Siege Windows incoming?!

Emdash

Well-known member
Sep 22, 2021
2,842
920
113

could be big. I'm not 100% a fan, but it's still a step. RIGHT?

Edit: also I am pretty sure you can dig up the thread of us talking about this and discussing this idea. PAY ME MY MONEY. No, but listen MORE!!
 

Jackdstripper

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2021
1,095
988
113
These siege timers sound a lot like the wardec requests we used to have in MO1. They never worked. I am very curious to see how they’ll prevent allies from mutually declaring fake sieges on each other in order to prevent actual enemies from doing it.

Imo any system that requires acceptance from the defensive party is flawed at the core. Nobody wants to accept a siege, and they will use any possible way to avoid doing it.

The second character is fine as long as its tied to the first in some recognizable way. They should share surname and also murdercounts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xunila

Emdash

Well-known member
Sep 22, 2021
2,842
920
113
These siege timers sound a lot like the wardec requests we used to have in MO1. They never worked. I am very curious to see how they’ll prevent allies from mutually declaring fake sieges on each other in order to prevent actual enemies from doing it.

Imo any system that requires acceptance from the defensive party is flawed at the core. Nobody wants to accept a siege, and they will use any possible way to avoid doing it.

The second character is fine as long as its tied to the first in some recognizable way. They should share surname and also murdercounts.

I agree, but I think this is a step in the right direction.

I don't think there needs to be an acceptance; they get to set the window. It's wack, though, yeah.

Removing defensive bonuses from supply stuff is gg. My idea was let supply towers and other stuff be able to be damaged so people can deplete guilds without sieging them out of the game. Then, make something bigger for actual siege on people's SHs, etc. I think they should have to declare a siege and maybe give a time period to prepare and a time period that it must happen during, but that's about as close as we can get to the anti-ninja thing.

Ninja siege is very maligned. It is necessary for smaller groups to be able to punish zergs. This is all about who can gather the biggest zerg (siege window.) Still huge step that they are going to remove the wack defensive bonuses of supply stuff. Hopefully, they will be able to siege things now. I can see even from vids the world is way too TC'd.
 

ElPerro

Well-known member
Jun 9, 2020
656
763
93
These siege timers sound a lot like the wardec requests we used to have in MO1. They never worked. I am very curious to see how they’ll prevent allies from mutually declaring fake sieges on each other in order to prevent actual enemies from doing it.

Imo any system that requires acceptance from the defensive party is flawed at the core. Nobody wants to accept a siege, and they will use any possible way to avoid doing it.

The second character is fine as long as its tied to the first in some recognizable way. They should share surname and also murdercounts.
I fully trust that Starvault and Henrik will someway, somehow find a way to fuck this up when all they need to do is copy Darkfall/Shadowbane system.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Jackdstripper

Robmo

Community Manager
Staff member
Dec 9, 2021
300
286
63
These siege timers sound a lot like the wardec requests we used to have in MO1. They never worked. I am very curious to see how they’ll prevent allies from mutually declaring fake sieges on each other in order to prevent actual enemies from doing it.

Imo any system that requires acceptance from the defensive party is flawed at the core. Nobody wants to accept a siege, and they will use any possible way to avoid doing it.

The second character is fine as long as its tied to the first in some recognizable way. They should share surname and also murdercounts.
My CURRENT understanding of whats in the code internally is that third parties can join sieges no issue. So even if allies try this, someone can come in during that time and siege.
I don't see this changing, but it could, I would wait for patch notes
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jackdstripper

azezal

New member
Mar 27, 2024
15
3
3
This game is increasingly Survival Difficulty if your solo and Carebear Themepark if your in a big guild. Hardly anyone ever sieges anyway. They just RMT Keeps.

Would be nice if they made it easier for solo to siege. Like you want to get revenge on someone and know where their SH is, but unless you pay a fortune to a large guild to Mang it, there is nothing you can really do about it.

On the other hand build an SH or medium house as a solo somewhere like the jungle and good chance some bored neckbeard guild will mang it at no cost to them almost because if they all chip in with RMT it costs almost nothing for them.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Rahz

Jackdstripper

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2021
1,095
988
113
Would be nice if they made it easier for solo to siege.
…..Solo siege?…. Wtf are you smoking?

Keep owning and keep sieging is end game large scale group content. All sieging should be medium to large group content. Gtf auta here.
 
Last edited:

Rahz

Member
Jul 19, 2022
97
37
18
This game is increasingly Survival Difficulty if your solo and Carebear Themepark if your in a big guild. Hardly anyone ever sieges anyway. They just RMT Keeps.

Would be nice if they made it easier for solo to siege. Like you want to get revenge on someone and know where their SH is, but unless you pay a fortune to a large guild to Mang it, there is nothing you can really do about it.

On the other hand build an SH or medium house as a solo somewhere like the jungle and good chance some bored neckbeard guild will mang it at no cost to them almost because if they all chip in with RMT it costs almost nothing for them.
Solo-Sieges arent really necessary. Lockpicking and stealing from strongholds/houses would be nice for solos to get revenge. I agree with the carebear-argument. Big guilds can respawn almost anywhere because there doesnt seem to be a limit to how many structures a guild can own and only very little restrictions to where. They can therefore regear everywhere and dont have much risk involved in their gameplay. Wall off camps and shoot the mobs from your house... "hardcore and immersive".
Also considering the complete map is freckled with the ugly house-assets of the same 10 guilds, its time to restrict them to ONE territory. You get to your siege target by riding there, not by moving stuff to one of your 56 bases thats 2 minutes away from your siege target. Its retarded.
 

Emdash

Well-known member
Sep 22, 2021
2,842
920
113
…..Solo siege?…. Wtf are you smoking?

Keep owning and keep sieging is end game large scale group content. All sieging should be medium to large group content. Gtf auta here.

I dunno if I agree. Knocking down a tower should be something you can brute force like days of old. It's a good check against the largest zergs being OP. Doesn't mean they can't go on a rampage and kill everyone, but stuff will even out (so we imagine.)

That's why I said it would be nice to be able to hit someone's supplies or something to cause them problems but it wouldn't knock them out of the game or even make them less functional. It would just be nipping at their heels. Which is important. Solo tho, maybe not... a little group with hammers? imo they should be able to be a nuisance.

Otherwise it's just waiting game for when a big siege happens.

Third party siege is gg. I really hope they do make the siege area a war zone. I also wish they made the dec just open up the war zone after a certain time, and close after a certain time. Setting a window does have problems, cuz you can make it as hard as possible. Even if the only thing you get to do is set a time, it's more power than you should have.

People say "How is it fair for people to make you get up at 3am to defend a siege?" Well, how is it fair for people to make you get up at 3am to siege haha.
 

Jackdstripper

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2021
1,095
988
113
I dunno if I agree. Knocking down a tower should be something you can brute force like days of old. It's a good check against the largest zergs being OP. Doesn't mean they can't go on a rampage and kill everyone, but stuff will even out (so we imagine.)

That's why I said it would be nice to be able to hit someone's supplies or something to cause them problems but it wouldn't knock them out of the game or even make them less functional. It would just be nipping at their heels. Which is important. Solo tho, maybe not... a little group with hammers? imo they should be able to be a nuisance.

Otherwise it's just waiting game for when a big siege happens.

Third party siege is gg. I really hope they do make the siege area a war zone. I also wish they made the dec just open up the war zone after a certain time, and close after a certain time. Setting a window does have problems, cuz you can make it as hard as possible. Even if the only thing you get to do is set a time, it's more power than you should have.

People say "How is it fair for people to make you get up at 3am to defend a siege?" Well, how is it fair for people to make you get up at 3am to siege haha.
You absolutely can destroy towers as a solo. My guild has had it happen many times. One enemy built a house next to our tower just so he could log in and hit the tower for a few minutes and log out before we could respond. We actually had to siege the house it got so annoying having to constantly respond to this one guy hitting the tower.

However, hitting towers is not actual sieging. Sieging is using catapults to destroy functional buildings. Towers are just disposable beacons if anything.

As far the 3am sieges you have to understand time zones. 3am in the US West coast is 1pm in Moscow. So a Russian guild can siege a US west coast guild in the middle of their day knowing full well the enemy is all asleep. And vice versa. They are not both getting up at 3 am. This is the problem of having a world wide server.
 

Jackdstripper

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2021
1,095
988
113
My CURRENT understanding of whats in the code internally is that third parties can join sieges no issue. So even if allies try this, someone can come in during that time and siege.
I don't see this changing, but it could, I would wait for patch notes
Thank you for the feedback Robmo. However, enemies would not be able to know what that siege window is, unless it is publicly displayed somewhere. Will it be?
Also how many guilds can declare sieging at the same time? Or within hours of each other? Or does one siege declaration prevent others from doing it for a set amount of time?