would be no fights.

Edited July 17, 2022 by Dawdler.8521

[Aeolus.3615]

1 hour ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

(...)

People complain about "PPT" and flipping objectives but without it WvW is just a dull, boring gank fest that no one want to run through as if it's a gauntlet. If it had only been about fights as so many wish it to be it'd be dead half a decade ago and there would be no fights.

That's what wvw still is, but instead of 5 ganking one theres zergs after 1 or 2 players, since most matches timezones its blob vs almost empty and very very rare teams have some sorta close numbers, and when the ktrain side find a similiar sized group that really wants to defend or fight they bail out to play other game if cant change map.

WvW its still the perma boon zergs  gameplay  but  capping  stuff faster for less atritition.

Small and havok groups still have same issue...

 

10years later WvW it is still very flawed gamemode, that provides way to much pvd.

EDIT: the fastest zerg  t3 smc take ive been into was arround  close to 60sec to take outer walls down,  some 30  seconds to inner gate (maybe less) and  lord melted.

Another thing the dune roler  a player can solo t3 stuctures....  add that into a zerg siege zone and every structure melts.

And another thing when players use siege against a wall try to use jalis elite  to see what happens :)

Edited July 17, 2022 by Aeolus.3615

[Dawdler.8521]

2 hours ago, Aeolus.3615 said:

WvW its still the perma boon zergs  gameplay

You know zerging kind of went through the same thing, right? Anet had to remake the way stability worked because those "permaboons" lasted a meter before the zerg was stopped dead in its tracks due to the massive amounts of CC.

WvW being a flawed gamemode doesnt change the many changes its gone through.

[Sviel.7493]

As others have said, it's more of a supply issue than guild siege issue.  I'd add that there is a complex defensive agency issue too.  The primary interaction point for early defense is siege, but Anet never had a great gameplay pattern for that and it got worse when they hamstrung the ability to kill siege using siege.  If someone builds siege on your objective, that should be the start of an exciting gameplay segment.  Instead, you have basically no chance to interact due to proxy catas, built-in bubbles, shield gens, etc.  You can pull a tactic to stall, but that's not very interactive.  Siege disablers were a good addition to add some interaction, but the reflect/block uptime has powercreeped to the point where they no longer function.

So, yes, it's very frustrating when a zerg drops a half-dozen catas on your wall.  However, rather than shaving a cata off, you should have better ways to interact with that siege.  Second, since supply is no longer used for upgrades, there's just too much of it lying around.  Anet did have the foresight to lower supply caps in walled objectives, but they didn't reduce how much is generated in the first place.  Offensive supply wasn't effected much and they can now steal what was formerly defensive or upgrade supply with fewer repercussions.  The result is an RvR game where a whole zerg can resupply at a waypoint then run directly to your wall.

 

It's unlikely that any of these issues will be addressed, acknowledged or mentioned before alliances drop.  Realistically, Anet has consistently catered to zerglings so it's likely that not much will change after that either.

Getting offensive/defensive balance right in a 24/7 RvR game is hard.  It's not as simple as tweaking siege damage or wall health, though those are important tools.  We can only hope that Anet plans to make a better go of it in the future.

[jpsssss.7530]

Ah yes the feature from GUILDS in GUILD Wars 2 should be worse than free seige especially after GUILDS invested in the upgrades to be able to make them and pooled together the extra resources to make them, which is more than superior. Yes its less supply, but it takes more upfront cost to just get the blueprints...

[Aeolus.3615]

18 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

You know zerging kind of went through the same thing, right? Anet had to remake the way stability worked because those "permaboons" lasted a meter before the zerg was stopped dead in its tracks due to the massive amounts of CC.

WvW being a flawed gamemode doesnt change the many changes its gone through.

I dont see any changes nor improvements towards that boon spam n stack.

The zerg now dives trough with perma boons and 1 minute of resolution and stability stacked in massive support bunker and condi bunkers, its stil the same old stack n spam but now better if u stack supporter minstrells.

Support specs should not be that tanky in which kinda is the issue arround siege atm since every one uses  minstrells stats when on support one of the reasons they wont be stressed from siege as a group.

Edited July 18, 2022 by Aeolus.3615