Siege change • CCNet

Siege change Back

humik58 over 3 years ago

This suggestion will get ignored like all the others probably, but eh
Many sieges have been extremely painful lately, especially for attackers, they aint got nuthin, defenders usually spam their soul out on the attackers with cannons, and the attackers only counter are slow artillerys or truck with artillery or tank, which can easily be sunk or damaged by cannons, + the fact theres water fucking everywhere blocking your movement, and holes caused by cannons, actual pain in the ass.
PLEASE for love of the god make fighter planes break walls again, but not fucking melt them on one hit, and let land movecraft move through water puddles, there surely must be some way from stopping them from going through seas and oceans
-make them get blocked by sea grass and kelp
-how many blocks of the craft can be in water
-or something else

Comments

CosmicKingSimp over 3 years ago

Yeah I agree, attackers only have so many counters against a damn wall!

From a wall you can oversee the ENTIRE battlefield, the only things that can stop you up there is enemy artillery, and tanks.

If planes could damage, it would be epic.

xITAxHuman147 over 3 years ago

We already have regeneration of blown up terrain and obviusly having the high ground (provided by walls) is, and have to be, and huge dvantage, if you want to have the same opportunities to win the war create a siege town, wait for the unpeaceful timer and build walls on them too.
Also allowing fighters to break walls was so exploitable that had to be removed.

galacticwarrior9 over 3 years ago

Terrain already regenerates during sieges. Holes should not be a problem.

If small bodies of water are problematic, why can you not drain the area or cover them up? I went to the siege zone that inspired these complaints and I don't see why you can't make the terrain easily traversable by tanks in a few minutes.

I am not keen on allowing ground vehicles to move *through* water again because this was heavily exploited in regions with very shallow seas, like the area around Indonesia and Malaysia, where they functioned as discount ships.

Fighters are notoriously difficult to balance and I'd rather not open that can of worms again.

galacticwarrior9 over 3 years ago

Attackers should consider deploying the broader range of tactics available to them. Only then can we properly evaluate whether sieges need "rebalancing".

At the siege that inspired your complaints, I saw:

• The walls of the city could be *jumped onto* from the mountains on one side, letting the attackers push the defenders off their cannons. But nobody did this.

• The "siege town" was so close to the city that the defenders could pre-aim their cannons towards all of its possible tank exits, and that anyone leaving it would be immediately shot at by tanks and guns.

• Artillery could have been hidden in the forest or mountains.

• Every single attack by tanks was focused on the same side of the city (the one facing the banner). But you could easily send another tank to attack a different side simultaneously, forcing the defender's cannoneers to be split. Unlike WW1, nobody is forcing you to futily attack a single front repeatedly.

Essentially, the server shouldn't need to correct the attackers' deficiencies in strategy if they haven't tried all the tools at their disposal.

Torque over 3 years ago

I agree with humik, attackers have a VERY hard time fighting against defenders, and defender advantage is so that u can hold banner against a much numerous foe as well