Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 17, 2021, 07:02:49 am

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Savage: XR is a new patch for Savage, created by the Newerth.com staff. The XR1.1 Client is out now! Download it now!
190122 Posts in 11015 Topics by 18626 Members
Latest Member: RabbitWhite
* Home Forum Wiki Help Search Login Register
+  Newerth Forums
|-+  Savage XR
| |-+  Re-balancing Suggestions
| | |-+  Nerfing Siege Camping
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Nerfing Siege Camping  (Read 14948 times)
Daemon
XR Main Developer
Legendary Member
****
Posts: 4823


beware, for this is the everbroken...


View Profile
« on: June 18, 2017, 08:55:33 pm »

Nerfing Siege Camping

Intentions shall be clear! We're suffocating under siege camping for as long as this game exists (probably). So I thought of this simple fix!

If spawned as siege and re-entering spawn positions a 30 second respawn penatly will be given to the player.
This simple fix should forbid people from re-entering and successfully camp at spawn locations.

This should include every single siege units including the ejected unit (so sieges are actually dying for the mess they can cause / will cause).
Logged

Marbello
Newerth Donator
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 251



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 18, 2017, 10:32:03 pm »

In an ideal world, ballista's make people a) use weapons other than rabid, b) promote team play and c) make people apply terrain knowledge. This decreases the impact that duel champs have and makes the normal player stronger.

However, last nerf was already not well thought out. Beasts get massive amounts of gold vs shielded buildings and the necessary train defense is starving. Your suggestion is again strengthening beasts, as their sieges aren't as essential for defense as for humans.
Why more? Keep the normal player, which is needed to keep the community alive, in mind. Let them cry for another 15 years if thats what they need to learn.

/rant
« Last Edit: June 19, 2017, 09:26:21 am by Marbello » Logged

More meaning!
Bullet
Python enthusiast
Newerth Donator
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 353



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: June 19, 2017, 03:49:03 pm »

I support this aswell.

Marbello have a point regarding that it might favor beasts more, but I think behecamping/behespawning are breaking balance more than camping balis and catas.

The logic for that is:
1. human defenses are strong(in general), if a bali misses his shots, its no emergency, they pred most likely dies to shielded towers.
2. Beast defenses are weak, so any disruption in the playerdefense (the defense made up of actual players) are much more critical, and any demorunner who is lucky to find a re-spawning behe who have to wait 30 seconds, are much more dangerous than a bali who have to wait 30 seconds.



Logged

Brad_Troika
Newbie
*
Posts: 49


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: June 19, 2017, 04:37:41 pm »

I have an idea on how to nerf siege-camping when it's the most annoying (imho anyway), that is demorunning and (chain)saccing.

So one idea is to make the usage of sac immune the user to any siege damage.
The other is to have sub-lairs emit an "aura" that makes T1 units invulnerable to siege damage.


Also reducing balli and summ dmg to "somewhat-less-than-a-lego/pred" could make siege units less of a defensive units, but it would severely decrease their protection even when they are attacking.

My problem with Trig's 30s cooldown is that I don't think siege units entering and re-entering is a big issue, while it happens sometimes, most of the times the behe/balli camping camps until the danger is present and they don't enter/re-enter.
The 30s would also penalize players using siege units "appropriately".
« Last Edit: June 19, 2017, 04:56:09 pm by Brad_Troika » Logged
Daemon
XR Main Developer
Legendary Member
****
Posts: 4823


beware, for this is the everbroken...


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: June 19, 2017, 05:02:34 pm »

Forcing a respawn cooldown, although ill-willed imho, could be somehow explained (siege is reloading, whatnot...). But as far as immersion and consistency goes, i can see no viable way to reconcile the idea that subs are offensive structures and beasts are an offensive race, with the fact that subs protect the enemies from their own brethren damage. Sac making you invulnerable is also hard to explain but it's actually wrong on at least 2 other accounts: it buffs sac, which is already the strat of choice, and it changes the game too much.

There was a suggestion floating around that would force behes to stand still while their melee swing is active. I could go with that. I'd also go with some sort of timer that's reset every time siege leaves a spawnpoint, that has to expire before being able to attack.
Logged

Brad_Troika
Newbie
*
Posts: 49


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: June 19, 2017, 05:12:56 pm »

Sac isn't overpowered, sacrushes are. If humans got to the point where they can get ballis out that sac rush probably failed (although not always).

As for immersion breaking, you could make the demo item protect the demorunners, I can imagine a small "tentacle" coming out of sub when the demo is placed similar to how towers look like when you place them under commander view.

The changes themselves would change only spawncamping (unless misused, although I don't know how) which is the goal of the changes.

Although I don't think it's a good idea, but the effects could be researched after researching the items at tier3. The reason I don't think it's good is because it would legitimize spawncamping, but it would also change the game less.

But I really don't think immersion is such a high priority, I know it's not for me.
Logged
Bullet
Python enthusiast
Newerth Donator
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 353



View Profile
« Reply #6 on: June 19, 2017, 05:31:31 pm »

This is rather radical, but its a pretty simple solution:

Deny siege units to enter spawnpoints (garrs/subs/lairs/sh) after spawning. People will quickly learn to not spawn at the wrong positions (besides, how often do you select wrong spawn anyway?)

OR

They can re-enter spawn, but all gold in your own stockpile is donated to the team (to avoid ppl wasting gold on purpose), and gold requests are denied for 1 minute for you(the siege camper who entered the sub/garr/whatever)... you're basically broke.

Regardless of the options, the idea is that it should totally suck to re-enter a spawnposition as a siege unit, to prevent camping.

Sidenote: I know humans huse catas/balis in defense against behes on small maps, but if youre constantly spawning/respawning to avoid getting hit by behe, you're using the siege unit wrong.
Logged

Shagroth
no u
Newerth Council
Super Hero Member
*
Posts: 2006


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: June 19, 2017, 06:04:00 pm »

Siege camping is one of the main reasons people quit this game, It's about time.
Siege camping is a problem because:
  • It prolongs games to the point where its simply boring.(behe spawning is the worst)- 1 behe can stop a team of demo runners using a lot of time and team effort just to get stopped by a guy who plans something for 1 second and stops the run with 1 move.
  • It can instantly kill a fully equipped unit with 1 shot(whereas its true purpose is buildings, not units)
  • 1 siege unit can effectively kill for 20k gold in a few seconds, with no negative effects(like elec cooldown)
  • Gold is extremely crucial to both sides, 1 siege unit can fuck up that balance with a "lucky" shot.
  • "Use ranged weapons" If you are the sole person who can push for your team, you cannot do that as beast with ranged.

Few years ago I could probably make several pages with points to why siege is killing the game, but I stopped caring.
It's a bit late to do it now, but better late than never.
Logged

Bullet
Python enthusiast
Newerth Donator
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 353



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: June 20, 2017, 05:15:37 pm »

Another solution could be to have caps on siege units, for exaple, maximum 1/3 of the team, unless team is below three players in total.

Pros:
- The team which have a siege camper is more likely to want to kick/movetospec the players which are excessively siegecamping, because they cant use siege units sometimes. This can help in the long run with creating a norm/culture that siege camping is not ok.
  --> Currently, this is not the case. If you try to kick someone, most of the team which have the player, will vote no, and you get nowhere.
- The solution works well in balanced games, especially in maps with many paths to the enemy bases and large maps.

Cons:
- Work bad on small maps, where siege units spawn in more neutral positions (offensive and defensive at the same time.. for example flags on kinixxx). Hard to be angry on someone who defended flag, but argue to be using behe for offensive reasons.
- ?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another solution:
-Keep track of siege building hits vs siege kills, and make damage on units relative to that siege units building hits divided on siege kills- As any Siege units have a maximum unit-damage of 100% (normal) initially, but a the more players you kill as siege unit, the less damage you deal to them (unless you actually hit buildings with your attacks too).
- The concept is simple : If you kill a guy, but have done no building hits as that siege unit so far in the game, the mathwork is 0/1. That is 0, but lets say 50 % damage is minimum damage (0 % would be weird).
- Lets say you shot a shield tower 5 times as summ, but killed 6 guys. That is 5/6 = 0.83 = 83 % of normal damage damage towards units.
- In the event of having a surplus of building hits vs killed people, the damage towards units is 100 %.
- The damage the siege unit does to other siege units is not affected.
- The damage you do as siege units towards other players might need to be shown in the HUD, to break the meta-gameplay less.

Pros:
- Prevents excessive siege camping effectively, making them less deadly the more they camp
- Keep the units purpose intact - more specialization of the purpose, less agile and self-defending siege units.
- Creates more meta for behemoths - no longer instakill on most units.
- Is more in favor of humans than beasts, which in my opinion is a pro, since beasts win more in average (not competetive setting)

Cons:
- Breaks the meta for some siege units, such as summoner and balista.
  --> You are no longer sure if you kill another player with a shot.
- Very RPG-ish, and not in style with how Savage is, im not fan of RPG elements, but I can support rpg elements for siege units as long as it doesnt interfere with the regular gameplay units, and to get rid of the siege camp problem
- ?


Logged

Trigardon
Forum Administrator
Legendary Member
****
Posts: 4830


Demonic Monster


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: June 20, 2017, 06:03:04 pm »

Another solution could be to have caps on siege units, for exaple, maximum 1/3 of the team, unless team is below three players in total.

This makes siege rushes on normal maps or on low population useless and is like a way bigger nerf than I had in mind.
Logged

Bullet
Python enthusiast
Newerth Donator
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 353



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: June 20, 2017, 06:14:54 pm »

You're welcome to modify the alternative to the way you imagined.
Logged

Marbello
Newerth Donator
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 251



View Profile
« Reply #11 on: June 21, 2017, 06:09:03 pm »

Siege camping is one of the main reasons people quit this game, It's about time.
Old players quit because of siege camping, new players leave because of Shagroth(s).

  • It can instantly kill a fully equipped unit with 1 shot(whereas its true purpose is buildings, not units)
Although 1 shot kills are a high vulnerability, sieges are themselves even more vulnerable to these fully equipped units (and other sieges) if they're not close to respawn points. Leaving the dictionary purpose of siege units aside, they are still needed. In a 9vs9 match on public, defending against 9 behemoths is not happening without siege. It would need an extent of coordination that goes very far beyond a rabid and another player with a blaze.
  • "Use ranged weapons" If you are the sole person who can push for your team, you cannot do that as beast with ranged.
You are not supposed to push alone, although the old players that you've mentioned in your first line of course would like to be able to do so. If absolutely needed you can still hide behind a tree. But if your definition of pushing is to crush anyone who spawns from strongholds (of course to give room for summs to kill shields, harvester of noobs), so god be with us.

With my (human) viewpoints in mind, the only solution that I could see working would be a damage reduction against siege if sac has been activated in a certain radius around respawn points. Against beast siege, I could see a damage reduction on behemoth hits working if the human unit is carrying a demo pack. This needs to be of course tested and the % or # of reduction should be likely not the very same for both races.

Another solution could be to have caps on siege units, for exaple, maximum 1/3 of the team, unless team is below three players in total.
As far as I remember, there was a server that did that and it just led to sieges never available when one needed them.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2017, 06:25:20 pm by Marbello » Logged

More meaning!
SavageBeard
XR Map Administrator
Sr. Member
***
Posts: 263


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: June 21, 2017, 07:31:05 pm »

Player hit by siege gets stunned for a bit instead of taking damage  Afro
Logged
Daemon
XR Main Developer
Legendary Member
****
Posts: 4823


beware, for this is the everbroken...


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: June 21, 2017, 07:57:05 pm »

Player hit by siege gets stunned for a bit instead of taking damage  Afro
So you die from getting stung by a tiny hunting arrow but you only get a headache from being impaled by a big ass ballista bolt? Tongue
Logged

Shagroth
no u
Newerth Council
Super Hero Member
*
Posts: 2006


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: June 21, 2017, 09:42:03 pm »

Siege camping is one of the main reasons people quit this game, It's about time.
Old players quit because of siege camping, new players leave because of Shagroth(s).

Is this a personal attack or is it attempt at making a point...?

* I will never choose to attack newbs. Spec me anytime.
* More chances they leave when they get killed by something they don't see or know how works, like a random lightning/summoner shot. Melee is very straight forward, big guy hits you and you die.
* In general Newbs would leave would leave the game no matter how they got killed though, cause its the spoonfed generation.

  • It can instantly kill a fully equipped unit with 1 shot(whereas its true purpose is buildings, not units)
Although 1 shot kills are a high vulnerability, sieges are themselves even more vulnerable to these fully equipped units (and other sieges) if they're not close to respawn points. Leaving the dictionary purpose of siege units aside, they are still needed. In a 9vs9 match on public, defending against 9 behemoths is not happening without siege. It would need an extent of coordination that goes very far beyond a rabid and another player with a blaze.

"High vulnerability" what? Elaborate?
Of course siege units are vulnerable to attack, they are supposed vulnerable because of the potential damage they can deal to a base in a short time.
Using siege in defence is the lazy mans way of playing the game. Of course siege is effective vs behemoths, but a repeater nomad with immob is more cost effective and probably better(I did not do the DPS math).
What would make what you say better is 2 shamans and 6 behes and a blaze/saccer. But how often does this perfect situation occur in a public game, where the real problem lies?

  • "Use ranged weapons" If you are the sole person who can push for your team, you cannot do that as beast with ranged.
You are not supposed to push alone, although the old players that you've mentioned in your first line of course would like to be able to do so. If absolutely needed you can still hide behind a tree. But if your definition of pushing is to crush anyone who spawns from strongholds (of course to give room for summs to kill shields, harvester of noobs), so god be with us.

This is a weird way to see the situation. I believe you are having several logical phallacys in your reasoning so far.
The players quit cause siege camping makes the game boring, whatever skills you may have does not apply versus the instakill.
I can try to break it down for you how the game works lately in my experience.
Lets say comms are equal.
Very often teams are unfair, usually there are some top players on both teams, of course if this does not happen the lesser skilled team loses.
What I experience very often is fighting a stack, where my team relies on me to do the work. I can do that very well, unless something instantly kills me where i have no ability to stop it and strikes me out of gold. Now I am suddenly unable to do anything unless I steal from team gold, which is usually empty on the worse team side. I would elaborate further but I believe you can understand the issue.

With my (human) viewpoints in mind, the only solution that I could see working would be a damage reduction against siege if sac has been activated in a certain radius around respawn points. Against beast siege, I could see a damage reduction on behemoth hits working if the human unit is carrying a demo pack. This needs to be of course tested and the % or # of reduction should be likely not the very same for both races.
Wow no....

If anything saccers should take more damage cause of how overpowered it is when used correctly.
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 3 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.05 seconds with 21 queries.