PDA

View Full Version : Share Your Castle Siege Balance Feedback!



Pages : [1] 2

Scapes
12-10-2014, 02:32 PM
Adventurers,

Since the first castles of Auroria were sieged last month, the ArcheAge Team has been listening to player feedback regarding the experience as both attacker and defender. The most common feedback was that attackers had a much more difficult challenge than defenders did, largely due to the beefiness of castle defenses. The developer, XLGAMES, has been very receptive to the feedback received so far and has been closely monitoring the gameplay data of each siege. To assist the attackers, they pointed out that their design for sieges requires more siege vehicles to be brought to the battle than they've seen in previous sieges. These vehicles may be fragile but are designed to combat the high health and defenses of the castle constructions.

With the next set of sieges beginning this Wednesday (today), both Trion Worlds and XLGAMES will be monitoring how the battles play out but we also want to hear from you. Be sure to provide your feedback on your siege experience in this forum thread after the fights. These insights will help shape how sieges are balanced moving forward.

Quak
12-10-2014, 02:40 PM
So tl:dr - "Thanks for the feedback but your feedback is wrong. Please keep submitting feedback!"

ieJkee
12-10-2014, 02:41 PM
really? no any news about new content, but new topic about feedback for sieges :D

did you see server online? you should check it, game would not be alive after holydays.

Knife
12-10-2014, 02:44 PM
Monitoring sieges will be hard, because i don't see any guild participating in one (or even buying the siege scroll in the first place). They simply don't have a chance at taking the castle at this point in the game. Maybe in a month or two they will have enough siege gear to actually do another attempt. Until i don't see any guilds doing this.

But it's good to know that you listen to your community and at least communicate with XLGames about possible problems regarding end game content. It would be a shame if the castles we have at the moment would belong to the first guild that claimed it forever.

Soronir
12-10-2014, 02:48 PM
Can you tell us anything about the upcoming December Update or when Timber Coupe will be available?

Scapes
12-10-2014, 02:49 PM
really? no any news about new content, but new topic about feedback for sieges :D

We've a series of articles about new upcoming content in the works. One's being published later today.

Scapes
12-10-2014, 02:53 PM
Can you tell us anything about the upcoming December Update or when Timber Coupe will be available?

Still finalizing the patch notes for build 4.16 which will be our December update. The Timber Coupe is in the garage for retuning so to speak: its "offroading" ability allowed it to drive straight up vertical walls which was not intentional. XLGAMES is still working on rebalancing the ability to be less extreme.

Steelwind
12-10-2014, 02:57 PM
We've a series of articles about new upcoming content in the works. One's being published later today.

This is good news because I have been dying to see some discussion with Trion/XL about the game itself not only technical issues.

Hopefully this will also include info on the Christmas event and a statement about the Seductive Rose.

Soronir
12-10-2014, 03:02 PM
Still finalizing the patch notes for build 4.16 which will be our December update. The Timber Coupe is in the garage for retuning so to speak: its "offroading" ability allowed it to drive straight up vertical walls which was not intentional. XLGAMES is still working on rebalancing the ability to be less extreme.

lol, but that's why I want the Coupe! Thank you for answering.


Are they coming back all as Gilda star designs or can I still buy a design with Vocation / Honor?

Amused Observer
12-10-2014, 03:06 PM
I appreciate that: a) XL Games is considering rebalancing castle sieges (which is tilted too far in favor of defenders currently), b) preparing updates including possibly new content/items for xmas season. I'll keep an eye on these forums tonight.

Please
12-10-2014, 03:22 PM
(A small snippet of my thoughts)

Speaking on behalf of SlayerS, a guild that is fully well capable of sieging a castle even as broken as they are right now. The walls have too high of HP as well as the lodestone. You have to pick one or the other to have high HP for sieges to be viable right now. The tower cannons need to not be able to do so much damage to siege vehicles, or if they do that much damage they need to not have the same if not higher range than siege vehicles. As it is now, if any castle is well prepared and designed with these tower cannons everywhere, any attacking guild will not have a fair chance at successfully even taking down one wall, let alone 3-4.

In my opinion, the walls HP need to be cut in half and the lodestone HP can stay where it is at. The tower cannons need to have shorter range, about 30-40m or so. As it is now, the defending team doesn't even need siege vehicles for defense.

But I guess we will find out this weekend if Trion lets us instead of helping the castle owners like they've done the previous two times.

Trixologist
12-10-2014, 03:28 PM
I would have feedback however neither Siege that was scheduled to occur on my server actually took place. So, given that information I would say:

1.) Please ensure server readiness for max capacity on Siege day. (Latency claims will not be excusable again)
2.) Ensure CRYSTAL CLEAR instructions are posted (We've learned players don't read between the lines well and you will be blamed even if its their fault and the entire server suffers from it).
3.) Make sure GM support is around 120% IN THE GAME during this round of sieges. Perhaps make a few available for direct contact by Guild Leaders if they should have issues.
4.) Stop the normalization of items because this isn't Kindergarten. There SHOULD be such a thing as "the best" to allow for utilization of tactics other than brute force.

Superficial

5.) Items should be able to be branded, whether its a vehicle, weapon or cannon. It would be ridiculously cool to be able to do this with all items not just land. Imagine 80 tanks with the same flag/guild crest on them smashing into a wall...takes awesome to a new level.

Thx
T

rbb138
12-10-2014, 03:34 PM
I think everybody will agree with me when I say that the range of siege weapons is the problem here.
How can you use trebuchets when they must be moved in range of the siege turrets, which destroy them in seconds?

The issue here is with the 1.2 patch. It's not like this in other countries AA versions, and it was not like this in alpha.

tl;dr Put it back to how it was in alpha, alpha was good.

Conor123100
12-10-2014, 03:43 PM
Thanks for replying for once Scapes

BlooDEvil
12-10-2014, 03:43 PM
About Siege

- WHY siege was rebalanced or even touched? Everything was working pretty fine in ALPHA!
- Why did u change that?
- Why walls now have double HP?
- Why nobody can damage walls?

Something went really wrong from Alpha to Release!
=/

And why flowers exploit still working? It was fixed then "unfixed", and now its being used more and more....

Trenjeska
12-10-2014, 04:23 PM
Still finalizing the patch notes for build 4.16 which will be our December update. The Timber Coupe is in the garage for retuning so to speak: its "offroading" ability allowed it to drive straight up vertical walls which was not intentional. XLGAMES is still working on rebalancing the ability to be less extreme.

PLease please please let the three cars each have its own acquisition method, Gilda, Honour AND Vocation badges. 150k Vocation badges is worth a lot of gold nowadays

bytoa
12-10-2014, 04:34 PM
There is nothing wrong with the castle sieges, you just need siege weapons (tanks, trebs).

There was a stream of NA siege last week, and they took down 2 walls, just out of time for heart (not enough tanks to do it quicker).

There was also stream of RU siege, and the attackers WON the siege (tons of siege weapons).

You want balance of what? Let players dmg the walls? Who the ♥♥♥♥ can hit a wall with hands, wtf! Siege weapons are there for a REASON!

Tower has range of the siege weapons? What do you except? To spawn 50 tanks, protect it with 70 attackers, and just destroy walls in 15 mins?

#usebrain
#getgood
#ifshtleaderchangehim
#ifcasualleadergoplayyourfarmvileandstayawayfromsi eges

Zacdy
12-10-2014, 04:35 PM
Are we just ignoring the fact that Marcala and Calmlands haven't gone through a siege phase, due to the server debacle last week?

Atleast this is the case on Kyrios.

Pikapee
12-10-2014, 04:46 PM
Feed back are already made in the first siege , now you are just profing yourself the team was ignoring the forum when ♥♥♥♥ happens.

RONlN
12-10-2014, 04:57 PM
There is nothing wrong with the castle sieges, you just need siege weapons (tanks, trebs).

There was a stream of NA siege last week, and they took down 2 walls, just out of time for heart (not enough tanks to do it quicker).

There was also stream of RU siege, and the attackers WON the siege (tons of siege weapons).

You want balance of what? Let players dmg the walls? Who the ♥♥♥♥ can hit a wall with hands, wtf! Siege weapons are there for a REASON!

Tower has range of the siege weapons? What do you except? To spawn 50 tanks, protect it with 70 attackers, and just destroy walls in 15 mins?

#usebrain
#getgood
#ifshtleaderchangehim
#ifcasualleadergoplayyourfarmvileandstayawayfromsi eges


Sincerely,
Castle Defender

NZ1
12-10-2014, 04:59 PM
There is nothing wrong with the castle sieges, you just need siege weapons (tanks, trebs).

There was a stream of NA siege last week, and they took down 2 walls, just out of time for heart (not enough tanks to do it quicker).

There was also stream of RU siege, and the attackers WON the siege (tons of siege weapons).

You want balance of what? Let players dmg the walls? Who the ♥♥♥♥ can hit a wall with hands, wtf! Siege weapons are there for a REASON!

Tower has range of the siege weapons? What do you except? To spawn 50 tanks, protect it with 70 attackers, and just destroy walls in 15 mins?

#usebrain
#getgood
#ifshtleaderchangehim
#ifcasualleadergoplayyourfarmvileandstayawayfromsi eges


QFT
nailed it

darksneider
12-10-2014, 05:02 PM
bonjour a tous je savais pas ou l'écrire mais y a un bug sur les parchemin d'attaque de siège sauf si je calcul mal l'attaque se passerai a 6h du matin dimanche chose qui est totalement abérente on demander de mettre sa en journée pas encore plus enbétent que 22 h du soir merci de prendre en compte mon message au revoir

Dey
12-10-2014, 05:11 PM
With the next set of sieges beginning this Wednesday (today), both Trion Worlds and XLGAMES will be monitoring how the battles play out but we also want to hear from you.

How are you going to do that when no one wants to spend the money on this broken system?

Why would a guild want to waste their money on broken siege equipment and a scroll right now? Ridiculous that you'd expect them to.

Rha3gar
12-10-2014, 05:14 PM
Scapes, feedbacks have been given already. Guilds aren't spending anymore money to do that, since it's close to be impossible. We gave tons of data, and to be honest after so much time we would expect a fix to be out already, not an additional question on what's wrong. Have you even seen this : http://forums.archeagegame.com/showthread.php?133367-Guild-Masters-Want-A-Meeting-with-Dev-team. ? If you're interested in what's wrong and what's good just talk more to people. When looking at your Dev Tracker section you can see a 99% of answers related to login, apex, hackers, but NOTHING about gameplay issues, bugs, updates, content. You need to care more about your community, and we shouldn't even be here to tell you that, since a bad outcome ( that is already noticeable just by looking at the huge amount of players that have left the game ) should concern you more than us.

Goko
12-10-2014, 05:14 PM
well i may have had some input had our siege actually happened, and our siege didnt get refunded and never got rescheduled

Rha3gar
12-10-2014, 05:18 PM
There is nothing wrong with the castle sieges, you just need siege weapons (tanks, trebs).

There was a stream of NA siege last week, and they took down 2 walls, just out of time for heart (not enough tanks to do it quicker).

There was also stream of RU siege, and the attackers WON the siege (tons of siege weapons).

You want balance of what? Let players dmg the walls? Who the ♥♥♥♥ can hit a wall with hands, wtf! Siege weapons are there for a REASON!

Tower has range of the siege weapons? What do you except? To spawn 50 tanks, protect it with 70 attackers, and just destroy walls in 15 mins?

#usebrain
#getgood
#ifshtleaderchangehim
#ifcasualleadergoplayyourfarmvileandstayawayfromsi eges

So what you're telling us, is that sieges are supposed to become a content available after 1 or 2 years of gameplay and farming right? Like the game will last that long to begin with.
Please just stop posting, you're useless.

fleabite
12-10-2014, 05:49 PM
I used to work on an incident system for an IT company and Scapes initial post sounds just like something we'd say to the customer at 16:55 on a Friday afternoon.

"What, your machine isn't working properly? Okay, just reboot it again for me and let me know on Monday if that fixed it for you."

vexis
12-10-2014, 05:52 PM
Scapes, feedbacks have been given already. Guilds aren't spending anymore money to do that, since it's close to be impossible. We gave tons of data, and to be honest after so much time we would expect a fix to be out already, not an additional question on what's wrong. Have you even seen this : http://forums.archeagegame.com/showthread.php?133367-Guild-Masters-Want-A-Meeting-with-Dev-team. ? If you're interested in what's wrong and what's good just talk more to people. When looking at your Dev Tracker section you can see a 99% of answers related to login, apex, hackers, but NOTHING about gameplay issues, bugs, updates, content. You need to care more about your community, and we shouldn't even be here to tell you that, since a bad outcome ( that is already noticeable just by looking at the huge amount of players that have left the game ) should concern you more than us.

this ^.

Also if you can post a video of Trion dev team successfully sieging an unmanned castle. that would be a start.

also is there an expected time for 1.7 patch?

bwuki
12-10-2014, 05:54 PM
I can say the only way someone will lose a castle is if they afk, or don't try to defend. Can you just follow every other version and take XL updates 100%, instead of taking one you guys changed then saying it was XL idea? Thnx.

I bet it goes something like this. Trion mentions a change they want, and XL follows it out of respect or w/e. Then when the patch goes sour and ppl blame trion, they turn around and say "It wasn't out patch, it was XL's!" Yet don't realize yes it is XL patch... but it's XL patch only for Trion. Right?

Just follow XL patchs 100%, stop trying to change things on a live version. That's what alpha/beta should have been for.

You want a dead game? This is how you get a dead game. Make sure you normalize this dead game to all your other games, so no one will play those either.

:^)

Ashai
12-10-2014, 05:58 PM
Like its been said in other posts (even sorta the post someone posted above - devs go read it really good discussion that went on in that one - spans several pages.) If the walls are going to remain like that at least scale the siege weapon/mortars/ect to do more damage on the walls. That's all you need to do.

In between balance - like bring the wall HP down some but not down to where it becomes a problem again like in Alpha or the old sieges in KR where it was openly complained about where broken combos/strats ruined sieges to where it needed to be fixed/buffed or at later updates or 1.7 fixs.

Scaling - If you leave the walls or even take down the walls a bit in HP scale the darn weapons to do proper damage on them. But not super damage to where its another 'lolercoster' of 10-30 mins of of a auto win. This also includes balancing the cannons on the walls to start hitting closer you are not super far away as it is right now.

or

Leave the walls as it is - and really put out there information that people didn't have before. To understand that yes you need a ton of of siege weapons (like a true actual siege) to take down walls before attackers can breach/go inside and fight/take down the load stone. That no you can't go to siege with only one or two trebs even one or two mortars/ironclads. That it requires multiple to do war with.

Issue is you guys launched Castle Sieges with little information then a summery of what Guilds need to do or what they need to expect outside of a summery of smooshed information. Which left Guilds that did not at least get to experience some element of it in Alpha/Beta clueless with what to do.

At this point a lot of guilds will not spend money on sieges to attack because they may not have at least 7-10+ siege weapons or proper gears. With the way it is right now and on some cases some guilds have already quit that owned castles in the first place because as stated as it is now you can just go afk on the wall for 1:30 because there are not enough guilds on the servers that may have invested in the siege weapons (which are costly)

And also who wants to spend all this money on a castle now? When no one wants to own land in the north because there's no real benefit in having/spending taxs up there. When the rumbling trees came out people saw no need for having a ton of farms to farm TS. (Well there's one other reason you'd want multiple plots..but anyways) Costumes where normalized (no stats), surprised that the lords armor for mounts haven't been "normalized" as well (wait I probably jinxed that now.) and everything else that adds up on it now its like ?___?. So after guilds pay Nation Tax/Land Tax for even having the castle the money is like water droplets.

So its the question more so XLgames really should just think about revamping the seige system. I would have at least thought Song would have a clue seeing how LII sieges where fun or like old old games that had good sieges like RO (don't laugh they where fun before Renewal :P) and so forth..

Bloodmyth
12-10-2014, 05:59 PM
So tl:dr - "Thanks for the feedback but your feedback is wrong. Please keep submitting feedback!"

That's pretty much how I read it too,

vexis
12-10-2014, 06:04 PM
So its the question more so XLgames really should just think about revamping the seige system. I would have at least thought Song would have a clue seeing how LII sieges where fun or like old old games that had good sieges like RO (don't laugh they where fun before Renewal :P) and so forth..

RO sieges were fun as ♥♥♥♥. renewal and third classes are meh.

kaoti
12-10-2014, 06:08 PM
So its the question more so XLgames really should just think about revamping the seige system. I would have at least thought Song would have a clue seeing how LII sieges where fun or like old old games that had good sieges like RO (don't laugh they where fun before Renewal :P) and so forth..

Jake song created lineage 1, and lineage 1 had solid siege system. He knows how things are suppose to go. Trion does not. And trion is the one trying to pretend they are doing work by suggesting/demanding (we really dont know which) abunch of nonsencisal changes made by people who have no business suggesting such things. You can't run a sandbox mmo and inject social-justice liberalism into the game design and expect it to work. Some people are better than others, some people deserve better gear/costume/gliders/mounts than others, and when you take away those advantages without doing the extra work to rescale EVERYTHING, then NOTHING WORKS. The people at trion are making the exact same mistakes that richard garriot and his team of morons made when ncsoft let them westernize lineage 1, and their meddling directly lead to the number 1 mmo in korea to becoming DEAD in the eu/na. Ncsoft learned their lesson and never let a western developer "westernize" any of their korean games ever again. I hope some day xlgames learns this same lesson.

You can not bring a politically correct western mindset to a korean mmo and then half-♥♥♥ it. If you want to remove stats and abilities from gear, then you have to go back and revise everything they effect. Everything from pvp to pve player/monster stats/skills/mechanics. But trion hasn't done any of that. Instead we got a siege system that forces the defenders to use broken level 50 tools while the defenders afk under the protection of defense with level 55 stats.

Jackie
12-10-2014, 06:13 PM
There is nothing wrong with the castle sieges, you just need siege weapons (tanks, trebs).

There was a stream of NA siege last week, and they took down 2 walls, just out of time for heart (not enough tanks to do it quicker).

There was also stream of RU siege, and the attackers WON the siege (tons of siege weapons).

You want balance of what? Let players dmg the walls? Who the ♥♥♥♥ can hit a wall with hands, wtf! Siege weapons are there for a REASON!

Tower has range of the siege weapons? What do you except? To spawn 50 tanks, protect it with 70 attackers, and just destroy walls in 15 mins?

#usebrain
#getgood
#ifshtleaderchangehim
#ifcasualleadergoplayyourfarmvileandstayawayfromsi eges

In RU walls have 400k HP not 1.2 million. In RU players can actually attack the walls with their "hands" and deal damage.

#usebrain really does apply to you

I think you know very little about sieges, you just like to pretend like you do :D Have you ever even taken part in one as an attacker?

Drunkngod
12-10-2014, 06:19 PM
So we go through an Alpha and Beta for a game that's already been on the market for quite some time in other markets; have one siege weekend and another completely ruined...and NOW you want to get feedback on balancing?

smh

Forrest
12-10-2014, 06:21 PM
You want feedback?

Stop giving in to the whining and QQing that goes on incessantly every siege cycle. If people fail using their scrolls because they refused to use the mountains of information readily available at their fingertips, don't screw over the castle owners by returning the buyers money. Don't do things like move sieges up 3 weeks effectively screwing the defenders in favor of the attackers simply because your release was terrible. Stop the BS, admit you messed up and move on without resorting to one sided compensation (defenders lost out as well; on content, time and a lot of us actually scheduled our lives around sieges that never happened).

Stop trying to make up for the failed Auroria launch by screwing the castle owners.

Forrest
12-10-2014, 06:25 PM
Like its been said in other posts (even sorta the post someone posted above - devs go read it really good discussion that went on in that one - spans several pages.) If the walls are going to remain like that at least scale the siege weapon/mortars/ect to do more damage on the walls. That's all you need to do.

In between balance - like bring the wall HP down some but not down to where it becomes a problem again like in Alpha or the old sieges in KR where it was openly complained about where broken combos/strats ruined sieges to where it needed to be fixed/buffed or at later updates or 1.7 fixs.

Scaling - If you leave the walls or even take down the walls a bit in HP scale the darn weapons to do proper damage on them. But not super damage to where its another 'lolercoster' of 10-30 mins of of a auto win. This also includes balancing the cannons on the walls to start hitting closer you are not super far away as it is right now.

or

Leave the walls as it is - and really put out there information that people didn't have before. To understand that yes you need a ton of of siege weapons (like a true actual siege) to take down walls before attackers can breach/go inside and fight/take down the load stone. That no you can't go to siege with only one or two trebs even one or two mortars/ironclads. That it requires multiple to do war with.

Issue is you guys launched Castle Sieges with little information then a summery of what Guilds need to do or what they need to expect outside of a summery of smooshed information. Which left Guilds that did not at least get to experience some element of it in Alpha/Beta clueless with what to do.

At this point a lot of guilds will not spend money on sieges to attack because they may not have at least 7-10+ siege weapons or proper gears. With the way it is right now and on some cases some guilds have already quit that owned castles in the first place because as stated as it is now you can just go afk on the wall for 1:30 because there are not enough guilds on the servers that may have invested in the siege weapons (which are costly)

And also who wants to spend all this money on a castle now? When no one wants to own land in the north because there's no real benefit in having/spending taxs up there. When the rumbling trees came out people saw no need for having a ton of farms to farm TS. (Well there's one other reason you'd want multiple plots..but anyways) Costumes where normalized (no stats), surprised that the lords armor for mounts haven't been "normalized" as well (wait I probably jinxed that now.) and everything else that adds up on it now its like ?___?. So after guilds pay Nation Tax/Land Tax for even having the castle the money is like water droplets.

So its the question more so XLgames really should just think about revamping the seige system. I would have at least thought Song would have a clue seeing how LII sieges where fun or like old old games that had good sieges like RO (don't laugh they where fun before Renewal :P) and so forth..

But why is it Trions job to tell them how to take a castle? Plenty of info out there from Korea as well as Alpha and Beta :D.

minipirtex2
12-10-2014, 06:36 PM
Adventurers,

Since the first castles of Auroria were sieged last month, the ArcheAge Team has been listening to player feedback regarding the experience as both attacker and defender. The most common feedback was that attackers had a much more difficult challenge than defenders did, largely due to the beefiness of castle defenses. The developer, XLGAMES, has been very receptive to the feedback received so far and has been closely monitoring the gameplay data of each siege. To assist the attackers, they pointed out that their design for sieges requires more siege vehicles to be brought to the battle than they've seen in previous sieges. These vehicles may be fragile but are designed to combat the high health and defenses of the castle constructions.

With the next set of sieges beginning this Wednesday (today), both Trion Worlds and XLGAMES will be monitoring how the battles play out but we also want to hear from you. Be sure to provide your feedback on your siege experience in this forum thread after the fights. These insights will help shape how sieges are balanced moving forward.

The Trion response we are working on it we fix we fix DW but we wont do ♥♥♥♥ and will will try to leech you of all your money before we close the game because we ♥♥♥♥ed it up and there is no way to get it back on track

Forrest
12-10-2014, 06:39 PM
I am sure castle sieges will be great fun when you have no defenders left because you go above and beyond to compensate/help attackers for bad releases while only hampering defenders. Keep up the good work.

minipirtex2
12-10-2014, 06:59 PM
Trion loses More players every day And they cant see that what they do in this game makes people leave and not play there other's game's and theycant see that this can be the end of this large company due to there Epic work response times and sever downs Dont forget there epic marketplace and the good work they did on mobs restrictions etc.

Ashai
12-10-2014, 07:30 PM
Not saying Trion has to tell step by step just more information then just throwing it out there and then = guilds running around like chickens with their heads cut off. Outside of those that remain from Alpha/Beta States. lol :p

Uncle Salty
12-10-2014, 07:51 PM
Adventurers,

Since the first castles of Auroria were sieged last month, the ArcheAge Team has been listening to player feedback regarding the experience as both attacker and defender. The most common feedback was that attackers had a much more difficult challenge than defenders did, largely due to the beefiness of castle defenses. The developer, XLGAMES, has been very receptive to the feedback received so far and has been closely monitoring the gameplay data of each siege. To assist the attackers, they pointed out that their design for sieges requires more siege vehicles to be brought to the battle than they've seen in previous sieges. These vehicles may be fragile but are designed to combat the high health and defenses of the castle constructions.

With the next set of sieges beginning this Wednesday (today), both Trion Worlds and XLGAMES will be monitoring how the battles play out but we also want to hear from you. Be sure to provide your feedback on your siege experience in this forum thread after the fights. These insights will help shape how sieges are balanced moving forward.

Changes should never be made because of a vocal minority. Yet one must remember the ownership of castles are a minority comparatively to the rest of the server. Castles balances should've been made on a test server not live. Because...

Whilst you figure your kinks out which is a gross understatement, dominant guilds have been gaining tens of thousands of gold in the past many weeks where any form of resistance is a waste of time given the lack of siege mechanics for an attacker's use or the immaturity of most servers. Some servers dominant guilds hold up to 3 castles no thanks to YOUR mismanagement of the launch AGAIN and refusal to ROLLBACK the event as and when players, MANY players being unable to log in thus guilds were unable to field their miners etc etc which were the backbone of castle capture that day.

So rolling weeks forward, where said guilds have freely accumulated gold values in excess of 6 digits, what balance are you looking for now? I could think of harsher words but really, what sort of balance are you looking for when wealth is so unevenly distributed now?

Scapes
12-10-2014, 07:56 PM
Feed back are already made in the first siege

Feedback from the first set of sieges was forwarded to XLGAMES. The developers were interested in seeing more siege vehicle use in the second set of sieges before making decisions on rebalancing castle defenses.

Scapes
12-10-2014, 07:57 PM
Are they coming back all as Gilda star designs or can I still buy a design with Vocation / Honor?

The Comet Speedster design will only be purchasable using Gilda Stars.

Thork
12-10-2014, 08:01 PM
Dear Chicken Littles,

Thinking you're going to successfully siege a castle with nothing more than a large group of people, 2 pieces of siege equipment, a hope/prayer and a battle cry shows failure to plan or do much research on the side of the attackers IMHO. The blind comments all over these forums of "walls have too much HP, tower cannons can reach my siege equipment, I can't damage a wall with my regular attacks, defenders don't even have to defend to win, etc..." demonstrate this.

The Wheeled Mortars for instance do 3-3.5k a shot to walls and fire every 7 secs (for the one bought with Gilda). This means that 20 Wheeled Mortars can take down a gate (with 2.03mil HP) in less than 4 mins. Here's the kicker, you HAVE TO ACTUALLY DEFEND THEM to let them do their work!!!

The tower cannon argument is valid, but only if you don't plan for them. Here's a big tip: the Wheeled Mortars knock people off of the tower cannons and fire faster than the tower cannons do. [GASP] Trebs and Mortars can also fire OVER houses and while in defilade behind terrain due to the increased arc on the trajectory of their shot vice the tower cannons. Meaning if you place them correctly, the tower cannons cannot hit you. Additionally, the Siege Towers can get your groups up on the walls to keep the defenders off the cannons. Bottomline, if you let the defenders cannons beat on you, you will have no chance; but that's kinda the point right?

Attackers start with a 70v50 person advantage and the major advantage of choosing where and how they attack. If you can't keep defenders off of your siege equipment while they do their work and/or keep the defenders off of their tower cannons with said advantages, you DO NOT DESERVE to win. Period.

I know all of this because my guildies and I have tested it extensively; and more importantly, we know we're not the only ones to do so. My point is that I truly hope Trion waits another siege cycle or two before "adjusting" anything with sieges. The guilds that understand the mechanics of the game (through testing, research, and more testing), and more importantly understand that logistics win wars not simple "desire" (i.e. come to the party with more than 2-3 siege weapons, a T1 Hasla weapon and an Arcane armor buff) will be executing successful sieges in the coming weeks.

I know that we were waiting until we had at least 30+ Wheeled Mortars, a couple siege towers and a whole mess load of exploding barrels... we should hit those numbers this weekend.

~Thork

Traciatim
12-10-2014, 08:15 PM
To assist the attackers, they pointed out that their design for sieges requires more siege vehicles to be brought to the battle than they've seen in previous sieges. These vehicles may be fragile but are designed to combat the high health and defenses of the castle constructions.

I'll translate for those of us not Korean: "Buy more TS trees from the cash shop!"

vexis
12-10-2014, 08:30 PM
Dear Chicken Littles,

Thinking you're going to successfully siege a castle with nothing more than a large group of people, 2 pieces of siege equipment, a hope/prayer and a battle cry shows failure to plan or do much research on the side of the attackers IMHO. The blind comments all over these forums of "walls have too much HP, tower cannons can reach my siege equipment, I can't damage a wall with my regular attacks, defenders don't even have to defend to win, etc..." demonstrate this.

The Wheeled Mortars for instance do 3-3.5k a shot to walls and fire every 7 secs (for the one bought with Gilda). This means that 20 Wheeled Mortars can take down a gate (with 2.03mil HP) in less than 4 mins. Here's the kicker, you HAVE TO ACTUALLY DEFEND THEM to let them do their work!!!

The tower cannon argument is valid, but only if you don't plan for them. Here's a big tip: the Wheeled Mortars knock people off of the tower cannons and fire faster than the tower cannons do. [GASP] Trebs and Mortars can also fire OVER houses and while in defilade behind terrain due to the increased arc on the trajectory of their shot vice the tower cannons. Meaning if you place them correctly, the tower cannons cannot hit you. Additionally, the Siege Towers can get your groups up on the walls to keep the defenders off the cannons. Bottomline, if you let the defenders cannons beat on you, you will have no chance; but that's kinda the point right?

Attackers start with a 70v50 person advantage and the major advantage of choosing where and how they attack. If you can't keep defenders off of your siege equipment while they do their work and/or keep the defenders off of their tower cannons with said advantages, you DO NOT DESERVE to win. Period.

I know all of this because my guildies and I have tested it extensively; and more importantly, we know we're not the only ones to do so. My point is that I truly hope Trion waits another siege cycle or two before "adjusting" anything with sieges. The guilds that understand the mechanics of the game (through testing, research, and more testing), and more importantly understand that logistics win wars not simple "desire" (i.e. come to the party with more than 2-3 siege weapons, a T1 Hasla weapon and an Arcane armor buff) will be executing successful sieges in the coming weeks.

I know that we were waiting until we had at least 30+ Wheeled Mortars, a couple siege towers and a whole mess load of exploding barrels... we should hit those numbers this weekend.

~Thork

Good post. I disagree with you based on our numbers. Have you also considered damage to the lodestone and how many walls in addition to the gate you have to destroy to be able to kill the lodestone. Then youre also not considering the surprise that happens later, youll see if you get that far. Still, please post your findings im interested to know the results.

Docjones
12-10-2014, 08:51 PM
Good post. I disagree with you based on our numbers. Have you also considered damage to the lodestone and how many walls in addition to the gate you have to destroy to be able to kill the lodestone. Then youre also not considering the surprise that happens later, youll see if you get that far. Still, please post your findings im interested to know the results.

Spoiler alert: Fist of the Empire owns a castle.

vexis
12-10-2014, 08:57 PM
Spoiler alert: Fist of the Empire owns a castle.

I know they do. Owning a castle on day 1 of auroria and getting a castle from attacking are two very different processes. The surprise is part of attacking a castle.

CremeDeLaCreme
12-10-2014, 09:01 PM
Dear Chicken Littles,

Thinking you're going to successfully siege a castle with nothing more than a large group of people, 2 pieces of siege equipment, a hope/prayer and a battle cry shows failure to plan or do much research on the side of the attackers IMHO. The blind comments all over these forums of "walls have too much HP, tower cannons can reach my siege equipment, I can't damage a wall with my regular attacks, defenders don't even have to defend to win, etc..." demonstrate this.

The Wheeled Mortars for instance do 3-3.5k a shot to walls and fire every 7 secs (for the one bought with Gilda). This means that 20 Wheeled Mortars can take down a gate (with 2.03mil HP) in less than 4 mins. Here's the kicker, you HAVE TO ACTUALLY DEFEND THEM to let them do their work!!!

The tower cannon argument is valid, but only if you don't plan for them. Here's a big tip: the Wheeled Mortars knock people off of the tower cannons and fire faster than the tower cannons do. [GASP] Trebs and Mortars can also fire OVER houses and while in defilade behind terrain due to the increased arc on the trajectory of their shot vice the tower cannons. Meaning if you place them correctly, the tower cannons cannot hit you. Additionally, the Siege Towers can get your groups up on the walls to keep the defenders off the cannons. Bottomline, if you let the defenders cannons beat on you, you will have no chance; but that's kinda the point right?

Attackers start with a 70v50 person advantage and the major advantage of choosing where and how they attack. If you can't keep defenders off of your siege equipment while they do their work and/or keep the defenders off of their tower cannons with said advantages, you DO NOT DESERVE to win. Period.

I know all of this because my guildies and I have tested it extensively; and more importantly, we know we're not the only ones to do so. My point is that I truly hope Trion waits another siege cycle or two before "adjusting" anything with sieges. The guilds that understand the mechanics of the game (through testing, research, and more testing), and more importantly understand that logistics win wars not simple "desire" (i.e. come to the party with more than 2-3 siege weapons, a T1 Hasla weapon and an Arcane armor buff) will be executing successful sieges in the coming weeks.

I know that we were waiting until we had at least 30+ Wheeled Mortars, a couple siege towers and a whole mess load of exploding barrels... we should hit those numbers this weekend.

~Thork

I saw the Stream. You're far from knowing what you are doing:

http://www.twitch.tv/thork_foe/c/5555545

LOL.

Docjones
12-10-2014, 09:03 PM
I know they do. Owning a castle on day 1 of auroria and getting a castle from attacking are two very different processes. The surprise is part of attacking a castle.


Sigh. Do you have a castle? Are you able to test damage to walls? If not, then your numbers are ♥♥♥♥. Also, there is no surprise. At least, not to those who did their homework.

Jackie
12-10-2014, 09:11 PM
Dear Chicken Littles,

Stuff

~Thork

No. We can talk again after your attack fails miserably. That equipment is about enough to take an afk castle with no defenders.

Your entire logic misses out on the simple reality of graveyard rushing siege which will become indefensible if the enemy simply suicides on it. Then enjoy your 10 minutes of repairs only to have it all blown up again in under 2 minutes.

Everybodies got this dream world about siegeing and their master tactics, but its all just nonsense, current siege balance is impractical for attackers against any decent defense. Id love to see you try your strats on us :D Id be impressed if the wall even lost 10% HP.

vexis
12-10-2014, 09:13 PM
Sigh. Do you have a castle? Are you able to test damage to walls? If not, then your numbers are ♥♥♥♥. Also, there is no surprise. At least, not to those who did their homework.

we actually have 2 castles in live. and had all 4 in alpha (obtained through attacking). tyvm. and the surprise is there (clearly youre the one who hasnt done your homework). dw youll find out eventually :)

EDIT: just watched that siege video. Thork just lost a chunk of his credibility. Still it was the first siege, and they seemed more prepared than the other ones i saw. kudos. I want to see this massive vehicle siege though. Always good to have experimental confirmation of theoretical predictions.

Docjones
12-10-2014, 09:32 PM
No. We can talk again after your attack fails miserably. That equipment is about enough to take an afk castle with no defenders.

Your entire logic misses out on the simple reality of graveyard rushing siege which will become indefensible if the enemy simply suicides on it. Then enjoy your 10 minutes of repairs only to have it all blown up again in under 2 minutes.

Everybodies got this dream world about siegeing and their master tactics, but its all just nonsense, current siege balance is impractical for attackers against any decent defense. Id love to see you try your strats on us :D Id be impressed if the wall even lost 10% HP.


we actually have 2 castles in live. and had all 4 in alpha (obtained through attacking). tyvm. and the surprise is there (clearly youre the one who hasnt done your homework). dw youll find out eventually :)

EDIT: just watched that siege video. Thork just lost a chunk of his credibility. Still it was the first siege, and they seemed more prepared than the other ones i saw. I want to see this massive vehicle siege though. Always good to have experimental confirmation of theoretical predictions.

I'm not going to sit here and spell out how to win a siege for you. Its supposed to be hard. Deal with it.

EDIT: Its not a surprise, you moron. Do you believe you're the only person who knows how to fully siege a castle? Get over yourself.

vexis
12-10-2014, 09:36 PM
I'm not going to sit here and spell out how to win a siege for you. Its supposed to be hard. Deal with it.

I only pointed out that there are a lot of things that were not included in your estimation/strats. there is a difference between hard and impossible.

NZ1
12-10-2014, 09:38 PM
stop wasting gilda on lameass merchant and fishing ships, buy siege gear, learn to pvp and quit your ♥♥♥♥♥in and play it the way its ment to be played

Rha3gar
12-10-2014, 09:48 PM
I'm not going to sit here and spell out how to win a siege for you.



Even because you just can't spell how to win a siege right now. It has been said enough, and people who tested that ♥♥♥♥ knows that if that castle is defended by even a brainless monkey that can spam into his keyboard, you won't win it. Are we talking about winning against an empty keep? Or a keep full of afkers maybe? Because if that's not the case then stop doing the siege's white knight please. The solution here is not pushing 70 people to build 70 mortars or any other item that can be destroyed in litterally 3 seconds of damage. The fun thing is that even if the keep is empty you're gonna destroy walls and crystal with probably not too much time left anyway, so what we're talking about here is pure nonsense. That hardcore wannabe attitude is starting to get annoying. Sieges can't work at the current state, just deal with it.

Thork
12-10-2014, 09:54 PM
....current siege balance is impractical for attackers against any decent defense. Id love to see you try your strats on us :D Id be impressed if the wall even lost 10% HP.

Good point on the respawn rush; however, I would hope you would have to fight successfully in the open field in order to maintain an attack/siege line. Plus the respawn timers become abysmal after only a few deaths on the defender side, but I digress...

The point of my post was not to say, "my guild could tot's ROFL-stomp any defending force, you're all stupid!," because I know we suck ;-) I'm sure you folks watched just as many streams as we did over the past few weeks to know that none of the NA attacking forces have brought anything close to what they need to the fight yet... but I think that will change very soon.

My point is that I hope Trion waits until guilds who are truly prepared to attack actually get a chance to execute an attack before ending their data collection. If no one takes a castle after a dozen or so prepared guilds come at it hard, with multiple (30+) siege weapons, decent tactics and limited latency issues; then hell yeah, make some incremental "adjustments."

Successful castle sieges should be HARD and take weeks or months of a guild's (or multiple guilds) efforts to pull off. My fear is that they will make it too easy, too fast to where castles change hands every time someone wins the bid on a scroll, thus making the end game PvP of this game meaningless. I guess I'm tired of gaming developers/publishers bending to the will of the, "I want it, we tired it once and it's too hard to get for me and my 10 friends, so make it easier now!" crowd. We all love a challenge and I'm just trying to keep it challenging. If it needs to be fixed... do it, but only after the mechanics have been fully tested.

/salute

~Thork

Jackie
12-10-2014, 11:14 PM
Good point on the respawn rush; however, I would hope you would have to fight successfully in the open field in order to maintain an attack/siege line. Plus the respawn timers become abysmal after only a few deaths on the defender side, but I digress...

The point of my post was not to say, "my guild could tot's ROFL-stomp any defending force, you're all stupid!," because I know we suck ;-) I'm sure you folks watched just as many streams as we did over the past few weeks to know that none of the NA attacking forces have brought anything close to what they need to the fight yet... but I think that will change very soon.

My point is that I hope Trion waits until guilds who are truly prepared to attack actually get a chance to execute an attack before ending their data collection. If no one takes a castle after a dozen or so prepared guilds come at it hard, with multiple (30+) siege weapons, decent tactics and limited latency issues; then hell yeah, make some incremental "adjustments."

Successful castle sieges should be HARD and take weeks or months of a guild's (or multiple guilds) efforts to pull off. My fear is that they will make it too easy, too fast to where castles change hands every time someone wins the bid on a scroll, thus making the end game PvP of this game meaningless. I guess I'm tired of gaming developers/publishers bending to the will of the, "I want it, we tired it once and it's too hard to get for me and my 10 friends, so make it easier now!" crowd. We all love a challenge and I'm just trying to keep it challenging. If it needs to be fixed... do it, but only after the mechanics have been fully tested.

/salute

~Thork

Respawn timer takes 5 minutes to expire, siege takes 10 minutes to repair (not trebs or siege towers obviously). Is it possible for attackers to come with a siege vehicle each and about 10 trebs each to use trebs during the repair downtime of their siege vehicle (or even come with 2 siege vehicles and respawn one while the other is repairing). If you feel like bringing every member with 5k golds worth of trebs and 2 siege vehicles then go for it. This also doesnt secure victory because when the final push comes to shove you still need to channel a lodestone and graveyard rushing might stall a siege long enough that even with excessive siege weaponry you will still not meet the 1.5h time limit for a capture.

Here is something important to keep in mind. Your vision of a siege is not at all a good one. It should NOT take weeks or months of a guilds (or multiple) effort to pull off. Pvp is most interesting when it is accessible to promote diversity and competition. I honestly have no interest in seeing only one or two guilds on a server capable of siegeing. If you havent look around you, the game is dying. The notion that there is an abundance of players willing to put excessive effort to prepare for a single nights worth of gaming (a gamble no less, with rewards far less useful than the cost of an attempt, epeen aside ofc) is flawed.

If you wish for one or two guilds on each server to experience the end game content (maybe your guild is one, maybe my guild is one as well, thats besides the point) then thats your choice. For the sake of playing an active and healthy game where I get to compete with several guilds on a frequent basis, I much prefer this not be the case.

Sieges right now are shaping up to be a whole lot like warplots in wildstar (also an inaccessible game mode). I have no interest in content I will experience only once or twice due to massive time sinks just to take part in them. The sieges in alpha were fine, the better guild in all cases won, forestcrow vastly outclassed every alpha guild in combat. If any guild was better than them then they would have broken the turtle stack instantly (which is very easy to do). At most player damage should be reduced to nothing, but sieges should still take 2h to play out and wall HP should be reverted to 400k HP so that the siege is more about pvp and less about pvwall.

Lexaa
12-11-2014, 01:28 AM
Adventurers,

Since the first castles of Auroria were sieged last month, the ArcheAge Team has been listening to player feedback regarding the experience as both attacker and defender. The most common feedback was that attackers had a much more difficult challenge than defenders did, largely due to the beefiness of castle defenses. The developer, XLGAMES, has been very receptive to the feedback received so far and has been closely monitoring the gameplay data of each siege. To assist the attackers, they pointed out that their design for sieges requires more siege vehicles to be brought to the battle than they've seen in previous sieges. These vehicles may be fragile but are designed to combat the high health and defenses of the castle constructions.

With the next set of sieges beginning this Wednesday (today), both Trion Worlds and XLGAMES will be monitoring how the battles play out but we also want to hear from you. Be sure to provide your feedback on your siege experience in this forum thread after the fights. These insights will help shape how sieges are balanced moving forward.

Scapes, if XL GAMES & Trion know the difficult to take a castle, why you didnt refund the Siege Scroll or the cost of the siege scroll to attackers guild ? You know now it was impossible to attacked, we waste 30K Golds to get this scroll siege for the 1st siege set, what's wrong with a refund ?

Half of our guild left this game cause of this unfair judgement & because your GameMasters said to us we will be refund after a "Trion meeting"... We are already waiting...

Do you think people will buy a scroll siege while they know that it's impossible to make a success ? I think you need to refund all attackers guild on the cost of the siege scroll & to give FOR FREE for tonight & next week a siege scroll to the most active guild on each server to get a REAL monitoring of siege on ArcheAge EU.

Asan
12-11-2014, 01:33 AM
Make Siege Vehicles more obtainable.


Lower Health on Castle Walls.

TDE
12-11-2014, 01:41 AM
make siege vehicles more obtainable.


Lower health on castle walls.

dont forget to hand over the castle

flesh
12-11-2014, 01:47 AM
Adventurers,

Since the first castles of Auroria were sieged last month, the ArcheAge Team has been listening to player feedback regarding the experience as both attacker and defender. The most common feedback was that attackers had a much more difficult challenge than defenders did, largely due to the beefiness of castle defenses. The developer, XLGAMES, has been very receptive to the feedback received so far and has been closely monitoring the gameplay data of each siege. To assist the attackers, they pointed out that their design for sieges requires more siege vehicles to be brought to the battle than they've seen in previous sieges. These vehicles may be fragile but are designed to combat the high health and defenses of the castle constructions.

With the next set of sieges beginning this Wednesday (today), both Trion Worlds and XLGAMES will be monitoring how the battles play out but we also want to hear from you. Be sure to provide your feedback on your siege experience in this forum thread after the fights. These insights will help shape how sieges are balanced moving forward.

What the hell did we play alpha for? What a joke.

Forrest
12-11-2014, 02:25 AM
Scapes, if XL GAMES & Trion know the difficult to take a castle, why you didnt refund the Siege Scroll or the cost of the siege scroll to attackers guild ? You know now it was impossible to attacked, we waste 30K Golds to get this scroll siege for the 1st siege set, what's wrong with a refund ?

Half of our guild left this game cause of this unfair judgement & because your GameMasters said to us we will be refund after a "Trion meeting"... We are already waiting...

Do you think people will buy a scroll siege while they know that it's impossible to make a success ? I think you need to refund all attackers guild on the cost of the siege scroll & to give FOR FREE for tonight & next week a siege scroll to the most active guild on each server to get a REAL monitoring of siege on ArcheAge EU.

I took his post differently.


The developer, XLGAMES, has been very receptive to the feedback received so far and has been closely monitoring the gameplay data of each siege. To assist the attackers, they pointed out that their design for sieges requires more siege vehicles to be brought to the battle than they've seen in previous sieges.

I took this to mean working as intended and failed sieges were due to a lack of heavy weapons. It is an arms race. Get more arms.

Badwoulfe
12-11-2014, 02:47 AM
Adventurers,

Since the first castles of Auroria were sieged last month, the ArcheAge Team has been listening to player feedback regarding the experience as both attacker and defender. The most common feedback was that attackers had a much more difficult challenge than defenders did, largely due to the beefiness of castle defenses. The developer, XLGAMES, has been very receptive to the feedback received so far and has been closely monitoring the gameplay data of each siege. To assist the attackers, they pointed out that their design for sieges requires more siege vehicles to be brought to the battle than they've seen in previous sieges. These vehicles may be fragile but are designed to combat the high health and defenses of the castle constructions.

With the next set of sieges beginning this Wednesday (today), both Trion Worlds and XLGAMES will be monitoring how the battles play out but we also want to hear from you. Be sure to provide your feedback on your siege experience in this forum thread after the fights. These insights will help shape how sieges are balanced moving forward.

Really dude? I cant even get my scroll refund from the last siege cause Trion has no record I bought it. Do you guys really think that people are going to actually buy them?

Lexaa
12-11-2014, 02:56 AM
I took his post differently.



I took this to mean working as intended and failed sieges were due to a lack of heavy weapons. It is an arms race. Get more arms.


You're wrong guy, we used Sieges Weapons, did you participate at a siege to judge me & every attackers guild ? XL GAMES just found an excuse to their fail balance.

Armano
12-11-2014, 03:14 AM
What the hell did we play alpha for? What a joke.

Now we are playing in beta version of game...

Chuck Zitto
12-11-2014, 04:31 AM
Well we of the pirate faction are not even allowed to siege and claim a castle so its hard for us to give you feed back. I will repeat the same thing all pirates have been asking for since launch. Can we please please please please have a fish trader on growlgate to turn in our pirated fish. Also a gold trader or resource trader on growlgate to turn in our pirated trade packs would be amazing.

BADEVIL
12-11-2014, 04:51 AM
Adventurers,

With the next set of sieges beginning this Wednesday (today), both Trion Worlds and XLGAMES will be monitoring how the battles play out but we also want to hear from you. Be sure to provide your feedback on your siege experience in this forum thread after the fights. These insights will help shape how sieges are balanced moving forward.

@Scapes I give you Your feedback - STOP RUSHING game progress and give players time to play not pay !!!

When You understand that PPL need play to make progress by Your actions you mess it up more.

Stop releasing new content and work to solve problems in current state of game !!!

That approach to Game and Gamers would be a good sign to stay in this game for more.

If You don't understand this now - then more ppl quit game now and soon there will be no one who can make any siege anymore.

Ollerus
12-11-2014, 05:22 AM
Siege vehicles can be killed in one shot by any fully buffed archer with missile rain.

More siege vehicles means literally nothing, they get blocked by the amount of houses in the way, you can have unfinished mansions around the loadstone and it becomes impossible to hit it with any siege missile, etc. Hand cannons are unreliable because you are somehow not in the line of sight? So it normally takes 30 seconds of fidgeting around to get the shot off, and even then it would take way too many people firing constantly to be able to win an attack with hand cannons.

Using the black arrow/donkey charge did a lot of damage, but the pets just get one shot by any aoe that slips through and it's a long cooldown, unreliable as well.

TL;DR- We had a full raid of about 40 of the top PvPers on the server along with 30 decent players sieging a guild that had actually disbanded most player and just invited randoms in, some were lvl 30-40. And we could basically one shot/ ignore them and we still only got to the second wall.

You guys dun' goofed. It would take hundreds of thousands of gold and 70 high caliber players to successfully take a ♥♥♥♥ty guild's castle, against any equally competent defender a siege is impossible as it stands. - That isn't an opinion, that is a fact.

WickedSick
12-11-2014, 06:09 AM
Adventurers,

Since the first castles of Auroria were sieged last month, the ArcheAge Team has been listening to player feedback regarding the experience as both attacker and defender. The most common feedback was that attackers had a much more difficult challenge than defenders did, largely due to the beefiness of castle defenses. The developer, XLGAMES, has been very receptive to the feedback received so far and has been closely monitoring the gameplay data of each siege. To assist the attackers, they pointed out that their design for sieges requires more siege vehicles to be brought to the battle than they've seen in previous sieges. These vehicles may be fragile but are designed to combat the high health and defenses of the castle constructions.

With the next set of sieges beginning this Wednesday (today), both Trion Worlds and XLGAMES will be monitoring how the battles play out but we also want to hear from you. Be sure to provide your feedback on your siege experience in this forum thread after the fights. These insights will help shape how sieges are balanced moving forward.

And what about the castle peace funds ? there has been many ticket submit to live support by gms that no1 received it (myself included) and also a post ion the bug report forum,i do understand people that says the walls are too strong or whatever,but every guild with the known economy spent 4-5-6k gold of potions buffs and everything for sieges.not receiving the peace fund kinda messed up(and for those who think we get 10k a week per castle,its mostly 10k 1 week,2.5,2-3(3weeks rotation) since taxs arnt paid weekly so its more like 4.5k a week as a guild )

AeonAuron
12-11-2014, 07:21 AM
lol is this topic even real?
"We ♥♥♥♥ed up tell us what to do with sieges!"

Alara
12-11-2014, 07:41 AM
So tl:dr - "Thanks for the feedback but your feedback is wrong. Please keep submitting feedback!"

My tl:dr: "XLGAMES says L2P. Build more siege vehicles. We will watch if you shape up. Stop sucking please."

Memerto
12-11-2014, 08:14 AM
Feedback from the first set of sieges was forwarded to XLGAMES. The developers were interested in seeing more siege vehicle use in the second set of sieges before making decisions on rebalancing castle defenses.

AKA: Spend all your gold so we can see whats wrong since we don't play the game

Shinseiki
12-11-2014, 08:18 AM
I'm kinda at a loss here. So when exactly will the sieges take place as Scapes said first siege was already yesterday? Or am I missing something

Memerto
12-11-2014, 08:20 AM
Still finalizing the patch notes for build 4.16 which will be our December update. The Timber Coupe is in the garage for retuning so to speak: its "offroading" ability allowed it to drive straight up vertical walls which was not intentional. XLGAMES is still working on rebalancing the ability to be less extreme.

Oh no, i smell more normalization, just what this game need :mad:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_AzOi4INbNJI/TDTfAcgEvUI/AAAAAAAAAF0/14D7jnzNlio/s1600/news_matte_r2_c1.jpg

Theprostage
12-11-2014, 09:12 AM
Well do you really want to feedback when there was a castle at russian server without walls enemies still couldn't do it ?. Maybe at least you could gave back money for siege scrolls. Anyway I think its over now, because there are a lot of strong guilds with a lot of money only because they are owning castle so they dont need to do anything just only sit on ♥♥♥ and getting free money. And about the ballance of siege weapons trebuchets with same range as cannons on castle gg 2s and trebuchet down, no dps on castle still 1 dmg on main gate. And at least why defenders can use glinders and attackers not ?

YUP THERE IS BALANCE.

LilMcGinley
12-11-2014, 10:02 AM
. It should NOT take weeks or months of a guilds (or multiple) effort to pull off.

Castle sieges are THE end-game for guild based pvp and land ownership... you are saying that THE END-GAME for this shouldn't take planning and resource management? Wow.. It's called end-game for a reason, not "hey i showed up plz hand me castle."

That being said, bringing the walls down to 650k HP and slight buff to siege weapons would promote more open-field PvP than sitting on walls. I felt that the siege I was in had plenty of open-field PvP as well as wall-based PvP. If the attackers had a couple more siege tanks, they could have done better.

SteveT
12-11-2014, 10:10 AM
Thank you for the update!!!

Nahrael
12-11-2014, 10:12 AM
First things first:

I think its good that you guys are rebalancing the siege to be fair to every1.

You only missed one part:

On NEBE 2 castles got to go to siege, 2 didnt because of the server down time.
I dont think its fair to the persons who didnt get to go to siege (including my guild) to change the siege now.
The 2 castles that did get to go to siege, got to keep their peacefund, so they gained close to 20k for free, while the other 2 castles have to work for it.

Therefore i suggest u hold off on the siege altering until this set of sieges is over.

NotAnAdmin
12-11-2014, 10:13 AM
This is the post that answers why you don't have the right to ask for a re balance YET.

Let me start with short intro,
most of players had THE first experience with the siege last time, and have not experienced the siege before, this is normal since it is new content.
When new raid bosses are introduced to various MMO, tell me do people beat them in day 1? No? Why not?
Because they don't understand the mechanics yet. It takes time to learn it. How would it sound if people tried to kill new raid boss on day 1, fail and then cry to developer to fix it?

It's exactly the same with sieges, they failed because people do not understand how to do it yet, and are not practiced in it.

What were the fails?

1. Siege machines are what does damage to walls (not the player swords), and yes you need lots of them. Castle brings a lots of profit to the owner, so it is expected of attackers to invest a lot if they want a chance to take it. Noone in the first siege had nearly enough siege machines to even have a chance.

2. Yes, siege machines take a lots of damage (cannons specialy hurt them with their long range). Did the attackers try to stop cannons from attacking their siege machines? No. They didn't know how to.
The answer is siege towers. Most of attacking force SHOULD bring towers in front of cannons, and climb the walls. Attack the defenders ON THE WALLS, making them not able to use cannons.
Another part of attacking force THEN brings siege machines, and attack the walls uninterrupted. Plenty of siege machines!
The priority is to have plenty of siege machines, not broken, and attacking the walls for a period of time to bring it down. The whole attacking force sacrifices everything else (including themselves) to protect siege machines. The only way to do that is with towers, and attacking defenders on the walls (being better than them in close combat PvP) so your siege machines in background stay alive and crush the wall (lots of machines!).

3. The only way for defenders to counter such attack is then to go down the walls and try attacking siege machines directly. In that case part of attackers should stay on the walls to make sure cannons still aren't used by defenders, and other part goes down the wall, protecting their machines from defenders again in close combat PvP.

The rest is play of cat and mouse, who sends most players where, and to counter that behavior, much depends on close combat PvP but only if you know how and where to fight.


Sieges failed because none of the attackers tried anything even close to this tactics, and this exact tactics are REQUIRED to succeed in your attack on the castle.

To all the people who yell "walls are too hard". and "nerf defense":

- try something that at least closely resembles the above mentioned tactics before complaining

- INVEST some personal money (lots of machines, towers) if you hope to win (castles are not meant to be won CHEAP)

- complaining that you don't wish to risk your money so you don't even want to try is not an argument (sieges are a RISK, a big one, with also a chance for GREAT REWARD)

- LAST TIME THE ATTACK ON MANY CASTLES WASN'T EVEN ATTEMPTED! Minimum bid would have costed 500g, with 70 attackers it's less than 10g per person!

- In addition to 10g per person, cost's are few buffs, that are not expensive considering that sieges are only once in 3 weeks, and last limited amount of time.

- In addition to above CHEAP expense, the other requirement is to have many siege machines and towers, and know the tactics and execute them properly + have the gear/skills to pair the defenders in close combat.

- If you are attacking a Castle, it means you are in endgame guild (at least it should)! It means you are ready to own personal siege machine (each member of raid having just one, its 70 siege machines!) and throw in a few gold to have a chance at castle, which is not meant to be an easy job to get.


IF you are telling me that you wish to get a castle, but not spending even 20-30g on siege scroll/buffs, and not caring if you do not even have a single siege machine in your inventory (not ready to invest in that) - YOU DO NOT DESERVE TO EVEN HAVE A CHANCE AT CASTLE - so don't complain.

So again, all attackers that complain, try something like written above (it's the way to actually win a siege) and THEN if you fail after that, you will have the arguments to ask for re balance. Not before!

Lolforums
12-11-2014, 10:36 AM
blah!


Why do i get the feeling 1 meteor will completely annihilate the group you send up a siege tower. I think that plan works in theory, but the fact of the matter is those cannons will just dominate anyone and anything, and any castle will have more than one cannon shooting anyone who comes outta that tower....

Sieges are broken, I think everyone realizes that, and people do have a right to complain.

NotAnAdmin
12-11-2014, 10:42 AM
Why do i get the feeling 1 meteor will completely annihilate the group you send up a siege tower.

If person casting meteor is in top crafted gear, and attackers are in quest items then yes, but that's how it should be in that case. Otherwise no that will not happen (also wings, imprisons, etc).
On the other hand, that is how 1 attacking meteor could wipe out whole wall of defenders. See where I'm going?

It's close combat PvP skills and tactics that work in any other environment, and so in sieges also. It's about which team is better organised.

Siege is not just one crude tactic to follow, its lots of mini fights carve up to fit a grand tactic scheme. Wins and loses in those mini fights impact how many tasks will be completed and ultimately will your team win or fail a siege.

It takes time to become good at this. It's not an event you can master at 90 minutes, and become a pro.

The only downside i see is sieges are actually so rare, that you do not get the practice you need in short term.
Maybe a zone with siege simulation would be awesome, but that's a different story, and it does not necessarily mean, castle siege mechanics are bad.
It just means it will take some time to learn them, to actually be able to win siege as attacker.

People wanting to win siege instantly is another story. It is not fail in mechanics.

Espiritu
12-11-2014, 10:54 AM
Feedback from the first set of sieges was forwarded to XLGAMES. The developers were interested in seeing more siege vehicle use in the second set of sieges before making decisions on rebalancing castle defenses.

On Lucius, a server that certainly won't be around long term anyway, the failed Auroria launch followed by the failed sieges has just accelerated the imminent demise of our community. As sometimes happens in a game like this, Lucius became a two guild server Jolly Q vs. Blank. Jolly Q took the first castle, and Blank took the next three. Jolly Q took Nuimari which was in the first rotation for defense. As a JQ officer, I can attest to amazing commitment the leadership of JQ showed to being prepared for the siege. We worked around the clock to have every consumable in the game, thousands in gold to activate cannons and setup properties outside the castle walls, and endless time in meetings developing our strategy. As a guild we had nothing left in our coffers when that first siege Sunday occurred... but the siege never happened. The group who had purchased our scroll never activated it due to the ambiguous language you've since admitted to.

This was a major letdown. As we watched the stream footage of the sieges that did start we went from distressed to disgusted. We realized that not only would our siege have been a faceroll, giving us access to the peace fund, but we realized there was no chance to siege Blank a week later even as they had to defend two castles at once. Not that we would have been able to anyway with AA going down for three straight days. Mix in the multiple APEX exploits, RNG box exploits, Pay2Win trees, and the exodus was on. Once the servers did come back our guild was left with 5/13 of our original leadership still playing the game and ~30% of the membership. The game is so bad, that players in a guild actively holding one of the castles don't even want to play any more.

I'm sure at some point in the future you will correct your mistake of implementing 1.7 siege in the 1.2 version of the game... but by that point the guilds who have controlled castles will be so far ahead of the field regarding gear/siege/money, it won't really matter. Even a guild like us that controls one castle, will eventually be so far behind the guild that controls three, what motivation would we have to try and siege or even play this game?

This entire post was just an exercise in futility, because I'm still convinced that you probably will never fix things in this game that don't involve your ability to monetize it before it implodes. It is a cash grab operation, that even failed in doing that effectively. You didn't follow the rule of bleeding your whale's slowly... you wanted (or perhaps desperately needed) the capital right away. You sacrificed whatever longevity this game might have had for the cash grab now.

NotAnAdmin
12-11-2014, 11:01 AM
but by that point the guilds who have controlled castles will be so far ahead of the field regarding gear/siege/money, it won't really matter.

Not really, it's 5-10k gold per week income. Split that amount to 100-200 guild members (if the guild spreads it evenly), and you get MAX 50-100g per week per member... its few Halcyona traderuns...

"The leaders of guilds will be so far ahead" you can say that yes, for leaders who keep all the money and not give it to members, but one person alone does not win anything.

Espiritu
12-11-2014, 11:05 AM
+ the peace fund on every successful defense until sieges are the correct version for the game version we're playing. With three castles it is 22k/week + it will be another 75-80k from the peace fund alone the next two weeks. 100-125k the next two weeks.

Braddack
12-11-2014, 11:16 AM
okay, i only played the Game for about 2 Days, but let me ask this....

you had an Alpha, an Beta Phase and 1 Life Siege, ( Not to mention an Game who is running for long Time in Asia ) and you still need Feedback ?

Okay srly. anyone falls for that * we have changed nothing but please keep on Sieging* ?

LOL

pavmelas
12-11-2014, 11:42 AM
This is the post that answers why you don't have the right to ask for a re balance YET.

Let me start with short intro,
most of players had THE first experience with the siege last time, and have not experienced the siege before, this is normal since it is new content.
When new raid bosses are introduced to various MMO, tell me do people beat them in day 1? No? Why not?
Because they don't understand the mechanics yet. It takes time to learn it. How would it sound if people tried to kill new raid boss on day 1, fail and then cry to developer to fix it?

It's exactly the same with sieges, they failed because people do not understand how to do it yet, and are not practiced in it.

What were the fails?

1. Siege machines are what does damage to walls (not the player swords), and yes you need lots of them. Castle brings a lots of profit to the owner, so it is expected of attackers to invest a lot if they want a chance to take it. Noone in the first siege had nearly enough siege machines to even have a chance.

2. Yes, siege machines take a lots of damage (cannons specialy hurt them with their long range). Did the attackers try to stop cannons from attacking their siege machines? No. They didn't know how to.
The answer is siege towers. Most of attacking force SHOULD bring towers in front of cannons, and climb the walls. Attack the defenders ON THE WALLS, making them not able to use cannons.
Another part of attacking force THEN brings siege machines, and attack the walls uninterrupted. Plenty of siege machines!
The priority is to have plenty of siege machines, not broken, and attacking the walls for a period of time to bring it down. The whole attacking force sacrifices everything else (including themselves) to protect siege machines. The only way to do that is with towers, and attacking defenders on the walls (being better than them in close combat PvP) so your siege machines in background stay alive and crush the wall (lots of machines!).

3. The only way for defenders to counter such attack is then to go down the walls and try attacking siege machines directly. In that case part of attackers should stay on the walls to make sure cannons still aren't used by defenders, and other part goes down the wall, protecting their machines from defenders again in close combat PvP.

The rest is play of cat and mouse, who sends most players where, and to counter that behavior, much depends on close combat PvP but only if you know how and where to fight.


Sieges failed because none of the attackers tried anything even close to this tactics, and this exact tactics are REQUIRED to succeed in your attack on the castle.

To all the people who yell "walls are too hard". and "nerf defense":

- try something that at least closely resembles the above mentioned tactics before complaining

- INVEST some personal money (lots of machines, towers) if you hope to win (castles are not meant to be won CHEAP)

- complaining that you don't wish to risk your money so you don't even want to try is not an argument (sieges are a RISK, a big one, with also a chance for GREAT REWARD)

- LAST TIME THE ATTACK ON MANY CASTLES WASN'T EVEN ATTEMPTED! Minimum bid would have costed 500g, with 70 attackers it's less than 10g per person!

- In addition to 10g per person, cost's are few buffs, that are not expensive considering that sieges are only once in 3 weeks, and last limited amount of time.

- In addition to above CHEAP expense, the other requirement is to have many siege machines and towers, and know the tactics and execute them properly + have the gear/skills to pair the defenders in close combat.

- If you are attacking a Castle, it means you are in endgame guild (at least it should)! It means you are ready to own personal siege machine (each member of raid having just one, its 70 siege machines!) and throw in a few gold to have a chance at castle, which is not meant to be an easy job to get.


IF you are telling me that you wish to get a castle, but not spending even 20-30g on siege scroll/buffs, and not caring if you do not even have a single siege machine in your inventory (not ready to invest in that) - YOU DO NOT DESERVE TO EVEN HAVE A CHANCE AT CASTLE - so don't complain.

So again, all attackers that complain, try something like written above (it's the way to actually win a siege) and THEN if you fail after that, you will have the arguments to ask for re balance. Not before!

how much is the cost for defender ?

Defender got fat and rich owning the castles during peace time..

Just spamming the cannons to win ? balanced really ?

Proton
12-11-2014, 11:42 AM
It would be nice if the siege vehicles didn't have the equivalent of 1hp.

Proton
12-11-2014, 11:43 AM
This is the post that answers why you don't have the right to ask for a re balance YET.

Let me start with short intro,
most of players had THE first experience with the siege last time, and have not experienced the siege before, this is normal since it is new content.
When new raid bosses are introduced to various MMO, tell me do people beat them in day 1? No? Why not?
Because they don't understand the mechanics yet. It takes time to learn it. How would it sound if people tried to kill new raid boss on day 1, fail and then cry to developer to fix it?

It's exactly the same with sieges, they failed because people do not understand how to do it yet, and are not practiced in it.

What were the fails?

1. Siege machines are what does damage to walls (not the player swords), and yes you need lots of them. Castle brings a lots of profit to the owner, so it is expected of attackers to invest a lot if they want a chance to take it. Noone in the first siege had nearly enough siege machines to even have a chance.

2. Yes, siege machines take a lots of damage (cannons specialy hurt them with their long range). Did the attackers try to stop cannons from attacking their siege machines? No. They didn't know how to.
The answer is siege towers. Most of attacking force SHOULD bring towers in front of cannons, and climb the walls. Attack the defenders ON THE WALLS, making them not able to use cannons.
Another part of attacking force THEN brings siege machines, and attack the walls uninterrupted. Plenty of siege machines!
The priority is to have plenty of siege machines, not broken, and attacking the walls for a period of time to bring it down. The whole attacking force sacrifices everything else (including themselves) to protect siege machines. The only way to do that is with towers, and attacking defenders on the walls (being better than them in close combat PvP) so your siege machines in background stay alive and crush the wall (lots of machines!).

3. The only way for defenders to counter such attack is then to go down the walls and try attacking siege machines directly. In that case part of attackers should stay on the walls to make sure cannons still aren't used by defenders, and other part goes down the wall, protecting their machines from defenders again in close combat PvP.

The rest is play of cat and mouse, who sends most players where, and to counter that behavior, much depends on close combat PvP but only if you know how and where to fight.


Sieges failed because none of the attackers tried anything even close to this tactics, and this exact tactics are REQUIRED to succeed in your attack on the castle.

To all the people who yell "walls are too hard". and "nerf defense":

- try something that at least closely resembles the above mentioned tactics before complaining

- INVEST some personal money (lots of machines, towers) if you hope to win (castles are not meant to be won CHEAP)

- complaining that you don't wish to risk your money so you don't even want to try is not an argument (sieges are a RISK, a big one, with also a chance for GREAT REWARD)

- LAST TIME THE ATTACK ON MANY CASTLES WASN'T EVEN ATTEMPTED! Minimum bid would have costed 500g, with 70 attackers it's less than 10g per person!

- In addition to 10g per person, cost's are few buffs, that are not expensive considering that sieges are only once in 3 weeks, and last limited amount of time.

- In addition to above CHEAP expense, the other requirement is to have many siege machines and towers, and know the tactics and execute them properly + have the gear/skills to pair the defenders in close combat.

- If you are attacking a Castle, it means you are in endgame guild (at least it should)! It means you are ready to own personal siege machine (each member of raid having just one, its 70 siege machines!) and throw in a few gold to have a chance at castle, which is not meant to be an easy job to get.


IF you are telling me that you wish to get a castle, but not spending even 20-30g on siege scroll/buffs, and not caring if you do not even have a single siege machine in your inventory (not ready to invest in that) - YOU DO NOT DESERVE TO EVEN HAVE A CHANCE AT CASTLE - so don't complain.

So again, all attackers that complain, try something like written above (it's the way to actually win a siege) and THEN if you fail after that, you will have the arguments to ask for re balance. Not before!

You are wrong. Lot's of guilds that have plenty of experience from Alpha and even KR/RU have given their feedback on why the walls need to be balanced.

kaoti
12-11-2014, 12:19 PM
Feedback from the first set of sieges was forwarded to XLGAMES. The developers were interested in seeing more siege vehicle use in the second set of sieges before making decisions on rebalancing castle defenses.

Then the developers can play test their own sieges on your non-existent test server.

NotAnAdmin
12-11-2014, 12:30 PM
how much is the cost for defender ?

Defender got fat and rich owning the castles during peace time..

Just spamming the cannons to win ? balanced really ?

Low defending cost is actually your reward for investing a LOT while attacking, and winning a castle.
It balances off if you consider you invested a lot, attacked and then won the castle. You need some cash back to cover for attack expenses that should be large.

First castles being won without sieges, but by land rush is an exception, but you gotta start somewhere. Everyone had equal chance as this lottery.
Some guilds got jackpot in land rush yes, but that doesn't mean whole further mechanics are bad.
It's just that few guilds won the land rush lottery (while still placing emphases on everyone had equal chance for that).

-- TBH, costs of defending wouldn't be that low, if defenders would have to prepare for attackers who know what they are doing.

NotAnAdmin
12-11-2014, 12:36 PM
You are wrong. Lot's of guilds that have plenty of experience from Alpha and even KR/RU have given their feedback on why the walls need to be balanced.

I didn't see any of these guilds using the tactics that i mentioned.
Maybe some players have exp from before, but they certainly didn't use that exp and applied the tactics i wrote about. At least I didn't see.

If you have any video link of EU/NA siege, where attackers have plenty of machines, start with attacking walls with towers and climbing walls to fight defenders there, followed by use of larger number of siege machines from the background, please share.

I'd love to see a siege when a team did this part well, and still fail, in that case I'd say balancing would be needed. But as I wrote, I didn't see any siege like that happening.

NotAnAdmin
12-11-2014, 12:40 PM
test server

Test server with free siege test events would be really nice.

nekrosh
12-11-2014, 12:53 PM
What happened to the reschedule of failed last siege fiasco?

Forrest
12-11-2014, 01:23 PM
You're wrong guy, we used Sieges Weapons, did you participate at a siege to judge me & every attackers guild ? XL GAMES just found an excuse to their fail balance.

As a matter of fact, I have been in every siege thus far as my guild owns a castle and I participate din beta sieges as well.

QQ more over your failures, Trion tends to respond well to that.

vexis
12-11-2014, 01:26 PM
♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥



You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. You have this picture of what sieges should be like that you imagined. Nor have you even thought your imagined strategy through.

If trion wanted sieges to be like that, the entire thing would need to be reworked not just a simple buff to walls. And claiming that nobody attacked with 42343223 siege vehicles is besides the point. Do you think people just build expensive ♥♥♥♥ without first running the numbers? You calculate ♥♥♥♥ first to see if things are feasible. Sieges are not feasible. If XL/Trion can show us their numbers proving that it is actually feasible to siege a well built castle, that would be nice. But till then the numbers say that at can at most be done on a very badly built castle with no defenders.

Concubine
12-11-2014, 01:35 PM
Castle costumes need to go on cash shop like they are in Korea if you aren't going to put stats on them.

In Korea they're in the shop WITH stats. So talk to XL about that.

michelbcm
12-11-2014, 02:24 PM
in my server had not. the gold did not leave. ridiculous.

Dey
12-11-2014, 05:19 PM
The Wheeled Mortars for instance do 3-3.5k a shot to walls

And die in 2 hits. Your whole theorycraft is a bunch of bunk.

If you think that siege from Addiction applies to all attempts, and that there weren't serious problems with how that went you are delusional.

Just another Castle owner trying to make it so you never have to lose it. Oh you didn't included that little bit in your derision. You have a Castle, of course you don't want anything to change and loose that easy gold from a bugged launch.

How about this, you give up your castle, and prove it by taking one that is actually defended. Or keep the one you have to buy the scroll to go take TT6's, FS's or LotD's.

Put up or shut up.

Dey
12-11-2014, 05:28 PM
Successful castle sieges should be HARD and take weeks or months of a guild's (or multiple guilds) efforts to pull off.

Why? Because YOU say so? Oh yeah castle holder of course would want that.

I'm not suggesting making them so easy that their is no point holding them either. But your extreme isn't any better, and completely biased.

Nirvii
12-11-2014, 07:43 PM
Why Dev dont have this test run before? You can hire/volunteer god damn 140 testers and test it before applying any balance!

This is real server, we pay for it, we pay for the scroll. Ten thousand of gold is not a joke for "testing" the siege game for you Dev. Not to mention those who get castle already hoarding free 20k gold every week making ton difference in term of budget... Show us the video that have "sufficient siege" that succeed on taking castle in this current patch version.

Nirvii
12-11-2014, 09:04 PM
And considering the server going poof last siege. And you asked us to invest so much in both scrolls,potions,sieges, attackers have no easy income like defenders, how can that be happened? The community already on breaking loose about this end game mode. If you want us to invest, show us that it is possible to get the castle in this version of patch.

Unless i say TRION is just screwed up around and keep cashing out without caring the end game content. We aren't testing rats.

Red Comet
12-11-2014, 09:22 PM
Still finalizing the patch notes for build 4.16 which will be our December update. The Timber Coupe is in the garage for retuning so to speak: its "offroading" ability allowed it to drive straight up vertical walls which was not intentional. XLGAMES is still working on rebalancing the ability to be less extreme.

Yay normalisation just what we all want... You muppets

JMac
12-11-2014, 09:25 PM
The fact that NOT ONE castle has been successfully sieged says it all. I might buy into you guys saying "use better tactics" if a few castles were successfully attacked but when every flicking guild who has tried has failed, the mechanics are broken. If you want to prove it is all just a strategy issue then YOU go attack a castle. Until then, the facts say the castle mechanics are broken and if it is not fixed soon, no one will want to spend gold trying and there will only be two or three sieges even attempted each time out of all 21 servers. There are already a number of scrolls that were not purchased and it will only get worse if it is not fixed soon.

Jackie
12-11-2014, 09:33 PM
Castle sieges are THE end-game for guild based pvp and land ownership... you are saying that THE END-GAME for this shouldn't take planning and resource management? Wow.. It's called end-game for a reason, not "hey i showed up plz hand me castle."


I dont think you understand much about pvp. Nor what keeps pvp alive and makes successful games. But I am not surprised.

I am saying there is no end game if nobody plays it, that you cannot realize this is very telling of how much pvp experience you have.

LilMcGinley
12-11-2014, 10:13 PM
I dont think you understand much about pvp. Nor what keeps pvp alive and makes successful games. But I am not surprised.

I am saying there is no end game if nobody plays it, that you cannot realize this is very telling of how much pvp experience you have.

I forgot VoTF knows everything. Sorry.

Jackie
12-11-2014, 10:38 PM
I forgot VoTF knows everything. Sorry.

It sure seemed that way when I was asked to come on FoE ts during gw2 and help you play the game :D

In anycase I look forward to the sieges thriving with dozens of guilds competing, I am sure all the guilds are just dying to invest 100k gold in such an event instead of gearing their players. Makes complete sense.

Nirvii
12-11-2014, 11:49 PM
I cant imagine why some guild still showed their bragging rights about the siege assault when they arent yet tried or got successfully assualted the castle themselves...

Made complete sense how ****** people can be.

Dey
12-12-2014, 02:25 AM
Don't mind Dey he's a clinger

You wish Drazik. Typical response though from someone with no real rebuttal. BTW it was LotD that I supposedly was a clinger for, can't you keep your false demonizing straight?


Again prove your 'superior' skills and take one of the other Castles.

When all your siege is dead in 15 minutes, you'll be here crying to the Devs.

Lahan
12-12-2014, 04:01 AM
I have data on how sieges will turn out.

No attackers will even show up.

scarlett
12-12-2014, 07:38 AM
I dont have a dog in this race, as I doubt that I will ever have a chance to participate in a siege (on either side). However, I have watched a few of the streams from both NA and RU for entertainment value.

It seems to me that none of the NA sieges I saw brought anywhere near enough equipment. Back in the day I put a lot of hours in the "Total War" titles. In those games you took a castle (and it's walls) by bringing a large amount of siege equipment and attacking at two or more separate points of the wall. This would split the defenders and overwhelm them at at least one position.

I have not seen an NA stream yet where there was enough equipment for one position, let alone hitting at two or three spots. I have no idea how the restrictions on numbers would effect this, but I like those restrictions. Keeps the content open to smaller guilds. Seems to me though that even though you dont need a lot of people, you DO need to bring the gear.

SryAboutThat
12-12-2014, 08:16 AM
And die in 2 hits. Your whole theorycraft is a bunch of bunk.

If you think that siege from Addiction applies to all attempts, and that there weren't serious problems with how that went you are delusional.

Just another Castle owner trying to make it so you never have to lose it. Oh you didn't included that little bit in your derision. You have a Castle, of course you don't want anything to change and loose that easy gold from a bugged launch.

How about this, you give up your castle, and prove it by taking one that is actually defended. Or keep the one you have to buy the scroll to go take TT6's, FS's or LotD's.

Put up or shut up.

Haha you're actually friggin right, he doesnt want to lose his free gold. Honestly, i think there is nothing to be proud of keeping a castle right now. Even if they make it easier, you should be able to di ♥♥♥♥ with all this gold you guys got.. I mean, if you guys are even good.

TalonEzi2
12-12-2014, 01:28 PM
Here's my honest take on all of this:

Everyone defending is saying "nah sieges are great, you just need more siege weapons!"
Everyone attacking is saying "are you kidding me? Even without walls, sieging is still impossible."

Has a siege yet been successful? No.

It was hard fought on our end, but ultimately we were stuck at the "offline" screen for siege time, which gave the defenders another 3 weeks of taxes to collect and gear their members with. So instead of striking quick, we're now forced to delay and be left to our own devices. Good fight Trino, you really want defenders to have a cake walk.

Sieges should be difficult. They should not be impossible. Castles are the ultimate end game experience, one that everyone should in some way enjoy. There should be people lining up to siege, but right now it's the same castle owners buying their own siege scrolls, and a few brave souls getting pounded into the dirt while trying to siege, even with weapons. Take down 12 walls to make the lodestone killable? Wow. This means you literally need to have people secure the walls from the enemy, while people with siege engines pound the walls, but you also need to have people defending the siege engines or they will get rekt.

What the hell kind of mechanic is that? It doesn't encourage sieges. Which should be encouraged.

And what is XLs reply? They want us to be a live test?! Are you kidding me!? They want us to throw money at a siege just to prove how broken they are!!!?

No.

It's not going to happen.

This money pit is tiresome. When the community overwhelmingly says something needs to change, you change it. You establish a test server, hold sieges there, and collect your data, and then make changes accordingly. And if sieges need to be buffed when level 55 comes out, buff them. I can understand everyone will have an ironclad in time, but players won't last for years and years and years trying to get there. We want results, and we want to not spend an arm and a leg for a guaranteed failure.

Trion, I want you to nut up and tell XL how it is. They're holding you back. What good is soliciting feedback if XL is going to stick it's nose up in arrogance?

Castles right now give too much money and they are too impossible to siege. If you were one of the lucky four who managed to get their 50k miners online, congrats, you beat the server que hackshield world boss and are now rewarded with an undeserved castle forever. If you're not, tough ♥♥♥♥, see you in Black Desert Online. Lower the gold payout for castles, and make them easier to siege. It should come down to player vs player, not player vs intangible wall. And for the love of God, raise the amount of people who can siege. We want a fight, not a "cool kids club" of people sitting on the sidelines while the cool kids fight.

Get the community involved. You're a freakin' community manager, for the love of Christ. I shouldn't need to tell you this.

NotAnAdmin
12-12-2014, 01:40 PM
Everyone defending is saying "nah sieges are great, you just need more siege weapons!"


Nah, I actually wrote pretty detailed tactics about how to attack and reasons why do it like that. :)

-- my post --



This means you literally need to have people secure the walls from the enemy, while people with siege engines pound the walls, but you also need to have people defending the siege engines or they will get rekt.

This is why attackers start with more players, this extra players should be shooting with siege machines, while rest of the attackers should make defenders busy in close combat PvP (1:1 ratio) so they do not have time / ability to attack those extra players with siege machines.

Hmm, if you want to balance sieges towards attackers slightly, a simple way would be to increase the number of attackers that start the siege so they can better protect their siege machines.

However, as I wrote, if you don't implement tactics I wrote about, cannons will still be shooting at siege machines and you fail at the very start.

(siege tower attack)
1. disable cannon usage
2. climb the walls and make defenders busy

(siege machine attack)
3. attack the walls

-- the first part is crucial, if you fail that, you failed the siege.

Only when you make your siege machines attack unhurt, you can bring the walls and lodestone down (yes, again, few machines will not cut it).

TalonEzi2
12-12-2014, 01:52 PM
Nah, I actually wrote pretty detailed tactics about how to attack and reasons why do it like that. :)




This is why attackers start with more players, this extra players should be shooting with siege machines, while rest of the attackers should make defenders busy in close combat PvP (1:1 ratio) so they do not have time / ability to attack those extra players with siege machines.

Hmm, if you want to balance sieges towards attackers slightly, a simple way would be to increase the number of attackers that start the siege so they can better protect their siege machines.

However, as I wrote, if you don't implement tactics I wrote about, cannons will still be shooting at siege machines and you fail at the very start.

(siege tower attack)
1. disable cannon usage
2. climb the walls and make defenders busy

(siege machine attack)
3. attack the walls

-- the first part is crucial, if you fail that, you failed the siege.

Only when you make your siege machines attack unhurt, you can bring the walls and lodestone down (yes, again, few machines will not cut it).

And yet again, you've never watched a siege actually play out, or participate in one. You're theorycrafting. Which is great, except the reality is way different. "In theory you should be able to win with 20 more guys" except you forget the part where the cannons outrange the mortars, someone with missile rain (like myself, with my 800 unbuffed agility) will totally rek siege engines AND the players driving it, and the disposable siege engines cost a nut to build.

I like how vocal you are on this topic. It shows just how much you really don't understand in regards to siege mechanics. I bet you think that melee > archers > mages > melee as well, don't you?

NotAnAdmin
12-12-2014, 01:56 PM
Balancing math should be done like this:

There is 20 extra attackers when siege starts.
Lets say they would be using 20 siege machines, while rest of the team makes defenders busy.

So lets see how much time 20 siege machines need to shoot at the "same spot" on the wall to bring it down.
Yes the same spot (if each of your siege machines shoot at different wall you deserve to fail..).

Count in that you need to be able to break the 2 walls (or 1 if defenders are stupid) and a lodestone.

So how much time 20 siege machines (shooting unhurt and constantly at the same spot) need to break 2 walls (inner and outer) and the lodestone.
Balance the result that you get from that vs the siege duration.

Yes, siege machines can get destroyed, but attackers need to be able to summon more to replace the damaged ones, this balances off like that.

Aatxe360
12-12-2014, 02:07 PM
Try to tone down the rage part, so it doesn't get deleted again before I see it. :p

Kudos to your restraint from continuing that line of action. That's a step in the right direction.

Talon has a valid point. It still goes down to player vs wall even if the above strategy is implemented. 90 minutes is a really short period of time to successfully execute it with the cookie-cutter castle design intelligent players use.

So, we have more options on what can be changed/tweaked:

1. Lower the amount of castle income.(The weakest of ideas, you want other players to desire a castle)

2. Extend sieges to a longer time to actually make them a battle of attrition(Not the best idea; ain't nobody got time for that).

3. Include larger armies on both sides, allow the attackers to bring all their friends at the beginning as usual.(This would be a really great idea for TRION; more players having fun/srzbznz, more money; right?)

4. Lower hit points of walls by one-quarter.

5. Increase siege engine damage(maybe hitpoints).

6. Disable all glider usage or allow all glider usage. Both will allow slightly easier penetration into a castle. But both have their pros and cons. This is just a serious handicap to attackers to only allow defenders use of their glider.

7. ??????

8. Profit.

Any of these or a combination of these would open up more possibilities for slightly differing strategies and tactics and would open the expectations that more guilds/groups can siege a castle. It would still be difficult, but not nigh on impossible.

NotAnAdmin
12-12-2014, 02:08 PM
like myself, with my 800 unbuffed agility

Tell me, how many people globally have 800 unbuffed agility...

You should not have that much, in this short time the game was out - maybe you are guild leader who had his 500 members working for his set.

Yes there were also many exploiters who exploited credits and stuff and now have TOTALLY OP GEAR and can rekt anything.

You can not ask to balance siege mechanics because some people (legit with 500 people working only for their set, or exploiters) have OP stats.

Siege mechanics should balance around average legit player gear at this point in time.

-- Trion should ban those who got their OP gear by exploiting, and not rebalance the siege mechanics because of them.

Aatxe360
12-12-2014, 02:33 PM
Tell me, how many people globally have 800 unbuffed agility...

You should not have that much, in this short time the game was out - maybe you are guild leader who had his 500 members working for his set.

Yes there were also many exploiters who exploited credits and stuff and now have TOTALLY OP GEAR and can rekt anything.

You can not ask to balance siege mechanics because some people (legit with 500 people working only for their set, or exploiters) have OP stats.

Siege mechanics should balance around average legit player gear at this point in time.

-- Trion should ban those who got their OP gear by exploiting, and not rebalance the siege mechanics because of them.

He isn't leader of any guild. He got it all himself(I'm sure he had some help, but not as much as you would imagine). There was some kerfluffle on the forums about it several weeks ago.

I doubt he exploited. I can probably guess how, but that information isn't mine to share. I'm respecting his privacy, y'know?

I also doubt he's the only one with comparable gear and a number of them acquired it the same way. If you play the game long and hard enough, that information is easy to find.

TalonEzi2
12-12-2014, 02:46 PM
He isn't leader of any guild. He got it all himself(I'm sure he had some help, but not as much as you would imagine). There was some kerfluffle on the forums about it several weeks ago.

I doubt he exploited. I can probably guess how, but that information isn't mine to share. I'm respecting his privacy, y'know?

I also doubt he's the only one with comparable gear and a number of them acquired it the same way. If you play the game long and hard enough, that information is easy to find.

I never exploited anything. Not ever. I got my gear through hard work, micro transactions, and a lot of RNG luck.

Exploiting is hore♥♥♥♥, and if I ever stumble into one accidentally the first thing I'll do is reproduce it, then email Trion and destroy the goods gotten from it (or tell them what I obtained).

I was one of the first 50s on the server, first GHA armor, first hasla, and a ton of other firsts as well.

Also, 800 AGI is low compared to what it once was. But now I have 17k HP and 650 agi so it was worth the trade off.

Aatxe360
12-12-2014, 02:51 PM
I never exploited anything. Not ever. I got my gear through hard work, micro transactions, and a lot of RNG luck.

Exploiting is hore♥♥♥♥, and if I ever stumble into one accidentally the first thing I'll do is reproduce it, then email Trion and destroy the goods gotten from it (or tell them what I obtained).

I was one of the first 50s on the server, first GHA armor, first hasla, and a ton of other firsts as well.

I never said you did exploit. Exploiting is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, I agree. If I had any firsts on the server, it was obtaining and maintaining Patron without spending a dime. I somehow doubt I was the first to obtain it, but it is still maintained. That part is pretty easy.

Nirvii
12-12-2014, 03:12 PM
Here's my honest take on all of this:

Everyone defending is saying "nah sieges are great, you just need more siege weapons!"
Everyone attacking is saying "are you kidding me? Even without walls, sieging is still impossible."

Has a siege yet been successful? No.

It was hard fought on our end, but ultimately we were stuck at the "offline" screen for siege time, which gave the defenders another 3 weeks of taxes to collect and gear their members with. So instead of striking quick, we're now forced to delay and be left to our own devices. Good fight Trino, you really want defenders to have a cake walk.

Sieges should be difficult. They should not be impossible. Castles are the ultimate end game experience, one that everyone should in some way enjoy. There should be people lining up to siege, but right now it's the same castle owners buying their own siege scrolls, and a few brave souls getting pounded into the dirt while trying to siege, even with weapons. Take down 12 walls to make the lodestone killable? Wow. This means you literally need to have people secure the walls from the enemy, while people with siege engines pound the walls, but you also need to have people defending the siege engines or they will get rekt.

What the hell kind of mechanic is that? It doesn't encourage sieges. Which should be encouraged.

And what is XLs reply? They want us to be a live test?! Are you kidding me!? They want us to throw money at a siege just to prove how broken they are!!!?

No.

It's not going to happen.

This money pit is tiresome. When the community overwhelmingly says something needs to change, you change it. You establish a test server, hold sieges there, and collect your data, and then make changes accordingly. And if sieges need to be buffed when level 55 comes out, buff them. I can understand everyone will have an ironclad in time, but players won't last for years and years and years trying to get there. We want results, and we want to not spend an arm and a leg for a guaranteed failure.

Trion, I want you to nut up and tell XL how it is. They're holding you back. What good is soliciting feedback if XL is going to stick it's nose up in arrogance?

Castles right now give too much money and they are too impossible to siege. If you were one of the lucky four who managed to get their 50k miners online, congrats, you beat the server que hackshield world boss and are now rewarded with an undeserved castle forever. If you're not, tough ♥♥♥♥, see you in Black Desert Online. Lower the gold payout for castles, and make them easier to siege. It should come down to player vs player, not player vs intangible wall. And for the love of God, raise the amount of people who can siege. We want a fight, not a "cool kids club" of people sitting on the sidelines while the cool kids fight.

Get the community involved. You're a freakin' community manager, for the love of Christ. I shouldn't need to tell you this.
You got all the points mate'y. Spotted on. BUMP this to TRION!

Rha3gar
12-12-2014, 05:02 PM
Here's my honest take on all of this:

Everyone defending is saying "nah sieges are great, you just need more siege weapons!"
Everyone attacking is saying "are you kidding me? Even without walls, sieging is still impossible."



We're actually pushing for a siege change despite the fact that we own a keep ourselves. Thank god we're not all stupid and greedy. All those castle owners that says " OH WOW SIEGES ARE FINE , JUST GO BUY MORE WEAPONS " are just like Trion, trying to sit on their own gold while collecting more.

Dey
12-12-2014, 06:20 PM
1. Lower the amount of castle income.

Needs to be balanced between incentive and being too profitable.

They should also make it so the owner cannot bid on their own scroll. If they don't want a siege they should do it through diplomacy, not a system that can be corrupted by pay to win easily.

NotAnAdmin
12-12-2014, 07:42 PM
They should also make it so the owner cannot bid on their own scroll. If they don't want a siege they should do it through diplomacy, not a system that can be corrupted by pay to win easily.

This doesn't solve the problem, anyone who will pay to win can easily have 2 accounts, with second account in a small private or alt guild, and still bid for himself.

Aatxe360
12-13-2014, 03:42 AM
This doesn't solve the problem, anyone who will pay to win can easily have 2 accounts, with second account in a small private or alt guild, and still bid for himself.

True. A compromise would be that only a max-level player from a different guild than holds the castle could bid on it. At that point, if someone is using a second account or other intermediary to buy their own siege scroll, more power to them.

NotAnAdmin
12-13-2014, 09:09 AM
True. A compromise would be that only a max-level player from a different guild than holds the castle could bid on it. At that point, if someone is using a second account or other intermediary to buy their own siege scroll, more power to them.

Many players who are more or less hardcore have level 50 alts even on different accounts, running alt guilds. They could still bid for their guilds.

Hmm, if possible, make that only an officer in a guild with minimum 70 lvl 50 players can bid on a Castle.

Only level 50 players who were in this guild for minimum 1 week duration would count towards this number (thats to prevent, kicking and inviting players to different guild, just to bid, and than transfering them back).
70 because it's the number required for siege, so it's good for minimum line.

This would more or less prevent self bidding, but it would be a lots of coding.

It's what Allods Online implemented for guild battles, just to prevent guild player trading.
Every guild had a number of tabbards they could give out to players (depending on guild level), now this part is not important.
What is important is only players wearing tabbards could join "sieges".
And player could only be awarded the tabbard after being in guild minimum 1 week. So game mechanics prevented players who were less than 1 week in guild, join sieges.

AA could do something similar.
- When player is in guild less than one week he has special grayed out rookie rank, that guild leader cant change.
- only after one week in guild, guild leader can change his rank.
- only guilds with minimum 70 non-rookie level 50 players could bid on castles.

This would effectively fix self bidding, unless whole guild would be willing to make second accounts, level chars to 50 and put them in another guild just to self bid...
And even that situation could be prevented, by requiring both guilds to be online for the siege, or it would cancel as if it didn't happen.

Rha3gar
12-13-2014, 10:58 AM
Yah but bro, it's Trion we're talking about. I mean this is the only game ever where people are allowed to afk inside arenas just because they choose not to respawn. That says everything already regarding gameplay fixes.

Justi
12-13-2014, 12:19 PM
Many players who are more or less hardcore have level 50 alts even on different accounts, running alt guilds. They could still bid for their guilds.

Hmm, if possible, make that only an officer in a guild with minimum 70 lvl 50 players can bid on a Castle.

Only level 50 players who were in this guild for minimum 1 week duration would count towards this number (thats to prevent, kicking and inviting players to different guild, just to bid, and than transfering them back).
70 because it's the number required for siege, so it's good for minimum line.

This would more or less prevent self bidding, but it would be a lots of coding.

It's what Allods Online implemented for guild battles, just to prevent guild player trading.
Every guild had a number of tabbards they could give out to players (depending on guild level), now this part is not important.
What is important is only players wearing tabbards could join "sieges".
And player could only be awarded the tabbard after being in guild minimum 1 week. So game mechanics prevented players who were less than 1 week in guild, join sieges.

AA could do something similar.
- When player is in guild less than one week he has special grayed out rookie rank, that guild leader cant change.
- only after one week in guild, guild leader can change his rank.
- only guilds with minimum 70 non-rookie level 50 players could bid on castles.

This would effectively fix self bidding, unless whole guild would be willing to make second accounts, level chars to 50 and put them in another guild just to self bid...
And even that situation could be prevented, by requiring both guilds to be online for the siege, or it would cancel as if it didn't happen.

Yea some minimum

Instigator
12-14-2014, 01:55 PM
Sieges are still broken because the Auroria launch was botched by hackshield and DC's.On my current server, one guild owns three castles. They buy the scrolls (or have alts buy the scrolls), start a new guild, trade scrolls to that guild, declare siege to release funds, derp around, drop other guild, get back into actual guild...so they are printing gold essentially. In addition, they snipe the one scroll that belongs to the one castle not in their power and they blue ball and never siege so the gold is withheld.

Meaning, I have no feedback on the actual battle mechanics, because the majority guild are cowards and know they would get ROFL stomped if they ever had to face a fight with equal numbers instead of outnumbering the other side.

Jin
12-14-2014, 02:57 PM
Siege scrolls should be untradable. It's absurd for them to make it tradable. On my server "Lucius", it's bad because one guild on the West is just holding our scroll and preventing us from being sieged. It sucks that we do not get any peace funds out of it. This has been the third time they've done it to us. We should get peace funds if we do not get sieged.


They have three castles. We have one.

Feels
12-14-2014, 03:21 PM
OK. You guys buffed the walls so much. 20 tanks isnt enought to kill walls and loadstone within the 1 hour 15m mark.

Crazy Mike
12-14-2014, 03:49 PM
You cant even take down 10 walls with seige engines from the minute it starts to the minute it ends with 10 seige engines

Aatxe360
12-14-2014, 03:52 PM
Many players who are more or less hardcore have level 50 alts even on different accounts, running alt guilds. They could still bid for their guilds.

So what? This a minimum requirement that could work. Yeah, it can be worked around, but any more and you start excluding smaller groups from even trying.

Making then untradeable and unsellable are also two more options. I would say that then our guild would have been screwed out of a siege, but the servers were down that day anyways so it didn't matter.


Hmm, if possible, make that only an officer in a guild with minimum 70 lvl 50 players can bid on a Castle.

Only level 50 players who were in this guild for minimum 1 week duration would count towards this number (thats to prevent, kicking and inviting players to different guild, just to bid, and than transfering them back).
70 because it's the number required for siege, so it's good for minimum line.

This would more or less prevent self bidding, but it would be a lots of coding.

It's what Allods Online implemented for guild battles, just to prevent guild player trading.
Every guild had a number of tabbards they could give out to players (depending on guild level), now this part is not important.
What is important is only players wearing tabbards could join "sieges".
And player could only be awarded the tabbard after being in guild minimum 1 week. So game mechanics prevented players who were less than 1 week in guild, join sieges.

AA could do something similar.
- When player is in guild less than one week he has special grayed out rookie rank, that guild leader cant change.
- only after one week in guild, guild leader can change his rank.
- only guilds with minimum 70 non-rookie level 50 players could bid on castles.

This would effectively fix self bidding, unless whole guild would be willing to make second accounts, level chars to 50 and put them in another guild just to self bid...
And even that situation could be prevented, by requiring both guilds to be online for the siege, or it would cancel as if it didn't happen.

This isn't a minimum at all. Now you're just being technical and making it more complicated.


- When player is in guild less than one week he has special grayed out rookie rank, that guild leader cant change.
- only after one week in guild, guild leader can change his rank.

These two abilities aren't bad and affect more than just castles. Even with castles, it could make for some interesting emergent gameplay tactics. Can the lowest rank participate in sieges?

But with your player feedback coming in, it looks like the general player population was correct.

TastyCake
12-14-2014, 03:56 PM
Nerf the walls hp by a good amount and reduce to the range on the siege cannons on the castle walls pretty simple...

mirth
12-14-2014, 03:56 PM
The cannons on top of the towers are extremely overpowered. They have 100m range fire faster than the tanks, and do as much damage as the honor tanks.

The lodestone takes too little damage even with 4+ walls down, that buff need to be toned down to allow for more damage to be done per shot, or the health pool of the lodestone needs to be reduced significantly. The lodestone with 20tanks firing on it for ~800dmg will take 40mins of nonstop firing to destroy thats impossible.

The tanks could use a health buff, they die to a few shots by the OP cannons or 1 well placed missile rain, the trebuchet we didn't test we heard they were bad. The walls health seems fine atm, but the cannons on the walls being unkillable and having insane range splits the attacking group up too much to try to control too many at the same time while having 20+ people on tanks/defense of tanks.

Ipwnusuck
12-14-2014, 04:14 PM
I believe the wall's hp should be nerfed, OR nerf the amount of walls that need to be taken down in order to reduce the rank.

moonsniper
12-14-2014, 04:15 PM
Seiges.... fun and very entertaining, best time ive had in archeage so far. The walls though are quite tough though to bring down even though we had about 10-15 mortars firring on them at the same time we where only able to take down the gate house 2 towers and about 5 walls. the mechanics in the seige are awesome aswell. Great work Trion

lionelione43
12-14-2014, 04:17 PM
Walls could prolly have health nerfed a bit.
I think that the defenders shouldn't spawn so damn fast, without the respawn time they can just suicide rush respawn and rush again. There's no way for siege equipment to stand up to that.
The siege cannons on the castle walls are really freaking strong and can't be killed without the whole tower being killed.

cptfapnnap
12-14-2014, 04:17 PM
It is a war of walls, he who holds the walls and cannons, controls the battle. When you control the cannons, you can either stop them from destroying the mortars, or destroy mortars. Attackers must hold the cannons for the entire siege unless youve got 1337 tatted on your knuckles.

EpOx
12-14-2014, 04:18 PM
From what I've seen is a couple changes need to be made and there are a few options to do it.

1: Walls need slightly less HP
2: If you don't want to do #1 then lower the amount of walls you have to bring down for the buff on the lode stone to be downgraded to level 1.
3: Buff damage/health of Siege Tanks/Trebuchet's so they're more viable. (For the DAMAGE on the siege tanks make it so it's increased damage to WALLS and not for open world PVP because that would be way too OP)
4: A slight spawn timer on defensive players (say 10 seconds) and maybe a 5 second timer on attackers.
5: Cannons should be able to be destroyed on top of the walls. (or lower wall HP would fix this too)

This is just a few things.

Also damage taken on tanks should be slightly reduced due to them being well tanks XD

Psalm
12-14-2014, 04:22 PM
good, needs more time, defenders need a re-spawn timer increase for every wall or tower lost

Crazy Mike
12-14-2014, 04:23 PM
tanks / trebuchets should take 50% less damage from players minimum, they just get suicide rushed over and over until they are destroyed and there is almost nothing you can do about it because you need people to hold the walls so the attackers cant two shot the tanks with the wall cannons

Rooth
12-14-2014, 04:32 PM
The castle cannons are much better than the tanks. They can't be killed and with 5 shots they can take down a tank. Either the tower and wall health should be drop down so that the tanks can be trade fairly with the cannons, or that the cannons on the wall can be destroyed.

Practically there isn't anything that can beat the cannons.

Defenders also have the spawn point near by the fight and they cans simply suicide themselves to destroy the tanks, while attackers can't suicide to destroy the cannons.

TL;DR

-Cannons are to strong, can't be destroy. People manning the cannons get a defensive buff.
-Walls have too much hp, have to take down too many walls just in 1.5 hours
-Siege weapons are way to squishy/weak comparing to a wall/tower and cannons

Either buff siege weapons or nerf walls and cannons.
Also the option to teleport back to the respawn point is not necessary, if anything just make them a normal skill we can put on our skill bar. As it is now it completely change the hot keys set up and change the entire key bind.

Freelancer
12-14-2014, 04:34 PM
I feel like if more time was given for the siege, it would have worked. The walls and towers just seemed a bit too strong for the time you have. We had 25 siege weapons attacking, and still not enough time.

So I see a few solutions (not all at once, but these are options):
-More time for the siege.
-Less Wall/Structure HP
-More siege vehicle HP
-More siege weapon damage

All of these things feel like they could resolve the situation.

xPariah
12-14-2014, 05:16 PM
Defenders should have a 30 second respawn time while Attackers have a 15 second respawn time.

Castle Turrets need to have a slower fire rate, maybe add 2 seconds in between shots. Range reduced to 80m.

Siege Equipment needs to take alot less damage from Player attacks but take normal damage from other siege equipment.

Castle Walls take 10-15% more damage.

Defenders get a slight defensive boost while inside the Castle walls.

Draxxx
12-14-2014, 05:42 PM
First off, it was very clear to us the reason you added that Thunderstruck tree box into the game to nerf the popular castle sieges tactics and switch to a castle siege more reliant on using siege equipment. We loaded up on 20+ siege tanks and yes it would work if you made some fixes. You made the sieges very reliant on siege equipment but you made them obsolete. The castles cannons are like literally god like. They out range the siege equipment, they fire faster and they are unkillable unless you take out the whole tower. They also are virtually free to use but siege equipment cost 1500-2000g each to get. They also can die in less than 5 seconds while the castle cannons can't die at all. Siege equipment is super gimped compared to the castle defense cannons.

*Castle cannons have 100m range which is far superior to siege tank. They also fire way faster.
-Defender should have a small advantage of course but this is way too loop sided. Their range and/or attack speed should be similar to siege equipment at least. There is no way to defend against it as an attacking guild. We use a lot of man power to use the siege equpiment thus limiting our fighting capabilities. We have to 1- man siege equpiment 2- defend against flankers/rushers 3-defend off the cannons 4- fight the force pushing from their base. You leave the attacking numbers raid so thin and not enough man power to be able to do all this at once.

*Defender have virtually no respawn time - need a death penalty.
-This is a huge problem because you made sieges rely on siege equipment so guilds just suicide bomb for the siege equipment and get no death penalty. Once our weapons die they are down for 10 minutes but when they die they instant respawn. It takes no skill and no tactics to just rush tanks that can die in five seconds. They should have a death penalty for the amount of times they die. This again would help stop the suicide bombs on siege equipment because they would have to be more mindful of dying so often. Our guild personally had wiped the defending guild higher than I can count but they just instant respawn and come right back in. Where is the strategy or skill in that? You never give the attacking guild any time to prep for a proper siege on walls because they just come at you nonstop. Very unbalanced to have equipment on a 10 minute respawn timer while the defenders instantly respawn.

*Having to kill the castle gate to do any real damage to the lodestone.
-This is a huge problem because a well placed castle gate could be put behind a castle and on a cliff with no way to fight any siege equipment to do damage to it. You changed the point of sieges to be reliant on siege equipment but didn't fully think this through. If a guild got a lodestone where they can place their gate on the edge of a cliff how in the world are we suppose to kill it? Even if you could get your siege equipment there, The siege equipment would be so close to the castle that they would die in seconds. This mechanic needs to be removed because of this and the fact that it makes castle sieges predictable. Every guild would know you have to take down their gate to even attempt to win and would base their defense around that. The only way around that is to take down 10 walls to do any real damage to the lodestone? There isn't enough time in the siege to do that because you guys buffed the wall HP and lodestone.

*Wall/Lodestone HP needs to be lowered or siege equipment needs to do significantly more damage. Slightly more to walls and a lot more to the lodestone.
-Also need to rework and rethink the lodestone buff. That's just crazy to think a guild can take down that many walls and/or gate in the allotted time.

*Siege weapons being so squishy.
-Two things here that need to happen. These need to be more durable and harder to kill. One missile rain can kill siege equipment? They also have a 10 minute respawn timer while the defending guild gets to instant respawn then they die!! Siege equipment needs more HP/harder to kill.

*Amount of siege equipment needed.
-You spread out a guilds number way too thin trying to cover a number of objectives. We need to man the siege equipment, defend against flanks and stealthers, fight the main raids pushing force and also keep people off castle cannons. By the time the they guild gets their reinforcements they have 70 people just pushing as a raid and on cannons while we have maybe 50 people left over to cover all those task once you negate the 20 people we have dedicated to siege equipment. So with 20 people on siege equipment you
expect the other 50 to be able to defend the equipment, fight the opposing force AND be able to get the people off castle cannons? Very unrealistic.

You've literally given the defenders all the advantages in the world. I don't realistically expect you guys to make all of these changes but a number of them need to be reworked and rebalanced to make sieges more of an even fight and more based on player skill/strategy rather than mindless suicide rushes.

Also the other thing to think about is that the longer you guys take to deploy this fix, the more you're unbalancing the economy and game. The auroria launch was a fiasco and a lot of guilds missed out or were completely screwed out of a fair chance to get castles and now castles have been impossible to siege for weeks now. Guilds are just racking in taxes and peace funds getting thousands of gold for free. While other guilds trying to siege are spending thousands of gold just to be set up to fail. These guilds are not spending any money to defend while collecting thousands in return. Now that guilds have been doing this for weeks and coming up on months... How are other guilds suppose to catch up?

I hope you guys read all this feedback and do some balancing as soon as humanly possible before it gets any worse. The player base needs it!

ExecratioN
12-14-2014, 06:25 PM
First off, it was very clear to us the reason you added that Thunderstruck tree box into the game to nerf the popular castle sieges tactics and switch to a castle siege more reliant on using siege equipment. We loaded up on 20+ siege tanks and yes it would work if you made some fixes. You made the sieges very reliant on siege equipment but you made them obsolete. The castles cannons are like literally god like. They out range the siege equipment, they fire faster and they are unkillable unless you take out the whole tower. They also are virtually free to use but siege equipment cost 1500-2000g each to get. They also can die in less than 5 seconds while the castle cannons can't die at all. Siege equipment is super gimped compared to the castle defense cannons.

*Castle cannons have 100m range which is far superior to siege tank. They also fire way faster.
-Defender should have a small advantage of course but this is way too loop sided. Their range and/or attack speed should be similar to siege equipment at least. There is no way to defend against it as an attacking guild. We use a lot of man power to use the siege equpiment thus limiting our fighting capabilities. We have to 1- man siege equpiment 2- defend against flankers/rushers 3-defend off the cannons 4- fight the force pushing from their base. You leave the attacking numbers raid so thin and not enough man power to be able to do all this at once.

*Defender have virtually no respawn time - need a death penalty.
-This is a huge problem because you made sieges rely on siege equipment so guilds just suicide bomb for the siege equipment and get no death penalty. Once our weapons die they are down for 10 minutes but when they die they instant respawn. It takes no skill and no tactics to just rush tanks that can die in five seconds. They should have a death penalty for the amount of times they die. This again would help stop the suicide bombs on siege equipment because they would have to be more mindful of dying so often. Our guild personally had wiped the defending guild higher than I can count but they just instant respawn and come right back in. Where is the strategy or skill in that? You never give the attacking guild any time to prep for a proper siege on walls because they just come at you nonstop. Very unbalanced to have equipment on a 10 minute respawn timer while the defenders instantly respawn.

*Having to kill the castle gate to do any real damage to the lodestone.
-This is a huge problem because a well placed castle gate could be put behind a castle and on a cliff with no way to fight any siege equipment to do damage to it. You changed the point of sieges to be reliant on siege equipment but didn't fully think this through. If a guild got a lodestone where they can place their gate on the edge of a cliff how in the world are we suppose to kill it? Even if you could get your siege equipment there, The siege equipment would be so close to the castle that they would die in seconds. This mechanic needs to be removed because of this and the fact that it makes castle sieges predictable. Every guild would know you have to take down their gate to even attempt to win and would base their defense around that. The only way around that is to take down 10 walls to do any real damage to the lodestone? There isn't enough time in the siege to do that because you guys buffed the wall HP and lodestone.

*Wall/Lodestone HP needs to be lowered or siege equipment needs to do significantly more damage. Slightly more to walls and a lot more to the lodestone.
-Also need to rework and rethink the lodestone buff. That's just crazy to think a guild can take down that many walls and/or gate in the allotted time.

*Siege weapons being so squishy.
-Two things here that need to happen. These need to be more durable and harder to kill. One missile rain can kill siege equipment? They also have a 10 minute respawn timer while the defending guild gets to instant respawn then they die!! Siege equipment needs more HP/harder to kill.

*Amount of siege equipment needed.
-You spread out a guilds number way too thin trying to cover a number of objectives. We need to man the siege equipment, defend against flanks and stealthers, fight the main raids pushing force and also keep people off castle cannons. By the time the they guild gets their reinforcements they have 70 people just pushing as a raid and on cannons while we have maybe 50 people left over to cover all those task once you negate the 20 people we have dedicated to siege equipment. So with 20 people on siege equipment you
expect the other 50 to be able to defend the equipment, fight the opposing force AND be able to get the people off castle cannons? Very unrealistic.

You've literally given the defenders all the advantages in the world. I don't realistically expect you guys to make all of these changes but a number of them need to be reworked and rebalanced to make sieges more of an even fight and more based on player skill/strategy rather than mindless suicide rushes.

Also the other thing to think about is that the longer you guys take to deploy this fix, the more you're unbalancing the economy and game. The auroria launch was a fiasco and a lot of guilds missed out or were completely screwed out of a fair chance to get castles and now castles have been impossible to siege for weeks now. Guilds are just racking in taxes and peace funds getting thousands of gold for free. While other guilds trying to siege are spending thousands of gold just to be set up to fail. These guilds are not spending any money to defend while collecting thousands in return. Now that guilds have been doing this for weeks and coming up on months... How are other guilds suppose to catch up?

I hope you guys read all this feedback and do some balancing as soon as humanly possible before it gets any worse. The player base needs it!

+1
agree on every word

Dey
12-14-2014, 06:26 PM
So did Thork prove us all wrong this weekend? Or just hole up comfortably in a Castle they didn't have to siege for?

LilMcGinley
12-14-2014, 07:03 PM
So did Thork prove us all wrong this weekend? Or just hole up comfortably in a Castle they didn't have to siege for?

Actually, Legacy did most of what he posted about and hey, guess what? They got to the lodestone! You can go back to jock-hanging now. Thank you.

Nirvii
12-14-2014, 07:18 PM
First off, it was very clear to us the reason you added that Thunderstruck tree box into the game to nerf the popular castle sieges tactics and switch to a castle siege more reliant on using siege equipment. We loaded up on 20+ siege tanks and yes it would work if you made some fixes. You made the sieges very reliant on siege equipment but you made them obsolete. The castles cannons are like literally god like. They out range the siege equipment, they fire faster and they are unkillable unless you take out the whole tower. They also are virtually free to use but siege equipment cost 1500-2000g each to get. They also can die in less than 5 seconds while the castle cannons can't die at all. Siege equipment is super gimped compared to the castle defense cannons.

*Castle cannons have 100m range which is far superior to siege tank. They also fire way faster.
-Defender should have a small advantage of course but this is way too loop sided. Their range and/or attack speed should be similar to siege equipment at least. There is no way to defend against it as an attacking guild. We use a lot of man power to use the siege equpiment thus limiting our fighting capabilities. We have to 1- man siege equpiment 2- defend against flankers/rushers 3-defend off the cannons 4- fight the force pushing from their base. You leave the attacking numbers raid so thin and not enough man power to be able to do all this at once.

*Defender have virtually no respawn time - need a death penalty.
-This is a huge problem because you made sieges rely on siege equipment so guilds just suicide bomb for the siege equipment and get no death penalty. Once our weapons die they are down for 10 minutes but when they die they instant respawn. It takes no skill and no tactics to just rush tanks that can die in five seconds. They should have a death penalty for the amount of times they die. This again would help stop the suicide bombs on siege equipment because they would have to be more mindful of dying so often. Our guild personally had wiped the defending guild higher than I can count but they just instant respawn and come right back in. Where is the strategy or skill in that? You never give the attacking guild any time to prep for a proper siege on walls because they just come at you nonstop. Very unbalanced to have equipment on a 10 minute respawn timer while the defenders instantly respawn.

*Having to kill the castle gate to do any real damage to the lodestone.
-This is a huge problem because a well placed castle gate could be put behind a castle and on a cliff with no way to fight any siege equipment to do damage to it. You changed the point of sieges to be reliant on siege equipment but didn't fully think this through. If a guild got a lodestone where they can place their gate on the edge of a cliff how in the world are we suppose to kill it? Even if you could get your siege equipment there, The siege equipment would be so close to the castle that they would die in seconds. This mechanic needs to be removed because of this and the fact that it makes castle sieges predictable. Every guild would know you have to take down their gate to even attempt to win and would base their defense around that. The only way around that is to take down 10 walls to do any real damage to the lodestone? There isn't enough time in the siege to do that because you guys buffed the wall HP and lodestone.

*Wall/Lodestone HP needs to be lowered or siege equipment needs to do significantly more damage. Slightly more to walls and a lot more to the lodestone.
-Also need to rework and rethink the lodestone buff. That's just crazy to think a guild can take down that many walls and/or gate in the allotted time.

*Siege weapons being so squishy.
-Two things here that need to happen. These need to be more durable and harder to kill. One missile rain can kill siege equipment? They also have a 10 minute respawn timer while the defending guild gets to instant respawn then they die!! Siege equipment needs more HP/harder to kill.

*Amount of siege equipment needed.
-You spread out a guilds number way too thin trying to cover a number of objectives. We need to man the siege equipment, defend against flanks and stealthers, fight the main raids pushing force and also keep people off castle cannons. By the time the they guild gets their reinforcements they have 70 people just pushing as a raid and on cannons while we have maybe 50 people left over to cover all those task once you negate the 20 people we have dedicated to siege equipment. So with 20 people on siege equipment you
expect the other 50 to be able to defend the equipment, fight the opposing force AND be able to get the people off castle cannons? Very unrealistic.

You've literally given the defenders all the advantages in the world. I don't realistically expect you guys to make all of these changes but a number of them need to be reworked and rebalanced to make sieges more of an even fight and more based on player skill/strategy rather than mindless suicide rushes.

Also the other thing to think about is that the longer you guys take to deploy this fix, the more you're unbalancing the economy and game. The auroria launch was a fiasco and a lot of guilds missed out or were completely screwed out of a fair chance to get castles and now castles have been impossible to siege for weeks now. Guilds are just racking in taxes and peace funds getting thousands of gold for free. While other guilds trying to siege are spending thousands of gold just to be set up to fail. These guilds are not spending any money to defend while collecting thousands in return. Now that guilds have been doing this for weeks and coming up on months... How are other guilds suppose to catch up?

I hope you guys read all this feedback and do some balancing as soon as humanly possible before it gets any worse. The player base needs it!
This was summed up everything i need to say. +100. TRION, do something to this mess or there will be no stop to the mass bleeding. Once people realised the end game is nothing but a joke, then they will leave. Guilds that fail to archieve the end goal for guildies will demoralize and set to mass exodus. We now already seen plenty of known organized big guilds gave up on this game. It's time to take action on this neatly and asap.

Banjee
12-14-2014, 09:31 PM
I feel like if more time was given for the siege, it would have worked. The walls and towers just seemed a bit too strong for the time you have. We had 25 siege weapons attacking, and still not enough time.

So I see a few solutions (not all at once, but these are options):
-More time for the siege.
-Less Wall/Structure HP
-More siege vehicle HP
-More siege weapon damage

All of these things feel like they could resolve the situation.

You guys did a great fight there, was fun to watch it.

If they would give Defenders a Spawn Debuff if they die out of there walls it would help against the suicides too.

Or an immunity buff for the siege Weapons like the Defence Tree has would be also helpfull against Suicides on the Paper Tanks.

If they dont change anything a 2. Rotaion of Siege Weapons and at least Legacy would be fine.

Kappaden
12-14-2014, 09:34 PM
Honestly, I think most issues with sieges could be sorted out just by giving trebuchets 10-15m more range.

clkchris
12-14-2014, 09:52 PM
First off, it was very clear to us the reason you added that Thunderstruck tree box into the game to nerf the popular castle sieges tactics and switch to a castle siege more reliant on using siege equipment. We loaded up on 20+ siege tanks and yes it would work if you made some fixes. You made the sieges very reliant on siege equipment but you made them obsolete. The castles cannons are like literally god like. They out range the siege equipment, they fire faster and they are unkillable unless you take out the whole tower. They also are virtually free to use but siege equipment cost 1500-2000g each to get. They also can die in less than 5 seconds while the castle cannons can't die at all. Siege equipment is super gimped compared to the castle defense cannons.

*Castle cannons have 100m range which is far superior to siege tank. They also fire way faster.
-Defender should have a small advantage of course but this is way too loop sided. Their range and/or attack speed should be similar to siege equipment at least. There is no way to defend against it as an attacking guild. We use a lot of man power to use the siege equpiment thus limiting our fighting capabilities. We have to 1- man siege equpiment 2- defend against flankers/rushers 3-defend off the cannons 4- fight the force pushing from their base. You leave the attacking numbers raid so thin and not enough man power to be able to do all this at once.

*Defender have virtually no respawn time - need a death penalty.
-This is a huge problem because you made sieges rely on siege equipment so guilds just suicide bomb for the siege equipment and get no death penalty. Once our weapons die they are down for 10 minutes but when they die they instant respawn. It takes no skill and no tactics to just rush tanks that can die in five seconds. They should have a death penalty for the amount of times they die. This again would help stop the suicide bombs on siege equipment because they would have to be more mindful of dying so often. Our guild personally had wiped the defending guild higher than I can count but they just instant respawn and come right back in. Where is the strategy or skill in that? You never give the attacking guild any time to prep for a proper siege on walls because they just come at you nonstop. Very unbalanced to have equipment on a 10 minute respawn timer while the defenders instantly respawn.

*Having to kill the castle gate to do any real damage to the lodestone.
-This is a huge problem because a well placed castle gate could be put behind a castle and on a cliff with no way to fight any siege equipment to do damage to it. You changed the point of sieges to be reliant on siege equipment but didn't fully think this through. If a guild got a lodestone where they can place their gate on the edge of a cliff how in the world are we suppose to kill it? Even if you could get your siege equipment there, The siege equipment would be so close to the castle that they would die in seconds. This mechanic needs to be removed because of this and the fact that it makes castle sieges predictable. Every guild would know you have to take down their gate to even attempt to win and would base their defense around that. The only way around that is to take down 10 walls to do any real damage to the lodestone? There isn't enough time in the siege to do that because you guys buffed the wall HP and lodestone.

*Wall/Lodestone HP needs to be lowered or siege equipment needs to do significantly more damage. Slightly more to walls and a lot more to the lodestone.
-Also need to rework and rethink the lodestone buff. That's just crazy to think a guild can take down that many walls and/or gate in the allotted time.

*Siege weapons being so squishy.
-Two things here that need to happen. These need to be more durable and harder to kill. One missile rain can kill siege equipment? They also have a 10 minute respawn timer while the defending guild gets to instant respawn then they die!! Siege equipment needs more HP/harder to kill.

*Amount of siege equipment needed.
-You spread out a guilds number way too thin trying to cover a number of objectives. We need to man the siege equipment, defend against flanks and stealthers, fight the main raids pushing force and also keep people off castle cannons. By the time the they guild gets their reinforcements they have 70 people just pushing as a raid and on cannons while we have maybe 50 people left over to cover all those task once you negate the 20 people we have dedicated to siege equipment. So with 20 people on siege equipment you
expect the other 50 to be able to defend the equipment, fight the opposing force AND be able to get the people off castle cannons? Very unrealistic.

You've literally given the defenders all the advantages in the world. I don't realistically expect you guys to make all of these changes but a number of them need to be reworked and rebalanced to make sieges more of an even fight and more based on player skill/strategy rather than mindless suicide rushes.

Also the other thing to think about is that the longer you guys take to deploy this fix, the more you're unbalancing the economy and game. The auroria launch was a fiasco and a lot of guilds missed out or were completely screwed out of a fair chance to get castles and now castles have been impossible to siege for weeks now. Guilds are just racking in taxes and peace funds getting thousands of gold for free. While other guilds trying to siege are spending thousands of gold just to be set up to fail. These guilds are not spending any money to defend while collecting thousands in return. Now that guilds have been doing this for weeks and coming up on months... How are other guilds suppose to catch up?

I hope you guys read all this feedback and do some balancing as soon as humanly possible before it gets any worse. The player base needs it!

Drax4presss

Nirvii
12-14-2014, 10:04 PM
Honestly, I think most issues with sieges could be sorted out just by giving trebuchets 10-15m more range.
No if the treb still get down by 1-2 missile rain. Defender will just suicide rush the treb regardless of range.
-Treb range increase 10-15m and normal damage reduction -50or-70%
-Reduce wall/heart HP by 20-30%
-Defender has spawn cooldown of 100-150sec
-Cannon damage reduce to match lv50 equipment/siege
-There should be proper scroll bidding system to prevent the nominee of the existing guild castle owner to bid. Some way some how, like bidder must be in guild of 70ppl of lv50, create for more than a month, etc, something that prevent a easy bid from the castle owner guilds.

Defender should not have this much benefits considering they already have free tax income for weeks which are huge. Attackers have nothing but to spend so they need to have more advantage than a lol 20more ppl at the headstart. Siege equip is freaking expensive and if to invest on a treb that get destroyed by 1-2 missile rain, or same range and get down by 1-2 cannon fire, that's just suck.

Austriacus
12-15-2014, 12:03 AM
Actually, Legacy did most of what he posted about and hey, guess what? They got to the lodestone! You can go back to jock-hanging now. Thank you.

getting to the lodestone was never the complain wtf. Its winning the actual siege. They took like 5% off the lodestone. after killling the lodestone you also need to channel for some minutes to be able to take the castle.

This strats are not enough.

jet
12-15-2014, 03:15 AM
Thr walls are way too tough also the denders have more dps than attackers with there cannons gg

vexis
12-15-2014, 03:35 AM
getting to the lodestone was never the complain wtf. Its winning the actual siege. They took like 5% off the lodestone. after killling the lodestone you also need to channel for some minutes to be able to take the castle.

This strats are not enough.

Not to mention

1) the castle was built badly. the gate was right infront with only 1 tower near it
2) the defenders had no idea what they were doing, didnt missile rain the wagons much. and sat on the wall and tickled the attackers.

If the defenders were not ******ed they probably at most would have taken down one wall or less.
If the defenders were ******ed and the castle was built better they wouldnt have got to the lodestone.
If the defenders were afk then maybe they would have won.

Ethersen
12-15-2014, 03:36 AM
This is what I think,

The game is still "new" in terms of full release until now, imagine a few months down the road when attacking guilds have more money and can field 30+ siege machines, then castle walls will seem like a joke, in addition guilds are still experimenting with tactics, so let things settle for now before you nerf things.

vexis
12-15-2014, 03:47 AM
This is what I think,

The game is still "new" in terms of full release until now, imagine a few months down the road when attacking guilds have more money and can field 30+ siege machines, then castle walls will seem like a joke, in addition guilds are still experimenting with tactics, so let things settle for now before you nerf things.

As attackers learn new stats, defenders learn new counterstrats. So far nobody has attempted to siege a castle that is actually built well with 3 layers of walls and a non exposed gate. Legacys siege is a prime example of what is wrong. the people defending the castle were barely defending it. the castle was built very badly with very bad tower placement. and legacy barely scratched the stone even though they had like 15 tanks out at a time and completely outgeared the defenders.

The way it is right now its attackers vs castle while defenders watch and occasionally help the castle out.
What it needs to be is attackers vs defenders who have a terrain/spawn advantage. The majority of the defense must be done by the defenders.

Nirvii
12-15-2014, 04:15 AM
This is what I think,

The game is still "new" in terms of full release until now, imagine a few months down the road when attacking guilds have more money and can field 30+ siege machines, then castle walls will seem like a joke, in addition guilds are still experimenting with tactics, so let things settle for now before you nerf things.
Yeah... Not to mention defender also get tax fund for 1Xk gold at least every week. By the time, attacker who live their living with trade runs and things, defenders prolly get all delphinard + all tanks ripping the hell out of any attackers. Or the game would be desert town with defender sitting there nothing to do the entire game...

Tax fund also need to stop as the siege mechanism still provide no way of winning for the attackers, otherwise the gap will be bigger and bigger as the time goes on. Not to mention the attacker's morale to try hard making money also fade at time faster than defender's tax money gain too...

Alizia
12-15-2014, 05:28 AM
Attackers should learn that they need to bring enough siege equipment and not just 1 or 2. Castle sieges are not meant to be fought just by hitting with your characters weapons or magic.

Please don't make it any easier - so far no one has brought a decent amount of siege weapons to any Castle siege. People just have to learn what to do and what to bring. Its not supposed to be as easy as hijacking a fishingboat.

Fheer
12-15-2014, 05:53 AM
Attackers should learn that they need to bring enough siege equipment and not just 1 or 2. Castle sieges are not meant to be fought just by hitting with your characters weapons or magic.

Please don't make it any easier - so far no one has brought a decent amount of siege weapons to any Castle siege. People just have to learn what to do and what to bring. Its not supposed to be as easy as hijacking a fishingboat.

Clearly you don't know what your talking about. I watched the siege of legacy on the delusion castle and quite honestly bringing more siege weapons is a disadvantage. The more you bring the less defenders you have to fight of the swarm of reds coming in with zero respawn timer. The siege weapons themselves are glass cannnons.

The answer is not more siege weapons. Legacy had around 20 siege weapons.

Skypho
12-15-2014, 06:11 AM
Clearly you don't know what your talking about. I watched the siege of legacy on the delusion castle and quite honestly bringing more siege weapons is a disadvantage. The more you bring the less defenders you have to fight of the swarm of reds coming in with zero respawn timer. The siege weapons themselves are glass cannnons.

The answer is not more siege weapons. Legacy had around 20 siege weapons.

+1 We had 15 siege weapons. I think they should limit the number of cannon walls and decrease the damage the mortars and trebuchets are taking.

So yea bringing more siege weapons doesn't help as there are less ppl to defend them plus they can take like 5 or 6 hits from the wall cannons. So say you have 30 ppl on siege weapons that lives you 40 to defend against 65 (5 on the cannons).

ErTitoRay
12-15-2014, 06:30 AM
Attackers should learn that they need to bring enough siege equipment and not just 1 or 2. Castle sieges are not meant to be fought just by hitting with your characters weapons or magic.

Please don't make it any easier - so far no one has brought a decent amount of siege weapons to any Castle siege. People just have to learn what to do and what to bring. Its not supposed to be as easy as hijacking a fishingboat.

I've seen the streaming of legacy and i think that legacy deserve the castel i think they do the best to take it so far so if nowadays they cannot take it doing what they do, then i can say that or defenders afk or its imposible 100%.

Draxxx
12-15-2014, 06:53 AM
So with the new strategy and direction that you guys implemented for sieges you have to 100% take down a castle gate to have any chance at all at winning and to do any damage to the lodestone. And the only way to take down walls right now is siege equipment.

So what is any guild suppose to do when a gate is built on a cliff?

http://i.imgur.com/HNONGQU.png
http://i.imgur.com/HNONGQU.png

Literally impossible to siege any castle that does this with their gate. You can't fit any siege equipment on that cliff to take out the gate.

Kaosfury
12-15-2014, 06:57 AM
So tl:dr - "Thanks for the feedback but your feedback is wrong. Please keep submitting feedback!"

Hahahaha.......

Wait this affects me.....boooooo

Lynnara
12-15-2014, 07:10 AM
+1 We had 15 siege weapons. I think they should limit the number of cannon walls and decrease the damage the mortars and trebuchets are taking.

So yea bringing more siege weapons doesn't help as there are less ppl to defend them.

Seems like if 50 of your guys cant handle 50 of theirs, that might be an issue. Those 5 extra tanks might actually help.

A few questions (noobish):

1. Would it maybe be a good idea to rush the tower canons before even bringing out the tanks?

2. Is it impossible to arrow rain / meteor the defenders respawn?

3. I watched one guild destroy their own walls with their tower cannons, is it not possible to take control of the enemy's tower cannons and turn them on the castle?

4. How long would it take 20 siege canons to destroy a single canon tower?

Anyways, I'm not in a guild owning a castle, and I don't have a specific opinion one way or another. I would like more serious sieging to happen, so that my farming/crafting guild can get some work and have fun supporting other guild's sieges. It seems pretty difficult to siege now, but looking at what everyone is saying, as well as looking at what some attackers have done, I would personally say the mechanics might need a little tweak but they are pretty close.

From my perspective, seems like the biggest tears are coming from attackers who really are not prepared, and rely too much on zerg tactics (which is to say they aren't really using any tactics). Castle sieges should be pretty nearly insane. Guilds really shouldn't be driving up to a castle with only 5 or 10 or even just 15 tanks and a bunch of players in crap gear with crap builds. Its like the arena where one side is too undergeared or too dumb to take out the healer first, everyone would agree that those people should lose. Got a problem with OP archers? Don't have any on your team? Well then...

Buying a siege scroll shouldn't be a guaranteed win. The defenders should have a natural defensive advantage. Its a frickin castle. History is full of castle siege attempts where even when the defenders were outnumbered they still managed to defend successfully.

All that being said, there is always room for improvement in the mechanics. The one thing that probably makes the most sense to change is the length of the siege battle. 90 minutes does seem a bit short. Its a siege, not a military coup. Its supposed to be epic.

TL/DR:
if you can't control the tower canons,
if you're not taking out the canon towers first,
if your players can't compete 1v1 in pvp with the defenders (gear/builds/buffs/etc),
if you cant deal with the defenders respawn,
can you really be surprised that you would lose?
Also, if anything were to be improved, the siege time should be longer.

Skypho
12-15-2014, 08:00 AM
It wasn't a question of not handling 50 of their own, both sides prepared pretty well for the siege. The problem was that you couldn't defend the mortars from the canon walls(mortar = 6 hits i think). So yea maybe if we had like 30 mortars and once 10 are destroyed spawn next 10 while fixing the first could have worked breaking the gate but that's far from the reaching the lodestone and i am sure time would not be on our side.


Well we tried our best and it was a good fight.

Maya4
12-15-2014, 08:38 AM
Feedback - people want to PvP. Siege weapons does not help for the PvP part. They just limit people in what they actually want to do - pvp with equal numbers vs equal numbers.

Massively nerf the walls. Siege weapons could be still requirements, but do not make them a significant part of the PvP. Let people PvP.

Tax nerf, please. Nobody wants a land in Auroria. I am looking for a month now, for someone stupid enough to buy my land in Auroria.

mirth
12-15-2014, 09:07 AM
First off, it was very clear to us the reason you added that Thunderstruck tree box into the game to nerf the popular castle sieges tactics and switch to a castle siege more reliant on using siege equipment. We loaded up on 20+ siege tanks and yes it would work if you made some fixes. You made the sieges very reliant on siege equipment but you made them obsolete. The castles cannons are like literally god like. They out range the siege equipment, they fire faster and they are unkillable unless you take out the whole tower. They also are virtually free to use but siege equipment cost 1500-2000g each to get. They also can die in less than 5 seconds while the castle cannons can't die at all. Siege equipment is super gimped compared to the castle defense cannons.

*Castle cannons have 100m range which is far superior to siege tank. They also fire way faster.
-Defender should have a small advantage of course but this is way too loop sided. Their range and/or attack speed should be similar to siege equipment at least. There is no way to defend against it as an attacking guild. We use a lot of man power to use the siege equpiment thus limiting our fighting capabilities. We have to 1- man siege equpiment 2- defend against flankers/rushers 3-defend off the cannons 4- fight the force pushing from their base. You leave the attacking numbers raid so thin and not enough man power to be able to do all this at once.

*Defender have virtually no respawn time - need a death penalty.
-This is a huge problem because you made sieges rely on siege equipment so guilds just suicide bomb for the siege equipment and get no death penalty. Once our weapons die they are down for 10 minutes but when they die they instant respawn. It takes no skill and no tactics to just rush tanks that can die in five seconds. They should have a death penalty for the amount of times they die. This again would help stop the suicide bombs on siege equipment because they would have to be more mindful of dying so often. Our guild personally had wiped the defending guild higher than I can count but they just instant respawn and come right back in. Where is the strategy or skill in that? You never give the attacking guild any time to prep for a proper siege on walls because they just come at you nonstop. Very unbalanced to have equipment on a 10 minute respawn timer while the defenders instantly respawn.

*Having to kill the castle gate to do any real damage to the lodestone.
-This is a huge problem because a well placed castle gate could be put behind a castle and on a cliff with no way to fight any siege equipment to do damage to it. You changed the point of sieges to be reliant on siege equipment but didn't fully think this through. If a guild got a lodestone where they can place their gate on the edge of a cliff how in the world are we suppose to kill it? Even if you could get your siege equipment there, The siege equipment would be so close to the castle that they would die in seconds. This mechanic needs to be removed because of this and the fact that it makes castle sieges predictable. Every guild would know you have to take down their gate to even attempt to win and would base their defense around that. The only way around that is to take down 10 walls to do any real damage to the lodestone? There isn't enough time in the siege to do that because you guys buffed the wall HP and lodestone.

*Wall/Lodestone HP needs to be lowered or siege equipment needs to do significantly more damage. Slightly more to walls and a lot more to the lodestone.
-Also need to rework and rethink the lodestone buff. That's just crazy to think a guild can take down that many walls and/or gate in the allotted time.

*Siege weapons being so squishy.
-Two things here that need to happen. These need to be more durable and harder to kill. One missile rain can kill siege equipment? They also have a 10 minute respawn timer while the defending guild gets to instant respawn then they die!! Siege equipment needs more HP/harder to kill.

*Amount of siege equipment needed.
-You spread out a guilds number way too thin trying to cover a number of objectives. We need to man the siege equipment, defend against flanks and stealthers, fight the main raids pushing force and also keep people off castle cannons. By the time the they guild gets their reinforcements they have 70 people just pushing as a raid and on cannons while we have maybe 50 people left over to cover all those task once you negate the 20 people we have dedicated to siege equipment. So with 20 people on siege equipment you
expect the other 50 to be able to defend the equipment, fight the opposing force AND be able to get the people off castle cannons? Very unrealistic.

You've literally given the defenders all the advantages in the world. I don't realistically expect you guys to make all of these changes but a number of them need to be reworked and rebalanced to make sieges more of an even fight and more based on player skill/strategy rather than mindless suicide rushes.

Also the other thing to think about is that the longer you guys take to deploy this fix, the more you're unbalancing the economy and game. The auroria launch was a fiasco and a lot of guilds missed out or were completely screwed out of a fair chance to get castles and now castles have been impossible to siege for weeks now. Guilds are just racking in taxes and peace funds getting thousands of gold for free. While other guilds trying to siege are spending thousands of gold just to be set up to fail. These guilds are not spending any money to defend while collecting thousands in return. Now that guilds have been doing this for weeks and coming up on months... How are other guilds suppose to catch up?

I hope you guys read all this feedback and do some balancing as soon as humanly possible before it gets any worse. The player base needs it!

what he said

Aatxe360
12-15-2014, 10:16 AM
This is what I think,

The game is still "new" in terms of full release until now, imagine a few months down the road when attacking guilds have more money and can field 30+ siege machines, then castle walls will seem like a joke, in addition guilds are still experimenting with tactics, so let things settle for now before you nerf things.

Bad idea. Then the defenders never have to worry about attackers as they purchase their own scroll.


...Anyways, I'm not in a guild owning a castle, and I don't have a specific opinion one way or another. I would like more serious sieging to happen, so that my farming/crafting guild can get some work and have fun supporting other guild's sieges. It seems pretty difficult to siege now, but looking at what everyone is saying, as well as looking at what some attackers have done, I would personally say the mechanics might need a little tweak but they are pretty close.

From my perspective, seems like the biggest tears are coming from attackers who really are not prepared, and rely too much on zerg tactics (which is to say they aren't really using any tactics). Castle sieges should be pretty nearly insane. Guilds really shouldn't be driving up to a castle with only 5 or 10 or even just 15 tanks and a bunch of players in crap gear with crap builds. Its like the arena where one side is too undergeared or too dumb to take out the healer first, everyone would agree that those people should lose. Got a problem with OP archers? Don't have any on your team? Well then...

Buying a siege scroll shouldn't be a guaranteed win. The defenders should have a natural defensive advantage. Its a frickin castle. History is full of castle siege attempts where even when the defenders were outnumbered they still managed to defend successfully...

Fair enough. As the quote above yours stated, this is a fairly new game. Meaning, unless you sink a crapload of real money into it at any point until now, getting a castle is next to impossible. Crap gear can be solved by GHA runs more or less. Crap builds can be solved by online guides and practicing in arena.

It's the material cost that's making it stupid. Auroria and castles were released too early. Even with rumbling archeum trees and their "over-powered" procs of TST, there is also the other materials to make those seems like drops in the ocean of castle siege expense.

Meanwhile, all the defenders have to do is get handed the gold to pew-pew and afk or zerg their defense. I'm not saying make it too easy, but as a game you would think TRION wants to make it an attainable goal to keep their income flowing.

They need to make it somewhat challenging for the defenders as well to prove that they want to keep that castle.

You know what? Even if castles change hands every week, doesn't that mean that TRION is getting paid? It means players are playing the game. There are still only four on every server and it is a sign of prestige.

Lynnara
12-15-2014, 11:48 AM
Feedback - people want to PvP. Siege weapons does not help for the PvP part. They just limit people in what they actually want to do - pvp with equal numbers vs equal numbers.

Massively nerf the walls. Siege weapons could be still requirements, but do not make them a significant part of the PvP. Let people PvP.

Tax nerf, please. Nobody wants a land in Auroria. I am looking for a month now, for someone stupid enough to buy my land in Auroria.

If you haven't noticed, there are plenty of opportunities to pvp at every turn. If you want pvp go get some. If you want dumbed down, go to WoW. Breaking walls with swords is just stupid. Castle siege is castle siege, not 70v70 arena.

Lastosmane
12-15-2014, 06:03 PM
this is so funny even the forums are so dead that not many are answering here =) that should show you that you do sth wrong with this game and one of these points is the castle siege which is the biggest ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ i´ve ever seen... if you dont patch this soon (max. 6 weeks) this would be a disaster and free gold for defenders since auroria release and they can catch up to the guilds which are rly working for their stuff. so me as a guild leader of one of the biggest guilds on my server will stop playing if it wont get patched. no need to explain what is wrong with siege you can read above lol

Dey
12-15-2014, 09:24 PM
Actually, Legacy did most of what he posted about and hey, guess what? They got to the lodestone!

And then what happened? Care to link the video so we have context?

iMythic
12-15-2014, 11:20 PM
First off, it was very clear to us the reason you added that Thunderstruck tree box into the game to nerf the popular castle sieges tactics and switch to a castle siege more reliant on using siege equipment. We loaded up on 20+ siege tanks and yes it would work if you made some fixes. You made the sieges very reliant on siege equipment but you made them obsolete. The castles cannons are like literally god like. They out range the siege equipment, they fire faster and they are unkillable unless you take out the whole tower. They also are virtually free to use but siege equipment cost 1500-2000g each to get. They also can die in less than 5 seconds while the castle cannons can't die at all. Siege equipment is super gimped compared to the castle defense cannons.

*Castle cannons have 100m range which is far superior to siege tank. They also fire way faster.
-Defender should have a small advantage of course but this is way too loop sided. Their range and/or attack speed should be similar to siege equipment at least. There is no way to defend against it as an attacking guild. We use a lot of man power to use the siege equpiment thus limiting our fighting capabilities. We have to 1- man siege equpiment 2- defend against flankers/rushers 3-defend off the cannons 4- fight the force pushing from their base. You leave the attacking numbers raid so thin and not enough man power to be able to do all this at once.

*Defender have virtually no respawn time - need a death penalty.
-This is a huge problem because you made sieges rely on siege equipment so guilds just suicide bomb for the siege equipment and get no death penalty. Once our weapons die they are down for 10 minutes but when they die they instant respawn. It takes no skill and no tactics to just rush tanks that can die in five seconds. They should have a death penalty for the amount of times they die. This again would help stop the suicide bombs on siege equipment because they would have to be more mindful of dying so often. Our guild personally had wiped the defending guild higher than I can count but they just instant respawn and come right back in. Where is the strategy or skill in that? You never give the attacking guild any time to prep for a proper siege on walls because they just come at you nonstop. Very unbalanced to have equipment on a 10 minute respawn timer while the defenders instantly respawn.

*Having to kill the castle gate to do any real damage to the lodestone.
-This is a huge problem because a well placed castle gate could be put behind a castle and on a cliff with no way to fight any siege equipment to do damage to it. You changed the point of sieges to be reliant on siege equipment but didn't fully think this through. If a guild got a lodestone where they can place their gate on the edge of a cliff how in the world are we suppose to kill it? Even if you could get your siege equipment there, The siege equipment would be so close to the castle that they would die in seconds. This mechanic needs to be removed because of this and the fact that it makes castle sieges predictable. Every guild would know you have to take down their gate to even attempt to win and would base their defense around that. The only way around that is to take down 10 walls to do any real damage to the lodestone? There isn't enough time in the siege to do that because you guys buffed the wall HP and lodestone.

*Wall/Lodestone HP needs to be lowered or siege equipment needs to do significantly more damage. Slightly more to walls and a lot more to the lodestone.
-Also need to rework and rethink the lodestone buff. That's just crazy to think a guild can take down that many walls and/or gate in the allotted time.

*Siege weapons being so squishy.
-Two things here that need to happen. These need to be more durable and harder to kill. One missile rain can kill siege equipment? They also have a 10 minute respawn timer while the defending guild gets to instant respawn then they die!! Siege equipment needs more HP/harder to kill.

*Amount of siege equipment needed.
-You spread out a guilds number way too thin trying to cover a number of objectives. We need to man the siege equipment, defend against flanks and stealthers, fight the main raids pushing force and also keep people off castle cannons. By the time the they guild gets their reinforcements they have 70 people just pushing as a raid and on cannons while we have maybe 50 people left over to cover all those task once you negate the 20 people we have dedicated to siege equipment. So with 20 people on siege equipment you
expect the other 50 to be able to defend the equipment, fight the opposing force AND be able to get the people off castle cannons? Very unrealistic.

You've literally given the defenders all the advantages in the world. I don't realistically expect you guys to make all of these changes but a number of them need to be reworked and rebalanced to make sieges more of an even fight and more based on player skill/strategy rather than mindless suicide rushes.

Also the other thing to think about is that the longer you guys take to deploy this fix, the more you're unbalancing the economy and game. The auroria launch was a fiasco and a lot of guilds missed out or were completely screwed out of a fair chance to get castles and now castles have been impossible to siege for weeks now. Guilds are just racking in taxes and peace funds getting thousands of gold for free. While other guilds trying to siege are spending thousands of gold just to be set up to fail. These guilds are not spending any money to defend while collecting thousands in return. Now that guilds have been doing this for weeks and coming up on months... How are other guilds suppose to catch up?

I hope you guys read all this feedback and do some balancing as soon as humanly possible before it gets any worse. The player base needs it!

Bumping this post, Drax is absolutely right. As of now Castle Sieges are nearly impossible to siege. Please fix these issues asap. There are alot of us looking forward to a epic balanced castle siege, SlayerS and hundreds of other big guilds out there are asking you to take your time and consideration into fixing and balancing the sieges. Have a nice day.

Nirvii
12-16-2014, 12:03 AM
And then what happened? Care to link the video so we have context?
Here you are: http://www.twitch.tv/fr3elancer/b/599302153

The longer Dev take to fix the siege balance, the more imbalance the economic are, the more give up guilds/leavers are. I also find it strange for the forum to be quiet like this too. I dont wanna see this ♥♥♥♥ ended up like Wildstar or ESO, seriously.

Griffit
12-16-2014, 03:03 AM
Here you are: http://www.twitch.tv/fr3elancer/b/599302153

The longer Dev take to fix the siege balance, the more imbalance the economic are, the more give up guilds/leavers are. I also find it strange for the forum to be quiet like this too. I dont wanna see this ♥♥♥♥ ended up like Wildstar or ESO, seriously.


1. Defanders can have stone pack inside of castle walls to repair stone walls
2. 10 defenders can just kamikaze on your siege weapons
3. cast time is 5 minute where you can be canceled or killed by walls cannons during that process
4. Defenders there where rly bad you are like 10x stronger than them, so yeah Noobs defanded their castle against 10x stronger people cause siege is not balanced.
5. This video proves what everyone was telling it is impossible castle to be taken + on this video WALLS ARE NERFED DOWN COMPARED TO FIRST SIEGE

Skypho
12-16-2014, 03:16 AM
Here you are: http://www.twitch.tv/fr3elancer/b/599302153

The longer Dev take to fix the siege balance, the more imbalance the economic are, the more give up guilds/leavers are. I also find it strange for the forum to be quiet like this too. I dont wanna see this ♥♥♥♥ ended up like Wildstar or ESO, seriously.

Where are the defenders when you guys break down the two walls? :confused:

Nirvii
12-16-2014, 09:22 AM
1. Defanders can have stone pack inside of castle walls to repair stone walls
2. 10 defenders can just kamikaze on your siege weapons
3. cast time is 5 minute where you can be canceled or killed by walls cannons during that process
4. Defenders there where rly bad you are like 10x stronger than them, so yeah Noobs defanded their castle against 10x stronger people cause siege is not balanced.
5. This video proves what everyone was telling it is impossible castle to be taken + on this video WALLS ARE NERFED DOWN COMPARED TO FIRST SIEGE
Legacy is not my guild lol but you are right on those points. Defenders now have huge advantages. You are not even considering the free tax income 10k gold every week to the castle holder guild which can be well spend to buy everybody a tank/gear...

Shinya
12-16-2014, 03:37 PM
Preface: This is not a QQ post, this is my observations from the siege Legacy participated in this past Sunday. I encourage discussion/debate on any of the points I make, as long as it remains civil and doesn't boil down to a flame war (I'm probably hoping too much here.)

After weeks of preparation Legacy attempted to establish their third castle on the Enla server for the West faction. We went in with an extremely concrete strategy, siege weapons, buffs, etc. Even with our valiant effort Delusion (East) stopped us in taking their castle.

Video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q_OIvow6nM



Zerg, baby, zerg

One of the biggest issues of the siege could be instantly be solved by giving the defenders some sort of respawn timer. The fact that they can instantly respawn 30m from the fight and rejoin instantly makes it so there is no penalty for dying. This is a war where you're trying to fight tooth and nail to defend your territory, yet you can simply rush headlong into the enemy with no repercussions. The simple fact you can come back into the battle within seconds make gear play absoloutely no difference to the battle at hand.

How is this fixed?

Standard respawn timer
(shorter/longer than attackers?)
Increased respawn timers with each wall/tower that is destroyed by the attackers.
(+5 seconds per wall/tower)
Increased respawn timers each death after the first
(+5 seconds per death?)



Defender's Cannons

The cannons on the towers have way too much power to them, which makes them completely overpowered against siege tanks. A single cannon can bring down a siege tank in 5-10 shots, which instantly occurs a 10 minute cooldown on that tank. These cannons cannot be destroyed unless the tower is taken down to below half health. Even with concentrated tank fire, any half decent defending team would have stone packs ready to repair these towers instantly to get these cannons operational. The only way to combat these cannons are to knock off the player operating it.

How is this fixed?

Reduce the range of the cannons from 100m down to 50m.
(This prevents every single cannon from being able to target any tank)
Severely reduce the turn speed of the cannons/have a set arc they can shoot from
(This encourages strategic positioning)
Allow the cannons to be attacked directly
(Tanks can be, why can a tower cannon not)
Flat out reduce the damage
(For being arguably invincible they do far too much damage)



Attacker Siege Weapons
The only way to properly damage any walls/towers is to use siege damage. Siege damage is caused by tanks/mortars and trebuchets. In the current incarnation the tanks/mortars do enough damage, they just die to far too easily. With a meger 30k~ health, they can die to a single coordinated team of 3 stealthers within seconds. These are supposed to be TANKS. They are supposed to be able to withstand attacks; Not simply fall over at the sight of a decently geared Darkrunner.
How to fix:


Reduce the cooldown to repair a tank
(From 10m -> 5m)
Increase the health of tanks
Increase the range
Severely decrease damage taken from normal sources
(Encourage use of siege VS siege equipment)



Walls and time

Myself and many others were under the impression we were given 2 hours to complete the siege. Sadly, this is not the case. There is a 30 minute period in which everyone is forced into the area to sit and wait. This 30 minutes cuts into the '2 hours' that was originally announced. I understand this is supposed to be time to buff up and discuss stratedgy, but any guild will have spent weeks preparing - this is completely unncescary. Give us an ACTUAL 2 hours to fight - Not 90 minutes.
My next point ties directly into the time constraint issue. 90 minutes is nowhere near enough time to bring down 13 walls/towers + gatehouse. Unless every single member of your raid had a tank and there was a perfect rotation of 5-6 tanks up at any given time - you're not going to be able to bring down enough towers/walls to be able to do proper damage to the lodestone.

http://i58.tinypic.com/k37qlg.png



How is this fixed?


Do away with the 30 minute pre-war period. Let us jump into the fight
Decrease the health of the walls/increase siege damage done to walls
Decrease the amount of towers/walls to do proper damage to the lodestone
SPECULATIVE: Decrease the channel time on the lodestone
(We've heard the channel takes anywhere from 5 minutes to 30s)



Miscellaneous Issues


Anti-glider cannons are AWESOME, but can we please actually click on them? They're nearly impossible to click on due to their hit box.

Remove the stewart during the battle. His name shows up in red and is able to be attacked. There was a few times I've tab used an ability on him, or wasted a charge of tigerstrike.

Disable opening portals during the siege. About 10 minutes towards the end of our battle we realized the defenders were opening portals inside the base, which allowed them to teleport to a house next to the firing position of our tanks.

Remove the immunity to normal source of damage to the wooden stairs. Currently they only take siege damage. This is just flat out silly.



Counter arguements


"Bring more tanks, noob!"

Legacy had 25-30 tanks that were rotated out approximately 7-10 at a time. Given how easily they die and the long cooldown of Shatigon's, we simply did not have enough firepower to bring down more towers/walls in a timely fasion.


"I said bring more tanks noob!"
Obviously at the end of the day more tanks is going to be better, but at what point do you have too many people mounting cannons/moving tanks? Each tank that's summoned you need someone to man the cannon, and sometimes someone to move it. Sometimes both at the same time. That's 1-2 people PER tank that's not going to be participating in keeping the defenders from coming and wiping your tanks.


"What about the trebuchet/kegs/glider bombs?"

We contemplated using them, but they do next to no damage to the walls.The Trebuchets are able to be shot by tower cannons even at max range.



In conclusion

Legacy had an extremely fun time participating in the siege. We were a little disappointed at how majorly defenders are biased in the battle, but it was still fun nonetheless. Hopefully with a few small tweaks to the defense of castles it allow castles to switch hands and take effort to defend. In it's current state there's no form of strategy for defense; Unless you call bashing your heads against the attackers with no penalty defense.

TL;DR: Defenders have an insanely lopsided advantage against attackers.

Forrest
12-16-2014, 06:50 PM
Basically, the majority of posts are saying "If people are failing on the first legit siege then it is imbalanced".

LOL @ all this falling sky...

Nirvii
12-16-2014, 07:42 PM
Basically, the majority of posts are saying "If people are failing on the first legit siege then it is imbalanced".

LOL @ all this falling sky...
Well you brought nothing to the table but keyboard warrior. Those people who sieged actually tried their best to give Dev feedback from their guild's money/dedication which those feedback were actually legit.

Forrest
12-16-2014, 09:51 PM
Well you brought nothing to the table but keyboard warrior. Those people who sieged actually tried their best to give Dev feedback from their guild's money/dedication which those feedback were actually legit.

The point: It is too early to start saying the failure is (still) on the game/Trion/XL. That excuse is getting old. If there are still no successes across all servers in a couple more sieges then you may be on to something. Until then the people saying this game is dead/dying and imbalanced (i.e. those who say the sky is falling) are humorous at best.

Just because you don't like the point doesn't mean that it is nonexistent.

How I really feel: Trion just wants to know what they need to do to keep people around without actually having to spoon feed people castles. Regardless of current balance, they will cater to the masses because that is how they stay in business.

Griffit
12-17-2014, 01:14 AM
The point: It is too early to start saying the failure is (still) on the game/Trion/XL. That excuse is getting old. If there are still no successes across all servers in a couple more sieges then you may be on to something. Until then the people saying this game is dead/dying and imbalanced (i.e. those who say the sky is falling) are humorous at best.

Just because you don't like the point doesn't mean that it is nonexistent.

How I really feel: Trion just wants to know what they need to do to keep people around without actually having to spoon feed people castles. Regardless of current balance, they will cater to the masses because that is how they stay in business.

Korea had same issue and after half year they balanced it down .

Trion opened AA siege with KNOWN unbalanced siege that korea already had fixed on their servers, yet they ask for feedback.

Nirvii
12-17-2014, 01:28 AM
The point: It is too early to start saying the failure is (still) on the game/Trion/XL. That excuse is getting old. If there are still no successes across all servers in a couple more sieges then you may be on to something. Until then the people saying this game is dead/dying and imbalanced (i.e. those who say the sky is falling) are humorous at best.

Just because you don't like the point doesn't mean that it is nonexistent.

How I really feel: Trion just wants to know what they need to do to keep people around without actually having to spoon feed people castles. Regardless of current balance, they will cater to the masses because that is how they stay in business.
Well u still brought nothing to the table. We dont need any more proof that trion failed, the fact that "not a single guild on naeu" had succeed in attacking for 3 sieges on all servers already means the system is complete imbalance. We dont have to say a damn thing and the fact that korea siege (or ru or jp) had the siege system for ages, why we still have to give dev a ♥♥♥♥ing feedback with our gold our time our blood in a freaking live server not ptr...

NotAnAdmin
12-17-2014, 08:52 AM
Every member of attacking raid needs to have 1 siege weapon in their bag.

That's enough siege weapons, and not 2-3, or even 15 -- that is low, when those get destroyed you don't have 15 anymore!

If every member of raid has 1! you can start with 20 at one time out there, and 50 of your people engage defenders.

When 1 siege weapon gets destroyed, his owner goes to 50 man offensive team, and other guy with unused siege weapon in bag replaces him in 20 man siege weapon team.

This is how you have 20 siege weapons constantly out, and not only on beginning.
The best try so far was bringing 15 siege weapons, wtf, and you people still complain...

Just admit it, you want to win sieges without spending gold, just by pvping. It does not work like that!

Also siege towers.. block cannon LOS, attack defenders on walls, do not let them attack trebuches.
THAT is what you need to do, and not: bring 15, let them be destroyed, come QQ on forums.

Shinya
12-17-2014, 09:15 AM
Every member of attacking raid needs to have 1 siege weapon in their bag.

That's enough siege weapons, and not 2-3, or even 15 -- that is low, when those get destroyed you don't have 15 anymore!

I'm not sure if you missed my massive post literally three posts above yours, but..


Legacy had 25-30 tanks that were rotated out approximately 7-10 at a time. Given how easily they die and the long cooldown of Shatigon's, we simply did not have enough firepower to bring down more towers/walls in a timely fasion.



When 1 siege weapon gets destroyed, his owner goes to 50 man offensive team, and other guy with unused siege weapon in bag replaces him in 20 man siege weapon team.

This is how you have 20 siege weapons constantly out, and not only on beginning.
The best try so far was bringing 15 siege weapons, wtf, and you people still complain...

Just admit it, you want to win sieges without spending gold, just by pvping. It does not work like that!

We're well aware now that every single member will need siege equipment to even have a shot at attempting to take a castle. This seems a little silly, no? You're telling me EVERY single person in the raid needs to have a tank. That's absurd.


Also siege towers.. block cannon LOS, attack defenders on walls, do not let them attack trebuches.
THAT is what you need to do, and not: bring 15, let them be destroyed, come QQ on forums.

Surely you're trolling, right? Block cannon LOS? Please tell me how you can block the cannon LOS. Unless there's a method I'm not aware of, you're not going to be blocking it's LOS anytime soon.

Do not let them attack? How about stealthers that come from behind? People teleporting in from behind? People suiciding from the base with gliders? It's not that simple. With no respawn timer and respawning instantly 30m away, they can throw bodies at each tank and trebuchet without any repercussions.

NotAnAdmin
12-17-2014, 09:37 AM
I've previously suggested increasing number of attackers vs number of defenders to help protect siege weapons better.

But yes, I'm guessing every member of the attacking raid should own 1 siege weapon. It's not silly at all, it's an investment, why would anyone get a free ride?

Shinya
12-17-2014, 09:49 AM
I've previously suggested increasing number of attackers vs number of defenders to help protect siege weapons better.

But yes, I'm guessing every member of the attacking raid should own 1 siege weapon. It's not silly at all, it's an investment, why would anyone get a free ride?

Nobody is asking for a free ride, it's the logistics of it that makes it silly. 70 siege weapons alone is going to cost you roughly 70k gold (they cost about 1k each) + 300 gilda. On top of that each guild worth it's weight is going to have every member inside the siege buffed (about 40-50g every 30 minutes). Even on the low spectrum that's 8400g in consumables for the hour and a half.

Amused Observer
12-17-2014, 05:07 PM
On the flip side, Legacy's got 2 castles and raking in a lot of dole from each. Surely 8.4k gold isn't impossible for Legacy to cough up. :) That being said, yeah it costs a fortune to bring enough siege gear and buffs to have a realistic shot at taking a castle.

Calim
12-17-2014, 05:23 PM
Can they not go into the game themselves and WATCH the few sieges that are still taking place??

Amazing concept to have in game GMs I know, I guess I'm just crazy.

Forrest
12-19-2014, 12:48 PM
Well u still brought nothing to the table. We dont need any more proof that trion failed, the fact that "not a single guild on naeu" had succeed in attacking for 3 sieges on all servers already means the system is complete imbalance. We dont have to say a damn thing and the fact that korea siege (or ru or jp) had the siege system for ages, why we still have to give dev a ♥♥♥♥ing feedback with our gold our time our blood in a freaking live server not ptr...

Your inability to read or comprehend anything you don't like is hilarious at best.

There has been ONE siege that has actually happened, not 3 (hence the scroll refunds for the first 2 siege attempts). The first 2 were total failures due to Trion server issues and cannot be used as "balance feedback" due to the lack of sieges. No one lost money unless they were ******ed and did not ask for a refund on the first two. If you failed on siege 3 that's on YOU.

The most recent one was the only siege that did not have server issues and went off as intended. It is the only one you could even begin to use for helpful balance feedback which again is not enough info, especially when it is all from those who were unsuccessful.

Jackie
12-20-2014, 10:38 AM
Actually, Legacy did most of what he posted about and hey, guess what? They got to the lodestone! You can go back to jock-hanging now. Thank you.

So they took down 4 mill hps worth of walls while having still a 4 mill hp lodestone to destroy + a channel after that. They didnt even make it half way vs what seemed to be a fairly bad guild that wasnt even remotley organized. Totally proof that things are balanced!

Myoko
12-20-2014, 01:16 PM
How bout a mechanic to prevent guilds from buying their own scrolls? Instead of having the scroll on ah and just making it whoever has the most cash gets it, make the bid in gildas (and cash if you really want) with a maximum number of contributions per player in the guild.

For example, each person in the guild can contribute up to 50 gilda for the seige scroll, and the guild with the highest gilda bid pays 5k gold for the seige scroll. If a guild really wants to siege, each member in the guild will have to work towards getting the guild the chance, instead of say, some guy drops a few k on cash shop items for gold, and wins the scroll by default (idk if anyone has done that).

This method makes it more difficult for a guild to just feed an alt guild cash and buy their own scroll, vs having to gather 50 gildas for a guild of say, 200.

talizzar
12-20-2014, 11:15 PM
Can the owning guild buy their own scroll? Alt guilds are not the owning guild so deal with it.

How about the mechanic that if the scroll is not placed the castle owner does not get their funds........More griefing mechanics...........

If the scroll is not placed the castle owner should be declared the winner and given the spoils of war.

Myoko
12-20-2014, 11:29 PM
Can the owning guild buy their own scroll? Alt guilds are not the owning guild so deal with it.

How about the mechanic that if the scroll is not placed the castle owner does not get their funds........More griefing mechanics...........

If the scroll is not placed the castle owner should be declared the winner and given the spoils of war.

The alt guild is not the owning guild, but having an alt guild buy your scroll makes the entire discussion here moot point. If the 'seige' is between you and your dual box, the discussion about how it's impossible to siege is irrelevant.

There hasn't been an actual siege on Ollo since addiction failed.

Griffit
12-21-2014, 07:30 AM
What is point of this topic ? I really do not get it ...

It is like :

" Hey I have Product half of human population rejected it , even owners of that product agreed it is broken , But can you guys give feedback to us : a ) why did you not like our broken product , b ) what do you think we should work to improve it . "


To me this topic looks more like TRION is hiding behind their Big time Fact up and they want to trick it was our idea that siege gets fixed .


Marketing ? in order to get whales they lost ?


P.S

Did Trion Marketing team had Idea :

" Lets Apolagize to our players do refund and try to save what we have left / cause acting like dumb 2 year kid will only increase to loose more , Maybe if we show player base That we are Professional team that bows head on fact up will show others there is worth sticking with trion there is team working "


This is what Trion did Bad to me :

A ) I bought 60 000 gold using cash shop , spent that on siege that was BROKEN
B ) Me + My Friends had + Alt accounts on which we used Apex Credits to get Patron status in order to have more labor to be used in game , cause on start 1 apex was being sold for 70 gold.
Trion Banned Main account + Alts for 2-3 weeks until they finished investigation that we did not use " APEX BUG EXPLOIT "
After 2-3 weeks they unbanned accounts and did full Money refund but that people lost 2-3 weeks advantage , went pissed off , quit game.
C ) ArcheageBuddy is still full working hack on AA servers
D) They Lied to me that they will wait for perfect time for opening Auroria Cause they understand how important that is . Instead They facked that so much was unbelievable.
E ) Economy Is destroyed
F ) There is a NO communication between player base and GMs here on trion . Take for example this topic , did any GM answered that he agrees with some valid feedback ?
G ) Trion does not understand we already have been " Money milked " by other companies in other games, and that they are couple years to late to try out this "Business model "

Amused Observer
12-21-2014, 11:36 AM
Can they not go into the game themselves and WATCH the few sieges that are still taking place??

Amazing concept to have in game GMs I know, I guess I'm just crazy.

You're assuming Trion has a ton of GMs available on SUNDAYs to watch each siege. Unfortunately, I think Trion is run w/ a shoestring staff, and they simply don't have the manpower to do what you're suggesting.

Amused Observer
12-21-2014, 11:40 AM
So they took down 4 mill hps worth of walls while having still a 4 mill hp lodestone to destroy + a channel after that. They didnt even make it half way vs what seemed to be a fairly bad guild that wasnt even remotley organized. Totally proof that things are balanced!

I agree w/ you that the defenders were poorly organized. My understanding is that a lot of the members of that guild were not available to defend the castle (i.e. due to work), and over half the 75 defenders were "borrowed" from other green guilds to assistance for that siege only. When you view the castle defense in light of this fact, it's actually a damn good effort to be honest.

Amused Observer
12-21-2014, 11:47 AM
What is point of this topic ? I really do not get it ...

I think Trion is trying to show that they are doing "something" right now re: castle siege. But I also believe that XL Games is not going to make any adjustments--pointing to Legacy's performance as reason NOT to reduce wall damage or increase tank effectiveness. XL's take is for attackers to bring more siege gear. Legacy did that and even damaged the Lodestone (a little bit). So maybe Legacy could bring double the number of siege gear and go even further the next siege.

Aatxe360
12-21-2014, 12:00 PM
You're assuming Trion has a ton of GMs available on SUNDAYs to watch each siege. Unfortunately, I think Trion is run w/ a shoestring staff, and they simply don't have the manpower to do what you're suggesting.

That's TRION's fault for not having the staff to do their jobs. It's on Scapes for saying that something is going to happen when he knows it clearly isn't going to happen.


I think Trion is trying to show that they are doing "something" right now re: castle siege. But I also believe that XL Games is not going to make any adjustments--pointing to Legacy's performance as reason NOT to reduce wall damage or increase tank effectiveness. XL's take is for attackers to bring more siege gear. Legacy did that and even damaged the Lodestone (a little bit). So maybe Legacy could bring double the number of siege gear and go even further the next siege.

I like your name. Do you actually play the game or just observe?

I was under the impression that TRION was the one that buffed the castle wall's hp. I also hear on the RUS server that castle walls are not as over-powered. These are just taken from multiple 2nd and 3rd-hand accounts as I don't have the best ability to verify these things myself.

TRION has the ability to have a viable World of Warcraft competitor with this game if they stop being so greedy. I understand they want to make back on their investment into the game, but it can't happen if they make so many changes and then not have a staff on hand when things break or charge lots of convenience for the smallest of upgrades.

Rahvin
12-21-2014, 02:22 PM
Can they not go into the game themselves and WATCH the few sieges that are still taking place??

Sieges are now a myth. It is just guilds sieging themselves with an alt. guild.

SICKOFQUES
12-21-2014, 02:41 PM
Come watch Dahuta server where guilds make alt guilds to get all the gold from siege.
GG ArcheAge.

Pint
12-21-2014, 03:20 PM
SLEEPERS, Brossquad, and Sinister all just took down a fully defended castle on Tahyang today. Arcadian Guard scrublords lost it.

#ZUMBALLIANCE

Hesperius
12-21-2014, 03:51 PM
Killing the enemy should matter. I do not know why the accumulative respawn timer we normally have was cut from sieges, but it should be included.

mirth
12-21-2014, 04:35 PM
SLEEPERS, Brossquad, and Sinister all just took down a fully defended castle on Tahyang today. Arcadian Guard scrublords lost it.

#ZUMBALLIANCE

I watched that video it looked like all your enemies were afk at the respawn what was going on

Draxxx
12-21-2014, 05:05 PM
Now that we've had a second real siege and able to learn off trial and error since sieges were ninja changed and no information was giving out. We had another chance to go in and test out more mechanics and provide more feedback. A balance needs to be looked at in terms of defending castles tower cannons and attackers siege equipment.

Anyway my thoughts on a way to help balance and fix sieges for changes that need to happen as soon as possible before you completely demoralize other guilds from sieging and letting the economy get even more out of control is that you simply add a death penalty to the defending team. You changed the mechanics of sieges to make sieges completely reliant on squishy siege equipment. However, now all defending guilds are doing is just literally mindlessly dying over and over and over, and just rushing siege equipment. They instantly respawn and just head right to it. If they die, who cares? They aren't penalized. But after enough charges they kill all the equipment and then the attackers can't do anything until they have an efficient amount of siege equipment back up for 10 minutes.

You wanted sieges to be more tactful and strategic which is fine and great. However it takes no skill or strategy what so ever to mindlessly run and use 2 skills on a piece of large siege equipment and be able to kill it. The simple way to fix this is to add death penalty to players so that guilds can't just be suicide bombers and nothing else for 90 minutes.

I still think that some of the balancing issues should be looked at, reworked and changed little bit, especially the OP cannons on towers BUT the major issue and main thing that should be changed is adding a death penalty to players dying repeatedly. In our siege we must have wiped the defending castles players more times than I can count. Literally all the DPS in our raid had 200/300 faction kills just in one 90 minute siege. The defending guild did nothing but mindlessly suicide to siege equipment for 90 minutes while the handful of others just sat on their tower cannons. We maybe got wiped 2/3 times in the whole siege and attacking guilds should get some kind of benefit or perk for fully wiping a defending team. At least a small window to be able to get organized and get our siege equipment set up.

Amused Observer
12-21-2014, 05:52 PM
Sieges are now a myth. It is just guilds sieging themselves with an alt. guild.

Unfortunately we're half way there on Enla, w/ Legacy holding 2 castles and sieging themselves w/ alts guild. Imagine the fun if the same guild ends up holding all four castles. . .

Amused Observer
12-21-2014, 05:59 PM
I like your name. Do you actually play the game or just observe?

I was under the impression that TRION was the one that buffed the castle wall's hp. I also hear on the RUS server that castle walls are not as over-powered. These are just taken from multiple 2nd and 3rd-hand accounts as I don't have the best ability to verify these things myself.

TRION has the ability to have a viable World of Warcraft competitor with this game if they stop being so greedy. I understand they want to make back on their investment into the game, but it can't happen if they make so many changes and then not have a staff on hand when things break or charge lots of convenience for the smallest of upgrades.

I play the game--2 accounts (1 main, 1 for land holding) w/ 8 characters on 1 server. I'm not 100% certain Trion made that buff to the walls, rather than XL being the ones to make the ultimate call on it.

The problem /w Trion is that it's a small company w/ multiple corporate shareholders (unless I'm mistaken). And when you have corporate parents, the subsidiary is under tremendous pressure to keep expenses low and squeeze as much profit out of Archeage. The sales revenues from the founder packages were supposedly enough to keep AA up and running for a year. If that's the case, why wasn't more funds allocated towards customer support, debugging, etc.? The signs point to a short leash from the parent companies.

I agree that Archeage could have been a viable competitor to WoW, but the launch issues, and continuous problems w/ bugs/exploits/poor customer service/etc. has really turned off a lot of players.

Amused Observer
12-21-2014, 06:05 PM
SLEEPERS, Brossquad, and Sinister all just took down a fully defended castle on Tahyang today. Arcadian Guard scrublords lost it.

#ZUMBALLIANCE

If a castle got taken down today, there goes any hope of changing the siege mechanics! In XL's eyes, it's working as intended!

Pint
12-21-2014, 06:29 PM
If a castle got taken down today, there goes any hope of changing the siege mechanics! In XL's eyes, it's working as intended!

http://www.twitch.tv/codaddy/b/601780041

Aatxe360
12-21-2014, 09:05 PM
I play the game--2 accounts (1 main, 1 for land holding) w/ 8 characters on 1 server. I'm not 100% certain Trion made that buff to the walls, rather than XL being the ones to make the ultimate call on it.

The problem /w Trion is that it's a small company w/ multiple corporate shareholders (unless I'm mistaken). And when you have corporate parents, the subsidiary is under tremendous pressure to keep expenses low and squeeze as much profit out of Archeage. The sales revenues from the founder packages were supposedly enough to keep AA up and running for a year. If that's the case, why wasn't more funds allocated towards customer support, debugging, etc.? The signs point to a short leash from the parent companies.

I agree that Archeage could have been a viable competitor to WoW, but the launch issues, and continuous problems w/ bugs/exploits/poor customer service/etc. has really turned off a lot of players.

If their parent companies give them some slack, I'm sure TRION would be happy to find ways to keep this game running. Yes, they have lost a lot of customers, but there are still many more playing it and starting new characters in it.

You know what we gamers want? A game that isn't World of Warcraft. A game that we don't have to pay a subscription. A game that we can take a break from when our Patron runs out and come back to almost where we left off or to where we can easily get back into it without having to spend a lot of money. The first two describe this game. The third is about the economy in this game and I have a few suggestions if they'd actually think about it.

Nirvii
12-21-2014, 09:14 PM
If their parent companies give them some slack, I'm sure TRION would be happy to find ways to keep this game running. Yes, they have lost a lot of customers, but there are still many more playing it and starting new characters in it.

You know what we gamers want? A game that isn't World of Warcraft. A game that we don't have to pay a subscription. A game that we can take a break from when our Patron runs out and come back to almost where we left off or to where we can easily get back into it without having to spend a lot of money. The first two describe this game. The third is about the economy in this game and I have a few suggestions if they'd actually think about it.
Offtopic: Thing is AA is not the same as GW2. If u not pay, not playing, you lose your precious land. This game actually "forced" you to play, and "forced" you to sub, in order for you to be productive. I hope it is a bit tone down and become like GW2 where you arent forced to play 24/7 to pay the land tax.

The only thing still keep us alive in this game is hope to get the castle siege fun... TRION, please act fast about this siege balance. The economy is already worse to attacker side each week pass by. When the population is dead, server is dying, no one dare/ have enough money to siege, that day would be the end of this game.

Aatxe360
12-21-2014, 09:51 PM
Offtopic: Thing is AA is not the same as GW2. If u not pay, not playing, you lose your precious land. This game actually "forced" you to play, and "forced" you to sub, in order for you to be productive. I hope it is a bit tone down and become like GW2 where you arent forced to play 24/7 to pay the land tax.

The only thing still keep us alive in this game is hope to get the castle siege fun... TRION, please act fast about this siege balance. The economy is already worse to attacker side each week pass by. When the population is dead, server is dying, no one dare/ have enough money to siege, that day would be the end of this game.

You don't have to have land. That is an option in this game. Auroria has lot of empty space on my server. There are ways to buy and sell land within game mechanics. The tax mechanic is actually a great way to have land change hands. Next argument.

I do agree that TRION and their parent companies are slowly choking the life out of this game. Do they not want a long-term income? I love this game, but it's being handled so poorly. They have made some steps in the right direction with the compensation package of a few weeks ago, and ...that's it. They refuse to acknowledge the player base except to take our money. We are giving them suggestions for free to help keep this game running. Just because they don't agree with most of them doesn't mean they shouldn't try some of them. That's the point of a public test server, isn't it?

Nirvii
12-22-2014, 12:12 AM
You don't have to have land. That is an option in this game. Auroria has lot of empty space on my server. There are ways to buy and sell land within game mechanics. The tax mechanic is actually a great way to have land change hands. Next argument.

I do agree that TRION and their parent companies are slowly choking the life out of this game. Do they not want a long-term income? I love this game, but it's being handled so poorly. They have made some steps in the right direction with the compensation package of a few weeks ago, and ...that's it. They refuse to acknowledge the player base except to take our money. We are giving them suggestions for free to help keep this game running. Just because they don't agree with most of them doesn't mean they shouldn't try some of them. That's the point of a public test server, isn't it?
They would be saying "Wait for XLGaming" "Wait for XLGaming" "Wait for XLGaming" "Wait for XLGaming" "Wait for XLGaming"...
I mean come on TRION, man up. You want to create "your own version" Archeage. If every freaking things has to get approve/done by XLGaming, we would be rot by the time the real fix came. This is NA version, your version, man up, change it now! Otherwise, just scrap the whole thing, and bring us the latest korean patch so u dont have to "wait for XLgaming" every single step...

This is pretty ridiculous. The sieges had been going for 3 times (meaning months) and yet they getting NOWHERE in term of balancing the ♥♥♥♥.

Aatxe360
12-22-2014, 12:47 AM
If a castle got taken down today, there goes any hope of changing the siege mechanics! In XL's eyes, it's working as intended!

So, you are saying that the only way to get a castle is through diplomatic means? That can get boring and tedious. Two castles were taken today in that fashion on my server, Ezi. TRION will kill castle sieging if that is the only way because you're not actually sieging the castle.

Players want to experience castle sieging through usage of big toys and player versus player combat. That is the point of castle sieging that players want to participate in, not just going afk at the lodestone.

Austriacus
12-22-2014, 12:49 AM
http://www.twitch.tv/codaddy/b/601780041

What this tells me is that defenders have to be mentally challenged to lose a castle. Did i really see like 15 tanks shooting without any disruption for like 10 minutes? wtf is this ♥♥♥♥.

Amused Observer
12-22-2014, 06:20 AM
You know what we gamers want? A game that isn't World of Warcraft. A game that we don't have to pay a subscription. A game that we can take a break from when our Patron runs out and come back to almost where we left off or to where we can easily get back into it without having to spend a lot of money. The first two describe this game. The third is about the economy in this game and I have a few suggestions if they'd actually think about it.

Agreed. The last MMO I played was Guild Wars. The first one. Nothing else interested me until AA came along. I played WoW at launch, and enjoyed it for a while. After that I wanted a difference online gaming experience. The only games I play online now are Archeage and Marvel Puzzle Quest (a totally different type of game, but very much p2w too).

Amused Observer
12-22-2014, 06:25 AM
So, you are saying that the only way to get a castle is through diplomatic means? That can get boring and tedious. Two castles were taken today in that fashion on my server, Ezi. TRION will kill castle sieging if that is the only way because you're not actually sieging the castle.

Players want to experience castle sieging through usage of big toys and player versus player combat. That is the point of castle sieging that players want to participate in, not just going afk at the lodestone.

I have personally participated in a castle defense, so I totally agree w/ your sentiments. Far too few players have been able to experience a legit castle siege, and it's a shame. :(

draciele
12-22-2014, 07:56 AM
Here are my 2 cents as to what could make sieges a little better.

1. wall/tower hp is just a bit too high i think. i would like to see either a drop in overall hp, or destruction to towers being before 25% hp. if destruction came sooner, lets say 40%, I could easily live with their current hp amount, or if you lowered the damage of the towers a bit.

2. if a castle's main gate is not connected to the castle, it should not be a requirement to kill to take the lodestone. an easy fix to this would be to force the castle gatehouse to be connected to the walls. if they want to build a wall right behind it to shield off the lodestone, that is their choice to do so.

3. defenders should not instant respawn. it takes away from the tactical aspect of siege defense if you can just instantly respawn and repeatedly zerg towards the siege cannons of the attackers.

anywho, that is my two cents towards possible balancing of sieges.

TheOuroborus
12-22-2014, 08:49 AM
Know what would be really cool? Enabling guild management in the guild window. Or maybe that whole section on Auroria that is still off-limits.

Sorry, I have no feedback as I could care less about castles. I'm just trying to decide whether a player like me, who just likes to tend my farm, make trade runs, enjoys lore... can tolerate much more of getting ganked and pk'd.

Victa
12-22-2014, 11:15 AM
SLEEPERS on Tahyang just took a castle from Arcadian Guard on Tahyang, we used 24 siege cannons and took the castle. This is proof that sieges are not in fact broken and are do able. People just need to put some effort into it.

Aros
12-22-2014, 11:39 AM
SLEEPERS on Tahyang just took a castle from Arcadian Guard on Tahyang, we used 24 siege cannons and took the castle. This is proof that sieges are not in fact broken and are do able. People just need to put some effort into it.

Read your other post, not suprised you managed to take it with Sinister in your alliance.
If this is the same Sinister I know (Old PvP/PK Community from like 97, played UO, Darkfall and more games) tell them I said Hi!

Grats on the first succefully sieged Castle!

Amused Observer
12-22-2014, 11:43 AM
congratz to SLEEPERS!

Chuck Zitto
12-22-2014, 12:54 PM
Great now that we had the mega alliance of all the most geared pvpers from real pvp games on our server successfully siege a castle from a bunch of carebears that hardly even showed up or put up a fight xl games is gonna think sieging is ok how it is. Don't matter much to me anyways I am a pirate and apparently our faction isn't cool enough to be allowed to own a castle.

Austriacus
12-23-2014, 12:43 AM
SLEEPERS on Tahyang just took a castle from Arcadian Guard on Tahyang, we used 24 siege cannons and took the castle. This is proof that sieges are not in fact broken and are do able. People just need to put some effort into it.

Everyone saw how ******ed the defenders where. Even with that into account you guys had like 10 minutes left. Its like the oposing guild doesnt understand the phrase "regoup and atack the tanks"

Nirvii
12-23-2014, 02:03 AM
SLEEPERS on Tahyang just took a castle from Arcadian Guard on Tahyang, we used 24 siege cannons and took the castle. This is proof that sieges are not in fact broken and are do able. People just need to put some effort into it.
Ur fight is flawed and not up to standard. If defender allow that paper tanks to shoot for 10min, something is wrong... Lol good defenders will send stealth archer to missle rain em or cannon them to death within a minute.

Tanks need improvement, not a paper tank like this. Cannon dmg need to be nerf and wall hp need to be reduce.

Let me show u how proper defenders do. I will compile our vid tonight.

Elias
12-23-2014, 02:21 AM
All I read here ist pro attacker
nerf cannon damage, reduce wall/tower hp

For me it will be "better" to balance all
24 siege cannons to claim a castle?

- allow a max of 10 (also the number of towers)
- balance the damage/hp of all and then
- put out the gliders/mounts

it must be a "fight" 50vs50 (70/70) and the winner must be the one with the better tactic... not gear or the number of cannons

Aatxe360
12-23-2014, 04:31 AM
All I read here ist pro attacker
nerf cannon damage, reduce wall/tower hp

For me it will be "better" to balance all
24 siege cannons to claim a castle?

- allow a max of 10 (also the number of towers)
- balance the damage/hp of all and then
- put out the gliders/mounts

it must be a "fight" 50vs50 (70/70) and the winner must be the one with the better tactic... not gear or the number of cannons

Fair enough. The reason why you hear nerf defenders is the fact that it's currently lop-sided in favor of defenders currently. I'm not trying to say that the first successfully sieged castle is any less of an achievement, but look at how ahead the attackers were of the defenders in that fight and how many siege weapons they had to bring to claim a castle within the last ten minutes.

I wonder how much real money they had to spend in a free-to-play game to get to that point?

Elias
12-23-2014, 04:50 AM
Thats another Thing ^^
AA is now P2W and nothing will Change it. Trion wants to go this way and we see... someone pays ^^

There are many things that must be changed (starting from bet the siege scroll) and till that the siegewars are... unnecessary

In my opinion
Move out the Castles till it is fixed and then restart the siege wars

Reihert
12-23-2014, 08:49 AM
Siege scrolls are not the major issue, but I agree, it could go a different route.

Maybe decreasing mat costs to create those siege vehicules or even increasing trebuchet range so they can fire outside cannon range (thus forcing defenders out of their castle to take it out) should help A LOT.

Nirvii
12-23-2014, 09:07 AM
Siege scrolls are not the major issue, but I agree, it could go a different route.

Maybe decreasing mat costs to create those siege vehicules or even increasing trebuchet range so they can fire outside cannon range (thus forcing defenders out of their castle to take it out) should help A LOT.
Also give the tank/treb more durability. 3-4 cannon fires/missile rains and the paper tank goes down. Should not be called a tank really. Cannon damage also ridiculously high. If u have that many hp of wall, then u have no alternative plan but to push one direction into a choke, with that in mind, you would be dead inside anyway due to cannon fires/wall range is extremely OP to counter. I'm not say it is impossible but it is extremly hard unless defender is too subpar or have no clue to get rid of paper tank.

Bokuden
12-23-2014, 10:01 AM
The problem with changing mortars/ironclads is that they are permanent vehicles and can be summoned anywhere in the world. They shouldn't be used as the main assault weapon in sieges, trebuchets should.

Frykka
12-23-2014, 10:37 AM
SLEEPERS, Brossquad, and Sinister all just took down a fully defended castle on Tahyang today. Arcadian Guard scrublords lost it.

#ZUMBALLIANCE

Fully defended? hardly NO anti-air defense - Sleepers could fly onto walls at will as I saw it for all of the fight. NO real attempts by defenders to take out attacking siege weapons. NO partial-build 3 story cottage exploits to block siege tank/treb LOS to half damaged walls (second phase of wall destruction is only possible from right up next to walls). This was not a defended castle siege, it was a joke.

Rekikyo
12-23-2014, 10:53 AM
@ Scapes:

At the moment there are a couple problems sieges cause, which probably require changes to both the siege system, and to the guild system.

1) Guilds that own castles are buying the siege scrolls with the obscene gold they gain from land taxes in their territory. Then, they are creating separate guilds to siege themselves. In other words, an official siege doesn't even happen.

My suggestion?
Make Siege Scrolls only activated by a GL of a guild with a member threshold of say 100 toons (seems reasonable given how hard this event is)
Put a 3 day delay on quitting/joining a guild (would deter guild making abuse by trapping the members in alternate guild or unguilded).

@ Subject of Siege weaponry; ALL of it requires thunderstrucks, which is why the numbers are so low. (And no; Rumbling Packs on Item Mall are NOT the answer!) If the weapons were more readily made for lower fees (remove thunderstruck, or the reliance upon it from some recipes), or were reuseable (most siege equip is 1 use; if it were instead something you could fix with Shatigon's Sandglass, that lasted 1 week their fragile nature would probably be acceptable) the sieges would go more smoothly.

Nirvii
12-23-2014, 05:38 PM
Here is our fight:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgD-Inngj7k

Result:
-Downed 1 gate, second wall 15%

TRION please fix:
1) Line of sight bug of honor siege gun and explosive keg! (While the tank is dead we need this, and it fcking stupid to see half of our raid couldnt fire due to no LoS!)
2)Freaking paper tank/wheel mortar need to get buff. (It is no good to get suicide attacks by 3-4 missile rains or geting 3-4 cannon fire and the paper tank was down with 25min cooldown...)
3)Reduce wall hp, Adjusting heart crystal buff to have less wall down requirement. Sometimes they put a gate into a position where you have no place to place siege or beside the guild hall where it was fking hard to get up to
4)Remove the god damn housing/guild hall whatsoever around. Now the defenders also use this as a tactical strategy by placing 3 story height guild hall for archer to missile rain down to prevent the tanks. Also place many housing plot to reduce the area for tank position/LoS. This is just stupid.
5)Reduce Cannon damage. Holy ♥♥♥♥ 3.5k dmg to all raid is not cool. And the range is way too far!

How the ♥♥♥♥ you suppose us to do having equal number and equal range but defender has super high wall to hide? Do we need to send 1 team to wall, 1 team to guildhall, 1 team to protect tank, and 1 team to clear the ground? When defender just need 1-2 stealth archer to ruin our tanks every 2min. How are we suppose to win?

RexNero
12-23-2014, 07:46 PM
Many people complain about the siege only because they are ignorant or are not aware of important information and basic math. Let's start then.

FIRE IRONCLAD

- 31K HP
- 744 Damage per second (without count fire damage) around
- Range 5-50 meter (normal mode) - 30-75 meters (siege mode)
- AoE normal 5 meters AoE siege 6 meter
- Move speed 5 m/s

IRONCLAD

- 31K HP
- 740 Damage per second around
- Range 5-50 meter (normal mode) - 30-75 meters (siege mode)
- AoE normal 5 meters AoE siege 6 meter
- Move speed 3 m/s

Mortar

- 1.1 milion HP
- 334 Damage per second (without count fire damage) around
- Range 5-45 meter (normal mode) - 30-65 meters (siege mode)
- AoE normal 5 meters AoE siege 6 meter
- Move speed 3 m/s

Wall HP = 1.2 milion

Total time theoric for a single tank not harassed for broke it 120000/740 = 1621 sec = 27 min

Total time for broke 2 x wall + archeum stone (1200000 x 2 + 4200000)/740 = 8918 sec = 148 min

-----------------------

Total time for 10 tanks

2.7 min (single wall)
14.8 min (2 wall + stone)

=========================================

- Guild with castle from start collected at least 100k gold from tax till now
- Craft a Tank is like 3k gold
- A guild that want to have serious siege can easy invest 60k gold and craft 20 tanks machine
- 10 main tanks start shot castle build if get destroy next 10 tanks replace for not loss fire power
- in 10 min tank can be repaired and up again for shot
- Towers cannon have just 100k HP
-
- Keep in mind cannon damage is AoE it don't hit just the wall but also 2 towers next to wall and stairs back to wall if shot on high can also hit 2 cannon over the wall (ALL THIS WITH A SINGLE SHOT)

CONCLUSION:

An organized and desirous of real war Guild (Attacker) can easy take down whole building of defender in 15 min (indeed you need also good people for pvp at least able to defend their tanks while shotting).
It's not mean sure win but taked off the building of defender rest could be very easy if attacker pvpers are better then defenders.

Now stop complain if you think to do a Siege without siege weapon and cry since your weapon hit a wall for 1 point damage and start craft the Tanks you will see it will be alot more fun.

P.S. For guild master that are earning money with Tax rewards, Lord Coins sell, Peace fund unlooked by Fake Bidding, stop to be so greedy not going around to waste money making your and 4-5 best friends ♥♥♥ full Delphynad and start to invest in the Tanks. Share golds with your guild members, make a list of active/ loyal/older player you have more chance to trust and help them to build the only thing gonna help you if you want really have good sieges.

PPS: not totally sure about Mortar (300 gildas) tanks statistic but is approximate

Nirvii
12-23-2014, 08:17 PM
Many people complain about the siege only because they are ignorant or are not aware of important information and basic math. Let's start then.

FIRE IRONCLAD

- 31K HP
- 744 Damage per second (without count fire damage) around
- Range 5-50 meter (normal mode) - 30-75 meters (siege mode)
- AoE normal 5 meters AoE siege 6 meter
- Move speed 5 m/s

IRONCLAD

- 31K HP
- 740 Damage per second around
- Range 5-50 meter (normal mode) - 30-75 meters (siege mode)
- AoE normal 5 meters AoE siege 6 meter
- Move speed 3 m/s

Mortar

- 1.1 milion HP
- 334 Damage per second (without count fire damage) around
- Range 5-45 meter (normal mode) - 30-65 meters (siege mode)
- AoE normal 5 meters AoE siege 6 meter
- Move speed 3 m/s

Wall HP = 1.2 milion

Total time theoric for a single tank not harassed for broke it 120000/740 = 1621 sec = 27 min

Total time for broke 2 x wall + archeum stone (1200000 x 2 + 4200000)/740 = 8918 sec = 148 min

-----------------------

Total time for 10 tanks

2.7 min (single wall)
14.8 min (2 wall + stone)

=========================================

- Guild with castle from start collected at least 100k gold from tax till now
- Craft a Tank is like 3k gold
- A guild that want to have serious siege can easy invest 60k gold and craft 20 tanks machine
- 10 main tanks start shot castle build if get destroy next 10 tanks replace for not loss fire power
- in 10 min tank can be repaired and up again for shot
- Towers cannon have just 100k HP
-
- Keep in mind cannon damage is AoE it don't hit just the wall but also 2 towers next to wall and stairs back to wall if shot on high can also hit 2 cannon over the wall (ALL THIS WITH A SINGLE SHOT)

CONCLUSION:

An organized and desirous of real war Guild (Attacker) can easy take down whole building of defender in 15 min (indeed you need also good people for pvp at least able to defend their tanks while shotting).
It's not mean sure win but taked off the building of defender rest could be very easy if attacker pvpers are better then defenders.

Now stop complain if you think to do a Siege without siege weapon and cry since your weapon hit a wall for 1 point damage and start craft the Tanks you will see it will be alot more fun.

P.S. For guild master that are earning money with Tax rewards, Lord Coins sell, Peace fund unlooked by Fake Bidding, stop to be so greedy not going around to waste money making your and 4-5 best friends ♥♥♥ full Delphynad and start to invest in the Tanks. Share golds with your guild members, make a list of active/ loyal/older player you have more chance to trust and help them to build the only thing gonna help you if you want really have good sieges.

PPS: not totally sure about Mortar (300 gildas) tanks statistic but is approximate
Lol. Do you know that those guild who has that kind of peacefund can spend more on delphinard bows then send those squad to kill even use it to buy their own tanks as well. Attacker has no kind of fund and will have to work their ♥♥♥ off for that kind of money plus they need to spend on bidding as well not to mention pots/scrolls. It's not attractive/supportive for attacker at all.

Tanks are way too weak. Cannon are way too strong and have too long range. Defender already have a lot advantage on the high wall already. Without tanks, without trebs, with siege harpoon los bugs, there is no way in hell the castle will break unless defenders leave the tanks there to shoot for free.

If you had attend the siege yourself, you would have known it is too easy to kill the tank. See my vid.

RexNero
12-23-2014, 08:29 PM
Lol. Do you know that those guild who has that kind of peacefund can spend more on delphinard bows then send those squad to kill even use it to buy their own tanks as well.

It's sure will happen if the attacker guild have 50 players afk that instead defend their siege weapon are to watching a football match in TV.

Keep in mind defender start for 30 min with 20 player less...

If you can't defend 70 vs 50 your tanks indeed you gonna fail.

BTW stop ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ delphi parts going from 5 to 40k depend what do you think the guild master gonna really buy full delphy set for their members even if money was enough? I not think really.
Delphi bow are around 20k+ on my server Guild master decided (and will never happen) to buy it 10 are 200k gold already and give to 10 random playes

1 nothing about armor? that mean that archer with good damage gonna die very easy if his armor suck
2 rest of 60 players have still their own gear

Nirvii
12-23-2014, 08:35 PM
It's sure will happen if the attacker guild have 50 players afk that instead defend their siege weapon are to watching a football match in TV.

Keep in mind defender start for 30 min with 20 player less...

If you can't defend 70 vs 50 your tanks indeed you gonna fail.

BTW stop ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ delphi parts going from 5 to 40k depend what do you think the guild master gonna really buy full delphy set for their members even if money was enough? I not think really.
Delphi bow are around 20k+ on my server Guild master decided (and will never happen) to buy it 10 are 200k gold already and give to 10 random playes

1 nothing about armor? that mean that archer with good damage gonna die very easy if his armor suck
2 rest of 60 players have still their own gear
Have you ever try to siege before? That 20man advantage prove nothing at all. You dont have the god damn ladder for that. The first 30min is going to spend getting the first wall down. Then what you going to do on the second layer of wall when they have 70vs70 (and defender gotta place their healer/range on the wall). If u see the spike damage in my video you will know how powerful the cannons are.

Tanks are getting kill in 2-3minutes. (And they have 25 fking minute cooldown for repair!) They have high ground guild hall, and stealth archers for that. The archer range is huge and you cant defend the siege tank in time because they will just suicide themselves at the tank and rinse repeat. 3 Archers with stealth and missile rains instantly are enough for a tank killing squad. You cant do jack, the tanks die way too easy, not to mention cannon range also cover almost every area. (On this castle we already place the tank on the most further edge that was allowed but still get hit by cannons) Once the tank is gone, the only option is "siege harpoon" which is line of sight buggy as hell, and refused to fire for most of the time. Plus if you dont realise the siege harpoon deal 1000 dmg each to wall and you only able to carry "10 god damn bullets". So u need to back and refill ammo all the time as well if u see in the video.

I suggest you try participate in such siege as attacker before you try to comment. Attackers are in dire situation right now, otherwise there would be more castle changing hands. Now only one i saw is sleeper's, and they just completely ♥♥♥♥, leaving the tanks to easy fire for 10min, the wall arent even closed properly.

Aatxe360
12-24-2014, 02:59 PM
The gist of what the community of players are saying, TRION, is that if your intentions to milk the maximum amount of money from attackers to take a castle is your intentions, then you've done a good job. You will have 10 players at most per server willing to pay-to-win a castle.

Unfortunately, you have excluded everyone else that is even interested from even trying because they don't want to spend time, effort, and lots of money to just have a chance at a castle. That will lead to stale gameplay and players losing interest in the game sooner, rather than later. There are many suggestions on these boards, some stupid, some brilliant. It is your job to test them to keep the community interested in continuing to play the game and it will help your bottom line in the long run.

Forrest
12-24-2014, 05:20 PM
Great now that we had the mega alliance of all the most geared pvpers from real pvp games on our server successfully siege a castle from a bunch of carebears that hardly even showed up or put up a fight xl games is gonna think sieging is ok how it is. Don't matter much to me anyways I am a pirate and apparently our faction isn't cool enough to be allowed to own a castle.

Great. Now that we have seen that the current mechanics are in fact legit we have to endure endless QQ that you can't do it without Trion handing you a ♥♥♥♥ing castle.

Chuck Zitto
12-25-2014, 06:59 AM
Great. Now that we have seen that the current mechanics are in fact legit we have to endure endless QQ that you can't do it without Trion handing you a ♥♥♥♥ing castle.

You sir are ******ed. The mechanics are not in fact legit they are broken. The only siege that has been won by the attackers was pretty much against a no show on the defenders side. Also again I don't really care all that much cus im in the pirate faction. We are not even allowed to siege or own a castle period.

SkilledNoob
12-25-2014, 09:31 PM
There are tons of people here who have not sieged nor have been sieged and they still think their opinion matters, why is that?
you guys need to shut up and let people who have experienced this talk.

Tracyfacey
12-26-2014, 04:06 AM
I was on the attacking side of The White Order vs Mostly Harmless on Kyrios. The major problem for us was the unfinished 3 story houses all around the entire castle that made it impossible for us to successfully siege. All buildings and farms are intended to be destroyed during siege however unbuilt houses is game breaking for attackers. It interferes with line of sight for trebuchets and wouldn't allow siege towers to pass. We also had a very difficult time deploying thunderbolt gliders with the unbuilt houses around the castle. Please see the post written by Sorcerer, Leader of TWO.

http://forums.archeagegame.com/showthread.php?145766-A-red-sun-sets-in-the-west...

SkullMonkey
12-26-2014, 06:55 AM
Adventurers,

Since the first castles of Auroria were sieged last month, the ArcheAge Team has been listening to player feedback regarding the experience as both attacker and defender. The most common feedback was that attackers had a much more difficult challenge than defenders did, largely due to the beefiness of castle defenses. The developer, XLGAMES, has been very receptive to the feedback received so far and has been closely monitoring the gameplay data of each siege. To assist the attackers, they pointed out that their design for sieges requires more siege vehicles to be brought to the battle than they've seen in previous sieges. These vehicles may be fragile but are designed to combat the high health and defenses of the castle constructions.

With the next set of sieges beginning this Wednesday (today), both Trion Worlds and XLGAMES will be monitoring how the battles play out but we also want to hear from you. Be sure to provide your feedback on your siege experience in this forum thread after the fights. These insights will help shape how sieges are balanced moving forward.


Here is how you fix the sieges.

1) Siege weaponry is just too squishy. No one brings them to the battle because they are 2 shotted by the castle defense cannons and it takes mere seconds for the defenders to take down siege tanks via common melee damage. "Ironclad" Siege weapons should only be able to take siege damage. They should also have higher health like around 60-80k health so it takes at least 6 - 10 cannon shots to take down.

2) There should be No Mobs in the area of sieges. we were fighting both 1 star mobs + the defenders so we were getting attacked on both sides. We were told that all mobs would be eliminated at time of siege.

3) walls & shard needs half their current health. walls 600k health sword. 2 million health. (these can scale up slightly for level 55 content if needed but seeing as walls can only be damaged by siege damage it doesn't make sense to raise them that much.

4) No half an hr "Pre game" attacking. That gave a HUGE advantage to the defenders because they could disrupt and destroy our lines before we could even damage their walls. It makes NO sense to have a castle siege start with players being able to kill each other and not be able to damage the walls. That was TOTALLY UN FAIR. As soon as the other players turn red. Walls should be able to be damaged.

5) siege tower cannons should be able to be targeted and destroyed separate from the walls. I don't mind if they have a bit more health than our siege tanks but we literally couldn't target a tower cannon to damage them. In fact most siege engine operators reported that they couldn't even damage the tower that the cannon was on.. that it appeared as though you had to destroy the wall next to the tower to be able to damage it. ALL WALL ELEMENTS SHOULD TAKE DAMAGE AT ANY TIME. You should be able to target the tower, the wall or the cannon.

6) Castle Sieges SHOULD be harder for the defenders. Why? Because you need high turnover for Auroria land to make end game PvP compelling. Why siege a castle if you have little to no chance in success considering how much time effort money and organization go into it? People are quitting the game left and right on our server because the end game is drying up. Most of us still playing are only doing so in order to see the lvl 55 content. If Castles in Auroria have a 50/50 chance of being taken every 3-6 weeks THAT's compelling end game content. It fuels endgame PvP because everyone feels like any decent sized guild has a chance at owning a castle. Right now no one even tries because the battle is so one sided. And because of that one sided battle people are quitting the game. Castle owners should have a hard time owning a castle. Winning a castle siege should be like winning the superbowl, you get to bask in your glory for a period of time but come next season (i.E. next siege) it's anyone's ballgame. You have the advantage by having a good well organized team/guild as well as the experience but it should be difficult to win back to back superbowls (read sieges)

7) Castle "Siege Scrolls" should be one via battle and not by bidding on the auction house. Just like in sporting events you have an entire sports season to whittle down to the top 2 teams going to the superbowl you need to make siege scrolls winnable by content. Making siege scrolls an item garnered by gold makes it a "Pay to win" item. guild's with the most gold win and that's it. Also guilds that own castles already can simply buy out their own scroll via negotiating a deal with another guild or an alt in another guild they own. That kind of mechanic simply ruins castle sieges. What should really happen is give guilds the ability to "go to war" with each other for say 24 hrs. And the guild with the most wins in a month gets the castle siege scroll. The highest ranking guilds get to battle it out for choice of which scroll they want to take.

8) Make Auroria more beautiful. Right now it looks like a dangerous wasteland filled with volcanoes and nightmarish creatures... who the hell would want to live in a place like that? If auroria was as beautiful as Villanelle or Falcorth or Lillyut hills or gwenoid forest people would be far more insterested in owning land there. They would be more invested emotionally in their property and fight harder to acquire and defend it. Having an ugly depressing landscape just makes it only a place you'd get for resources and gold and nothing else. Make Auroria beautiful... make it interesting.

9) Houses should be destructable during sieges (but can be repaired afterwards) Building a bunch of houses or mansions around a castle to block siege tanks is a viable strategy IF you can destroy them as in a real siege... but Making these structures immune to damage is simply a broken and unfair mechanic. Make houses destructable during sieges.

10) The Castle Glider shield should not be an automatic thing. It should be a tower upgrade that needs to be manually activated by a defender to be utilized. having an automatic glider shield is OP for Defenders and completely eliminates any air attack strategies. There should be more balanced air attack/defense mechanics.

11) Auroria honor - This game is built around PvP, and in order for PvP to be interesting and rewarding there must be a loss/win aspect. Auroria should be a zone where honor can be won and lost, or else there is no incentive to PvP outside of sieges.

12) Add Auroria specialty benches - This is one of the BIGGEST incentives you could add to the game to make it more interesting. high yield specialty goods and traders on Auroria to fuel PvP. Right now the seas between Auroria and Freedich are empty. If you had high Yield gold and gilda trade packs coming in and out of Auroria, the PvP would be crazy. Likewise there should be gold traders in ALL zones in the game. Perinoor, Hasla, Silent forest etc. More valuable goods on the high seas = more naval battle/PvP fun.

13) Fix archeum tree yield - while I agree with the adjusted yield amounts of archeum trees coming in the 1.7 patch what I Don't agree with is the size increase of the tree's footprint. Archeum trees should keep the same footprint size as a Pine tree. 10 trees per 16x16. This again makes archeum and crafted gear less "Pay to win" and makes the game more interesting. Also make the archeum trees have a slightly higher chance of getting thunderstruck... say double the chance of a pine tree. That would make those trees that much more valuable AND help balance the economy.

Employing these 13 things will fix Archeage's sieges as well as making the end game FAR more compelling, engaging and interesting for players

Also another recommendation or I'd like to make is the following:

1) Remove the Loyalty shop and combine customer loyalty into the credit system instead. Reward customer loyalty with credits that way the cash shop is not strictly "pay to win" say 50 credits a day each day you login. That would again fuel customer loyalty AND make the game less pay to win by making things such as the "wagon hauler" upgrade attainable without having to pay real world money. (yes you can get it on the AH but SOMEONE has to buy it first and then it becomes subject to supply vs demand)

2) Put 500 labor point potions in the marketplace which you can purchase for 150 credits.

3) balance out the regrading mechanics. Right now it's basically impossible to go mythic and regrade scrolls are so pay to win now it makes regrading to the higher tiers a viable option only for the players in game who are filthy rich. you only need to look at Kooncoon's regrading videos to see how ridiculous it is. (goes through 16k gold trying to upgrade 1 item to divine and fails the entire time.) Mythic should be possible. It should be incredibly rare But if I have 30k gold I should be able to make a mythic. Right now it's pointless to even try to go to mythic because you're almost guaranteed a catastrophic fail. There should be some kind of super rare/super hard to craft regrade crystals that would give you at least a 5-10% chance of success... alternatively this super rare regrade crystal could reduce the chance of catastrophic failure to only 10-20% thus making the higher end regrade levels attainable. Also another thing that grinds my gears about regrades is that you can't temper crafted gear. If the temper is supposed to be "built in" then I want to see what that %temper is. I.E. I craft an epherium cuirass and next to the Physical defense it lists a 107% temper, and it could be a random RNG amount based upon my Metalworking skill. The higher your MW skill the greater chance you have of getting a max temper of 109%. likewise you should get a greater chance of regrade success based upon your weapon/armor smithing skill.

anyway those are my thoughts.

Rekikyo
12-26-2014, 07:16 AM
No if the treb still get down by 1-2 missile rain. Defender will just suicide rush the treb regardless of range.
-Treb range increase 10-15m and normal damage reduction -50or-70%
-Reduce wall/heart HP by 20-30%
-Defender has spawn cooldown of 100-150sec
-Cannon damage reduce to match lv50 equipment/siege
-There should be proper scroll bidding system to prevent the nominee of the existing guild castle owner to bid. Some way some how, like bidder must be in guild of 70ppl of lv50, create for more than a month, etc, something that prevent a easy bid from the castle owner guilds.

Defender should not have this much benefits considering they already have free tax income for weeks which are huge. Attackers have nothing but to spend so they need to have more advantage than a lol 20more ppl at the headstart. Siege equip is freaking expensive and if to invest on a treb that get destroyed by 1-2 missile rain, or same range and get down by 1-2 cannon fire, that's just suck.

Well let's compromise; remember; there are 3 types of damage done by players; Ranged, Melee, and Magic. The best weapon in real world sieges to destroy sieges was indeed other siege weapons, but Melee units also were known to destroy siege engines, but overwhelming their manpower, or destroying key components.

Siege weapons SHOULD be vulnerable to melee.

However, most siege engines should be almost immune to ranged; Nothing about "arrows" really destroy anything on a siege engine other than units running them.

So, Give Siege Engines a 90% reduction in Ranged damage.
But leave Melee at 100-90% damage dealt.
As for magic; most magic has a range too short to be scary. About the only skills that could do damage are Skewer and Meteor, which SHOULD do damage, being a skill shot. I would leave Magic at 100%.

As for your complaint about cannon ranges, I disagree on the range card. Real sieges did indeed give an advantage to the higher ground, which was always the castle, by allowing longer ranges; that is simple physics. However, Trebuchets could outrange and outdamage castle defenses. They were not really in the same era as cannons though, so that's more or less a hard thing to calculate. The range on a Trebuchet was roughly 900m but I'd assume a well powdered cannon could also reach that far.

I think the key component is the cannons are accurate. The damage they do is realistic for what they are. But in battle, they aren't always accurate. I dunno if design could accommodate this, but:
-Make cannons only about to fire line of sight (like a gun.... straight forward).

Amused Observer
12-26-2014, 08:36 PM
re: unfinished homes. Yes, they do indeed block line of sight for siege gear. But that's a reflection of the sandbox nature of the game, in my view, to the extent that enterprising players could seek to "control the terrain" around the castle, so to speak. For example, if you're the attackers and want good line of sight for your siege gear, you should be hoarding the land surrounding the castle and slap down farms and gardens to ensure access for your tanks and trebs. The housing zone is bigger than the white circle under control of the castle owner, and as attackers you need to set the stage by ensuring access to the walls. If that means you need to buy out property holders in your faction, then so be it.

Slapping unbuilt houses to block line of sight is a perfectly legit strategy for castle defenders as part of the sandbox nature of AA, and I don't think it should be changed.