For me it seems that it's nothing more than team deathmatch without respawns, without any sort of objective aside obliterating enemies.This is actually funny, because when I ask for a TDM server in crpg many players answer: why do you want a TDM? we already have siege for that. personally I think the three game modes are nothing alike. And I wait for CTF since chadz talked about it in autumn last year. oh, and I'd like to see some Siege without respawn, with very few defenders (in relation to attackers) and less backdoor and stuff (=more tactical advantage for Defenders), can't have anything...
When I kill people, I like for them to stay dead. That's really what it all comes down to for me.
i play battle because first it is
- more exciting
and second it brings
- more prestige
Because it's awesome to play with your friends in a group, winning the round together and knowing you made a difference to get another multiplier :D!(click to show/hide)
Haha, that bridge map was pretty terrible. All the archers were on the other team so there was pretty much no way to win; half the team was already dead each round before the Varangians could close for melee, so of course we got ganked by the ranged/pike combo.
Varric's picture is from last night, though. Managed to get x5 for a full four maps with the VRN stack and good support from the team, made 800k XP in one sitting. :)
Siege with randoms is just a pain, every time I play it I end up raging when my teammates would rather fight on the walls then attack/defend the flag. In battle on the other hand, even if your team is composed of random people you can make a much bigger difference then in siege.
^yeah, and even less people than in battle are responding if you suggest some tactic or something more than the occassional "flaaag"...
At any given moment in siege 10% of the team is actually paying attention to the objectives while the remainder is farting around on a wall somewhere.
Because it's awesome to play with your friends in a group, winning the round together and knowing you made a difference to get another multiplier :D!
This. Although it can be done in siege as well, but it's usually nowhere near as "epic". Also respawning so fast makes me feel like I'm playing a mindless hack 'n slash action game a la Devil May Cry.
I bought this game to play it, not sit for 2 minutes watching other people fight.apperently most of us did :wink: inc. me
I bought this game to play it, not sit for 2 minutes watching other people fight.
You need good awareness to survive in battle. You also need to known when to play agressively and when to play defensively. Having a coordinated group of skilled people around you, combined with a good strategy usually means you don't have to sit and watch other people fight.
I play siege too, but usually only when I feel like going rambo style.
Edit: I don't play battle alone most of the time though, I'd rather play siege then.
You need good awareness to survive in battle. You also need to known when to play agressively and when to play defensively. Having a coordinated group of skilled people around you, combined with a good strategy usually means you don't have to sit and watch other people fight.
I play siege too, but usually only when I feel like going rambo style.
Edit: I don't play battle alone most of the time though, I'd rather play siege then.
1. Generally the more skilled players play battle. I'd rather play against people who are better than me.
2. You can contribute more in battle. In battle, taking out a few players makes a HUGE difference.
3. Tactics are far more important in battle. In battle, you need to work together to fight off cav, to group up to take out specific threats and to advance towards archers. In siege you either camp the flag, or camp the gates, or camp the whatever while the other team tries to kill the people there.
4. The fact that you can die makes everything you do far more important. I find if I play too much siege I get really sloppy, because who gives a shit if you die?
Siege is the server to build your awareness, really, since the press of people is so thick.
Pretty much this... Also there nothing more fun to be the last one left on your team against 5+ enemies and clutching the win for you team.
Try to hold the flag for 45 seconds, after the timer is down to 00:00.
Some sort of a "Hold 3 points to win" mode might be a good idea
siege without respawns? :D
Stakes are higher in battle, that's why its more fun and rewarding. You know your enemy has to wait a few minutes before respawn when you kill him.. Loosing your x5 feels like a real loss etc, and strategies may work. You also face overall better players in battle, at least on EU.
People are generally more skilled in battle, there is WAY less teamwounding. It is also more exciting because you don't want to die.
Reread OP's post and view it as a rage against archers and the entire post will make complete sense.
tactics (...) like camp the hill, camp the spawn, shieldwall and zerg rush, left and right.
And the most important thing about battle to many players. The scoreboard.
Battle requires less teamwork than siege.awsome idea +1! but then a round should last for 20 mins! even better.
If you kill someone in battle, he stays dead. You just helped your team, no matter where, how and why.
In siege, killing someone has no value in itself, unless it happens at the right time in the right place.
This is also the reason why most pubbers, including me, don't play siege often - the amount of teamwork needed for the game to be REALLY funny and challenging is more or less impossible to achieve. That's why battle is better suited for pubbers.
I still hope I can pull off the most epic gamemodes of em all:
2 opposing forts, more or less a lot of land in between, capturable spawn points in between (so inf doesn't have to walk that long), buildable siege equipment, gamemode: capture the enemy base while you have to defend your base.
I will call the gamemode "Epic".
I still hope I can pull off the most epic gamemodes of em all:
2 opposing forts, more or less a lot of land in between, capturable spawn points in between (so inf doesn't have to walk that long), buildable siege equipment, gamemode: capture the enemy base while you have to defend your base.
I will call the gamemode "Epic".
Edit: if you want to help me create a prototype map for Epic, pm me.
2 opposing forts, more or less a lot of land in between, capturable spawn points in between (so inf doesn't have to walk that long), buildable siege equipment, gamemode: capture the enemy base while you have to defend your base.
In my opinion, one of the reasons that siege is seen as lacking any sort of tactics, has more to do with what people use it for than the mode itself.
As i've read time and time again now it is apparently nothing more than a rambo playground for people, which actually explains why i constantly find 2handers and archers rushing infront of me on the ladders (myes i'm a turtle).
*shrug* just my 2 copper
One factor that I found really disturbing in siege is getting team switched around a LOT and therefore unable to keep a high multiplier.that happens when you play alone, if you play with a clan you all get switched and may be able to keep the multiplier, only critical factor is the first round of a new map (highest chance loosing mp, cuz not balanced yet)
it was really fun on the pecores server yesterday, we polled open plains 3 times when a new game started, every team had a leader that was really commanding(don't remember any names, though there was a guard...) it was the best day i ever played c-rpg. constant shield walls, cav flanking and taking down other cav. archers behind the shield walls. and so on.Pecores servers are located in EU, right?
can someone tell me why some matches end in a draw, and others a flag appears?
why cant all matches a flag appear?
cause some weeaboo bundle of sticks thought it would be cool to run to the other side of the map to make the other team lose their x5.
yeah nice tactics battle has, just camp here camp there and draw the match if you cant win.
it was really fun on the pecores server yesterday, we polled open plains 3 times when a new game started, every team had a leader that was really commanding(don't remember any names, though there was a guard...) it was the best day i ever played c-rpg. constant shield walls, cav flanking and taking down other cav. archers behind the shield walls. and so on.
Hahaha...
Most ppl havent played siege with their factions it seems.
Whenever HRE gets a decent amount of players on one siege server, we can be a decisive factor. Always.
Teamplay, communication and killing the right ppl gets rewarded soooo much better in siege. You can do ~ 1.2mill / 40/50 k gold easily in 4-6 hours.
All in all siege is much more rewarding for a team playing together.
Battle is a school of awareness against cav. / archers.
One thing is for sure, both gametypes are highly demanding when planning to get high multiplier, siege is more rewarding though.
Battle requires less teamwork than siege.
If you kill someone in battle, he stays dead. You just helped your team, no matter where, how and why.
In siege, killing someone has no value in itself, unless it happens at the right time in the right place.
This is also the reason why most pubbers, including me, don't play siege often - the amount of teamwork needed for the game to be REALLY funny and challenging is more or less impossible to achieve. That's why battle is better suited for pubbers.
I still hope I can pull off the most epic gamemodes of em all:
2 opposing forts, more or less a lot of land in between, capturable spawn points in between (so inf doesn't have to walk that long), buildable siege equipment, gamemode: capture the enemy base while you have to defend your base.
I will call the gamemode "Epic".
Edit: if you want to help me create a prototype map for Epic, pm me.
Hahaha...
Most ppl havent played siege with their factions it seems.
Whenever HRE gets a decent amount of players on one siege server, we can be a decisive factor. Always.
Teamplay, communication and killing the right ppl gets rewarded soooo much better in siege. You can do ~ 1.2mill / 40/50 k gold easily in 4-6 hours.
All in all siege is much more rewarding for a team playing together.
Battle is a school of awareness against cav. / archers.
One thing is for sure, both gametypes are highly demanding when planning to get high multiplier, siege is more rewarding though.
Battle requires less teamwork than siege.Siege takes too much teamwork for a pub. So much that winning generally comes from a map being unbalanced, not because one team played slightly better than the other, or in the case of defenders, they could dominate for the first 5 minutes then get some unlucky deaths on their team and lose the entire round. Especially when there are few players on, one untimely death for a couple defenders is enough to lose the round, regardless of how long they were alive or how many people they killed, which is terrible considering how balance is done. Often times it seems like there are 2 highly skilled players carrying 10 gen 1s while the other team has 20+ average players, where the two highly skilled players make up 50% of their teams kills, so if they both die at the same time, it means their team loses(I can't recall how many times this has happened to me, it's probably the biggest reason as to why I don't play siege).
If you kill someone in battle, he stays dead. You just helped your team, no matter where, how and why.
In siege, killing someone has no value in itself, unless it happens at the right time in the right place.
This is also the reason why most pubbers, including me, don't play siege often - the amount of teamwork needed for the game to be REALLY funny and challenging is more or less impossible to achieve. That's why battle is better suited for pubbers.
Unless it's the middle of the night, your clan won't be able to really utilize their teamwork due to there being too many players on the server and banner balance taking a back seat to other types of balance.
Believe me, the morons will still be playing Battle in their plate. Even with epic gamemodes.
We need something that is easier than Battle with the same rewards. It will be filled within days.
Most ppl havent played siege with their factions it seems.:lol:
Whenever HRE gets a decent amount of players on one siege server, we can be a decisive factor. Always.
I bought this game to play it, not sit for 2 minutes watching other people fight.
I agree with Mega that you can do more XP as a clan or well organized team on Siege, but i never got into a mod for xp reasons only, otherwise i would had farmed dtv as long that was highly XP farmable.That's how HRE is different from any other clan in crpg.
While siege is just a spam fest where no one gives a shit about hitting their team mates. Where archers are sooo bad they hit they team mates just to hit something...
It's the same thing in battle too, you know.Not even close ...
Not even close ...
Last I played people well kill-hungry as fuck, if there was one enemy 5-8 of our guys rushed it and made countless teamhits to kill that one straggler. It's horrid.Yes, but you know, its not the same in open field than on top of a wall with a square metter for 20 guys. Its like you should take more care in such situations... but not XDD
Yes, but you know, its not the same in open field than on top of a wall with a square metter for 20 guys. Its like you should take more care in such situations... but not XDD
Idk, Gore, Namo, Carebear, Swiftshot...They are like boss fights in siege mode, gets intense when you see them drop 10 people in 5 seconds, and you take one out. Especially if they have like 60 kills or more.
Battle requires less teamwork than siege.
If you kill someone in battle, he stays dead. You just helped your team, no matter where, how and why.
In siege, killing someone has no value in itself, unless it happens at the right time in the right place.
This is also the reason why most pubbers, including me, don't play siege often - the amount of teamwork needed for the game to be REALLY funny and challenging is more or less impossible to achieve. That's why battle is better suited for pubbers.