Separate names with a comma.
Create an account today to engage in discussions and community events on the Rise of Agon forums.
Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Buffalo Spaceman, Apr 28, 2019.
Hamlet sieges are dogshit. Always have been. Give us large stones for hamlets, thanks.
Bring back shard holder sieges.
ye shard holder seiges would be fucking sick
I think it could work better than it did before. Better computers, and a little tweaking here and there and it would probably work fine.
Keep siege stones but having the option for shard holders could be dope.
I wonder what happened to make this post appear hmmmmmmm
That was the icing on the cake. It's been a consistent problem though, hamlet sieges are usually decided by a few half naked guys with spikes during a fight, or a secondary party with 150 spikes. It's nothing to drop a hamlet stone, just sillyness.
Been a consistent topic of discussion since forever but you can have your giggle if you want. Hamlet sieges only allowing for one small siege stone makes absolutely no sense. Allowing the placement of two small stones, or one large makes perfect sense and should have been done years ago at this point. Even the reintroduction of medium stones (which are still in the game I have 2 in my bank) would be a decent alternative.
For those who didn't get accounts until after shard holder sieges were changed, how did they work exactly? I'm kind of aware of the general details but I'm not sure of any of the restrictions/timers involved.
From what ive heard (i wasnt around at the time either) is that people carried things called siege shards, and if you got killed with the shard siege was over. the issue i heard was that mass DCs made shard carriers auto lose sieges because internet was poop back in 2009, especially with 1000 man siege forces.
Since stuff can be thrown on the ground now i assume that can be fixed in case of a DC.
people can correct me if im wrong, which i probably am.
This is how I remember them.
They were fun but could at times be atrocious in the old game. A player would hold a shard and the clan being sieged would be able to see you on the map. You would run around with your boys and usually find an elevator or choke point that you could hold and then win the siege. If people didn't have runes up there and you got to the right place, it was hard to kill you. If they breached the elevator, you would jump off a random edge with the least enemies and spawn a raft or move to another defendable location.
They didn't always work out. Sometimes you would ping out and lose the siege. Sometimes the defender would throw a bounty out for whomever killed the shard holder, if they were in a lame location. This is back in the era where clans would build up cities and quit when they lost their capital half of the time.
i dont like that, it makes all canons/boats useless during a siege + u have 0 strategy no runes need to be mark.
More siege options can only be good.
Shard holder mechanic could do with improvements for sure.
I suggested a bunch of stuff before on this topic.
Even specialised Long Range siege stones could enable new locations to be used in fights.
I don't see a problem with making it so you can have 2 small stones for a hamlet
an option to choose between shard carrier or dropping siege stones would be great
also small stones are way too easy to take down
This would definitely improve hamlet sieges until the territory control system is implemented
L2 Big brain. Not hard at all.
Sacrifice Dothraki to make your siege defenses harder
What the actual fuck though amiright?
years of buildup to see them ride into the dark and get sticky backed