Town Siege

[Jyrgen]

Jorgen we put over 300p into thoose stones and had to redo every 20-30m while guards can be casted with 10p so that's not a good comparison.

With 10 piety ya prolly get like 1 guard also

[Glarundis]

sure, we can use monks, we can use dispel rite, and we can use dispel spell, but i think summoning guards at the stone is too powerful.
the problem with the siege system, i'll say it again, is that the defenders (in theory) are the attackers (in practice), so when law summons guards, it's not that they're summoning guards to defend a place, they're summoning guards to aggressively get towards a place. guards for defending purposes are fine, but in this case, the guards are for attacking purposes. even though in theory skara brae belonged to law and tekstone came to attack, in this siege system, what happens is it's tekstone that is defending a place and trying to hold it. so i don't think guards are fair based on this

i would get rid of the whole guard thing, but if it's only 15 tiles of autodispel, then please do it. even if my religion can make guards

[Darian Darkmind]

Taking over a city is hard for everyone at the moment.

Spawning guards -directly- on the siege stone just makes it impossible.

It did take effort to even get to the stone tho... Imho, if the battle is already going on at the siege stone, you've failed the takeover sooner or later anyway.

I was surprised it took you so long. Only reason we managed to keep the town against your multiple attemps was because you didn't play as a team, you broke formation and you failed. Your mistake was our only hope for victory. Even in the end it was more or less chaos on your side, but because of the guards we lost. We killed plenty of you multiple times and I thought we'd force you to retreat, but our kills served no purpose because 1) we were unable to loot you because of veritas and guards and 2) you were able to resurrect your fallen members because of guards and veritas. We killed more of you, many even multiple times than you killed us in the last battle, but still we lost. This is because when one of us died, we had no way to protect his corpse and we were all forced to retreat... where as for you, out of the 3 guys I killed in the last battle I only managed to loot one weapon before I was swarmed with guards. Then they were all resurrected and continued fighting whereas our fallen were clean-looted and thus forced to go back to temple/house and re-gear.

Guards can be dispelled with 0 piety. It sure is fun to compare.

- Boris

Again, you only prove how unexperienced you are in PvP. You make it sound like it's something everyone can do in a blink of an eye. When the battle is going on it's not as easy to dispell those guards as you might think with your invulnerable powers. You forget it takes time to cast it, the spell fails and it's hard to target all the guards at the same time. Not only that there's people running after you with blessed weapons, there's veritas all around and guards in every corner. When it comes to PvP you really should start to listen to those players who are the most experienced at it. We tried the siege system even though we knew we will lose if only our enemy plays as a team. I said the problems that will occur before anyone tried the system, but you insisted that we should try it out first instead of "whining". Like I said above I was surprised it took them that long to break the siege. For a moment there I thought we can actually win, but that was only because it seemed like our enemies failed to pull themself together time after time again and through their mistakes gave us free kills.

Anyway, Mike is right and you should look at your shard and your players and think for a system that works with the current playerbase. Of course we could, in theory have 10 more casters dispelling the guards, but with same awesome logic Law can have 30 more priests casting them! I still remember the times when we had over 100 players online, it was sweet but I know it's long in the past. We now have 20 to 40 players and it's important you don't forget that. During the siege 1/3 of all players online were from our team and another 1/3 was in our enemy team. You can't really ask for more. Maybe one bright day in the future we will have more players again, but until that day make the system work for those of us who play now... and hopefully in the future as well.

[Boris]

Considering that there has been a total of 1 siege wich was excecuted with 1 caster, there's barely any experience. You need to play more and try diffrent tactics. Having even 1 more caster would of made a difference. You only prove how unexperienced you are in Pv... right, sieging.

Every religion can siege, but as mentioned before - it's clear Law/Imperial have the edge, because the system is built around them.

- Boris

[Johnny Walac]

Every religion can siege, but as mentioned before - it's clear Law/Imperial have the edge, because the system is built around them.

- Boris

Pfft. I'm pretty sure the The Finnish Ceaser - Vilmon Petterson got his eyes on the mighty town Trinsic. Nature will expand.

[Palma]

If I been reading correctly, it takes 5 chants to end the siege right? If so, there's no way anyone can do anything if we run to the stone with guards and spam veritas. We might get some losses to keens but, doesn't matter, siege ends.
This is just an opinion, from the last time experience

I say, make it so no one can cast rituals (besides paralyze, fortuno, intervention and transport) in the sieged city. Defenders or attackers. This is a system meant to be fun, so let it have some good old fashioned hand to hand combat, and more use for casters

[Demian]

Siege is like 8-10 chants. Probably among the longest of rites there are.

Edit: And the rite can fail too, I had to cast it twice in the skara siege.

[aldath c'om]

I say, make it so no one can cast rituals (besides paralyze, fortuno, intervention and transport) in the sieged city. Defenders or attackers. This is a system meant to be fun, so let it have some good old fashioned hand to hand combat, and more use for casters

that would be so awesome.

[Darian Darkmind]

If I been reading correctly, it takes 5 chants to end the siege right? If so, there's no way anyone can do anything if we run to the stone with guards and spam veritas. We might get some losses to keens but, doesn't matter, siege ends.
This is just an opinion, from the last time experience

I say, make it so no one can cast rituals (besides paralyze, fortuno, intervention and transport) in the sieged city. Defenders or attackers. This is a system meant to be fun, so let it have some good old fashioned hand to hand combat, and more use for casters

Thank you for understanding. This is what I've been saying the whole time. Nice to see you have the guts to admit it, normally Law and Nature do all the same old excuses and arguments trying to justify that veritas and guards won't do a difference. We know it does so I'm glad at least one of our enemy willing to admit it.

It might take a bit longer to cast the ritual and like Demian said, it might fail, but still even if it took a minute to do, it's still fast and easy for group that has veritas and guards backing them up. Yes some of you might die, but at least the siege ends.

Yeah, it should be no casting zone - at least no hostile rites and rituals so when fighting by the stone, it is fair for all parties.

Considering that there has been a total of 1 siege wich was excecuted with 1 caster, there's barely any experience.

Again, playerbase is what it is. We could get one or two more casters, but like I said, Law and Nature can get one or two more priests as well. Not to mention even if we had few more casters, there's no way of telling if they could cast anything because they have to keep running for their lives. Theorycrafting is fun, but sadly it's far from reality. So let's focus on what is right now instead of what could be some day.

Yes, there's been one OFFICIAL siege, but there's been HUNDREDS of town attacks before! Official siege differs very little to none to our previous town attacks... In fact siege is HARDER because we have to stand ground and can't fall back or even retreat completely to re-gear and attack again in 30 mins. If we die, we die and lose hours of work. In normal town attacks we would have re-grouped and attacked again, but this time we can't because we will lose our work. Which is why I believe it should require the defending side to "hold" the town for half of the time the attacking side did. So if we held it for 3 hours, they'd have to hold it for 1½ hours giving us time to regear, re-group and attack again. Right now it's too easy to lose everything. This is why we even immolated in the end, because we had spent many hours on it we wanted to make sure we did absolutely our best and died instead of fleeing.

If our previous unofficial "sieges" has fell to veritas and guards spam, then again in what universe of common logic would a real siege system that is even harder to pull off not fall for the same problem? How many times do you want us to "try" it before you believe I am right?

So yes, official or not it doesn't matter. The fact you don't see it is only your unexperience of PvP speaking. Just because you're "the boss" doesn't mean you're right and we are wrong. I just hope that for now and in the future, both in game and IRL if there's something you don't know for certain you'd listen to someone who have a lot of experience on the matter.

[Jyrgen]

If our previous unofficial "sieges" has fell to veritas and guards spam, then again in what universe of common logic would a real siege system that is even harder to pull off not fall for the same problem? How many times do you want us to "try" it before you believe I am right?

When was the last time Tek even attacked any city other than Yew/Brit before the Skara siege? Probably before you had the keening change even.