• 382 Players on Java
  • us.mineplex.com
  • 4110 Players Online
  • 3728 Players on Bedrock
  • pe.mineplex.com
Attention Internet Explorer Users
To have the best user experience on our site please consider upgrading to Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox

In Discussion Bring Back Castle Siege [Evidence Regarding Its Justified Revival]

Discussion in 'New Game Discussion' started by Danese, May 1, 2020.


Would You Want CS To Be Brought Back?

  1. Yes!

    305 vote(s)
  2. Maybe...

    31 vote(s)
  3. No.

    33 vote(s)
  1. cs is back

    Posted Dec 23, 2020
  2. Hey,

    Yes, CS is presently live on the Network! Even though it's currently only temporary, I have it from a reliable source that Marketing and other various high-ranking Staff teams will be keeping their eye on the game's performance over the coming weeks!

    Show your support for bringing back CS by playing the game mode! And, if you have never played CS before, I strongly encourage you to hop into a game or two and check it out! It's really quite a fun game!

    Merry Christmas everyone! Have a safe and exciting holiday!

    OP OP
    OP OP Posted Dec 24, 2020
  3. I like Castle Siege but i honestly don't think the game will stay . It is not because the game is bad , it is because the players are . There are a few players that play normally and everyone else is win farming . All the somewhat skilled players will queue undead ( in most cases ) and win within 3 minutes . And if they somehow ended up on the opposite team , they just leave and join back , ruining the chances of the players that stayed.
    If you are somehow in a normal lobby with equal teams , the game is super fun, it is intense and enjoyable, but mostly the teams are one sided .

    I seriously think that a team making system that is based on odds would be better . So , when you first join you have a 50% chance to be undead and a 50% chance to be a defender . If you recently played as a defender , your odds of getting it again are lowered while the odds for getting to be undead are higher (40% : 60% lets say) .
    But lets say you really want to play as undead because you want to do the achievement . You queue for undead and your odds are changed so that you have a higher chance of getting it. For example : 50% : 50 % >>>>> 35% : 65% (Defender : Undead)

    Again , don't get me wrong , i love the game , it is one of my favourite games on mineplex and i have amazing memories of playing it many years ago . I just think that when you have win farmers the game becomes less enjoyable and people start leaving and therefore the game dies.
    Posted Dec 26, 2020
  4. I agree completely, I quit ultimately because I love being on defenders side but because the teams are always so unbalanced I ended up quitting for good because I got sick of playing a game I'm always losing at, if you want proof here are my stats. ! I've been playing since 2014 and even though I love this game with all my heart I think that because it takes so much effort to win as defender and almost little to no effort to win on the undead team I will quit again.


    I wish it would be a little easier to win as defender as it is easy to win as undead.
    Posted Dec 26, 2020
    Dellas and miraclebuilder19 like this.
  5. This is such a large indication that Castle Siege is back on the network until the year advances by exactly one.
    Posted Dec 26, 2020
    EpicEnderDragon1 likes this.
  6. There are several fixes to this problem, however I don't think MP will do them. Since MP does not plan to bring back the game completely. I never said they should or no, I just believe they will slack off any proof of the game being active as more or less just the "new game effect" or "limited game effect" on Mineplex.

    A few of the ways that would fix this are pretty simple:
    • Decrease Sun Time to benefit Defenders while also making it so wolfs (dead defenders) are more likely to stay since they won't have to wait as long.
    • Decrease player count so games start faster and the defenders have a stronger advantage with less players in the game.
    • Decrease TNT activity/Disable it from being used in the Kings Room. This would cut down on lag hopefully along with help the defenders out.
    Now, I don't think MP is planning on adding the game back, however these are some of the ways they would go about it. The game has a lot of problems, and the best way to fix them is through solutions that solve multiple problems at once. The thread claims these problems don't exist which is kinda upsetting on my end, since there are ppl right here talking about it. Either the OP is blind by biases toward the game, or just refuses to acknowledge the game needs fixed to actually be a game on the server.
    Posted Dec 26, 2020
    miraclebuilder19 and Danese like this.
  7. I feel like disabling TNT in the throne room could create a ‘safe zone’ for the defenders, making it difficult for the undead to kill them and also damage the king. If there are multiple defenders in the throne room, it can be really difficult to take them down and also deal damage to the king and TNT is often used to help the undead break through those defenses.
    Posted Dec 26, 2020
  8. I have to agree with what others here are saying - although I was initially excited to see CS back, it clearly has major balance issues that make it very difficult to enjoy.

    After playing several games, you begin to notice that a lot of the high-level/experienced players all pile on to the same team, most often the undead, since they can are able to farm wins quicker that way. The defenders get absolutely crushed in those games. You could be the best defender in history, you're still going to lose.

    There are times when they pile on the defenders team instead, but that too leads to very frustrating games. The undead get repeatedly bowspammed to death before even making it to the front gate. That certainly isn't fun for the undead, and I imagine it is pretty boring for the defenders also.

    This is quite honestly, not an easy problem to solve at all. It's not an issue with the game, but more so an issue with the community. If players weren't intentionally queuing specific teams for the purpose of farming wins, then I think we could see a lot more 'close' games and perhaps CS could even survive as a permanent game. In its current state though, I can't really foresee that happening. The pubstomping in this game is clearly driving people away. I was only able to play a few games myself before it got so frustrating that I just gave up on it.

    To solve this, I think there would need to be drastic changes. Perhaps eliminating the ability to queue for teams altogether, or disabling win/loss stats for the game.

    I know there's many people who probably wouldn't like those things, but I struggle to see how else you could stop these brutally unfair games from continuing.
    Posted Dec 26, 2020
  9. I would love CS back! We would have to have dedicated players, but I would be one of them so +1!

    -Dellas / Caid
    Posted Dec 26, 2020
    miraclebuilder19, Danese and Fusafez like this.
  10. Hey!

    Like every game on Mineplex, Castle Siege is subject to sweats farming wins, but I don't think the proper solution is to disallow team queuing or stats. Since the play styles of the teams are so different, it makes sense that someone who mains one team doesn't want to play on another, but I agree that undead win farming is an issue. What I've found kills the lobby is when people stat dodge by leaving immediately at the start of a game if they don't get the team they want. There are communities within the Castle Siege community though which aim to create more balanced games (you can do /com join TeamBalancers to join us). Most CS sweats actually enjoy close games, and we've found amongst ourselves that the majority of players farming stats and stat dodging are ones who hunt stats and achievements over just playing the game, and one way to help this would be to count a game that a player leaves at the start as a game played (currently if a player leaves mid-game, it doesn't count as a game played). This would motivate more stat-oriented players to stay and try to win in a lobby, while people who play the game for enjoyment wouldn't mind, since they play CS just to play the game. The process of trying to create more balanced games is something the CS community is already trying to do through our play styles and team choices, but I personally think a decreased timer would be beneficial, since lag on the server can actually cause games to last for 10 or 11 minutes (instead of 8.3).

    There is a difference between the game being unbalanced and the player skill gap being large. The OP believes that the game itself (kit abilities, maps, etc.) is relatively balanced, as do many people in the CS community, however we all do recognize that win farming and pub stomping are issues. Even though I'm a CS main, I've been pub stomped myself in lobbies where the ones stacking a team aren't CS mains, but actually MP sweats, or when I've not been put on the team I queued for, and quite simply, it's not fun. No one enjoys playing a highly unbalanced game, or a game where half of their teammates leave to stat dodge because they're on the wrong team, and we're all working to bridge that. However, that doesn't change that CS has kept a high, consistent player count, with upwards of 50 players even at 2 am EST, which is why many of us are hopeful for the future of the game.

    I have 242 CS wins, 150 of which are defense wins. Yes, winning as a defender is harder than winning as undead, but the ratio of wins being portrayed by many people on the forums in inaccurate of the CS player base. Like all team games on Mineplex, coordination is key. If the defender team is coordinating amongst themselves, winning isn't as rare as people seem to think. Winning as undead still requires some amount of teamwork, however the gameplay style demands less of it, and many undead mains are skilled in making leaps that allow them to bypass sections of the map, reach the king quickly, and aide them in pvp.

    I've seen lots of people claiming that either defense is overpowered, or undead is overpowered, so from that, I gather that the game is relatively balanced, since if both teams are overpowered.... neither of them are. The biggest issue is the skill gap because CS was only available in MPS for a long time, but making some tweaks that disallow stat dodging would help monumentally in my opinion, since I played a game today with 11 undead versus 29 defenders due to excessive stat dodging.

    Personally, I enjoy playing both undead and defender (as you can see from my stats, haha), so I myself wouldn't mind totally random teams (if stat dodging is fixed), but this would kill the existing competitive CS player base, which is why I don't agree with it. The player count is fine, as CS is meant to be played with many people, and disabling tnt in the throne room would be awful.
    Posted Dec 26, 2020,
    Last edited Dec 26, 2020
  11. I can appreciate your effort of trying to balance the game that way, but I have serious doubts that it will work. As you say in your own post, players have their own team preferences, and for the vast majority, that is the undead team. This makes sense of course, because wins can be attained much faster when going undead. But I think this is the very source of the problem. The mere fact that you can queue a specific team and get wins faster sets the stage for a massive win farming dilemma. There are very few other games on Mineplex that I can think of with this kind of set up. About the only one I can think of is Wither Assault (where the withers can win if they kill all the humans), and that game has also been plagued with balance issues for many years.

    I still stand by the fact that if this game is to survive beyond the next few days, then something needs to be done to stop this 'win farming' problem. If people are able to simply queue the team they want and pile on wins at the expense of others, then I don't think it will make it. Either of the suggestions I proposed would solve that issue.

    Preventing team queueing would mean experienced players would (on average) be split between the two teams, leading to more balanced/close games. This could be coupled with the anti-stat dodge suggestion you gave (which I agree with 100% btw) and you'd have a very effective way of having consistently balanced games. Yes, that might upset some people who play exclusively on one team, but they are honestly part of the problem. The other suggestions I gave was around removing the stats, which probably isn't as a good of a solution, but it would at least demotivate people from playing just for the sake of accumulating wins.

    On the other hand, this "TeamBalancers" community likely wouldn't work quite as well. It only consists of about a dozen players (last I checked) and only a handful of those are going to be online at any given time. For games that are only slightly unbalanced, then yes, you might be able to help even those out. But in many other games, the balance is so tilted that you'd need that entire community to pile onto the opposing team to make it even slightly fair. So I don't think this idea will work, though it does have some noble intentions.

    The other thing worth pointing out - is that yes, CS has maintained a somewhat high player count, but it would be naive to think that it is a result of people loving the game. The game is advertised in the server MOTD, the advent calendar, and has flashing alerts in the compass GUI indicating it is a limited time game. There is also an NPC in a lobby that most players will see when they spawn in. Once you take all of these things away, the player count is going to tank. A lot of those players will move on to whatever Mineplex's next new game/event is. That's just how these things work. Realistically, there would probably only be a single lobby running, and it would likely struggle to start at times. That's what the case was in 2017/2018 prior to the game's removal, and I don't see what would be different this time, especially given how MP's playerbase in general has decreased quite a bit in the last few years. Though if I'm being honest, I'd rather just see this as a holiday game. The issues with it are so vast, and it might be better to just have a nostalgia trip once a year. Could be a nice Christmas time thing.
    Posted Dec 27, 2020
    Fusafez likes this.
  12. We average 200+ players a day. Give us a chance for our OG game to come back once and for all! If the return does not go well, We will understand if it gets taken out again. Give it a shot, as it may bring back old players from 2013-2015 days!
    Posted Dec 27, 2020
  13. Hey everyone! I am playing CS right now, And ppl have been saying that they will defo. start to play mineplex again if this game we call Castle Siege comes back!
    Posted Dec 27, 2020
  14. MP believes the numbers are inflated since it was a limited/new event. They won't give it a shot, since they don't want to look like the Dev team made a bad decision to add an unpopular game back. I personally doubt it would bring back old players, since most of these ppl probs quit. I don't even think they still play Minecraft tbh, they probs haven't played mineplex in years lol. It is a cool game, just it sadly isn't as popular as some other games, or else I could see MP keeping it around.
    Posted Dec 27, 2020
    Dellas likes this.
  15. A few days ago, I remember playing a game that was 25 undead vs 6 defenders. Literally all defenders quit the moment the game started lmfao.
    But yeah I'm starting to lose hope in Castle Siege's revival, as when the game originally came out, it was getting 250+ players (3-4 games). Today, it's still doing alright, but it's usually getting 60-120 players on average (1-2 games). The main issue I'm seeing (and a lot of others are also seeing) is how bad the team balance is. I remember playing in a CS lobby where all the CS sweats/tryhards went undead, and the lobby basically died after like 4-5 games because of how badly defenders were getting beaten. I'm afraid that CS may go down the path of games like champions, where a party of sweats destroys the lobby, basically killing the game.
    Posted Dec 28, 2020
  16. I think this might be happening because the game hasn't been there in a long time, so a lot of OG players are spending every bit of time they have grinding their stats because they know that the game will get removed after a few days from now
    Posted Dec 28, 2020
  17. Defending is harder and it can get slightly boring because the sunrise is at 8 minutes and is time consuming. Most of us got the achievement kits including me, so undead win farming will be more then last week.
    Posted Dec 29, 2020
    EpicEnderDragon1 likes this.
  18. Hey,

    So a lot of people have been pointing out the fact that there are a large number of players on the Network- and not just from our community- who have been grinding wins on one team or another.

    I would like to point out two things:

    1. As mentioned above, there are a lot of players who are maining Undead to gain more wins in CS. This causes a large number of games to be won as the Undead within a few minutes. With that in mind, please redirect your attention towards my next point.

    2. Our Community Castle Siege Game Insights team is fully aware of the fact that it is far easier to win on the Undead team than it is to win on the Defender team solely due to the large gap in communication required on each team. When it comes down to it, with two teams of players that are either new-ish or just casually playing, the Undead has a better chance of winning simply due to the team not needing to communicate with one another nearly as much as is required for the Defender team.

    This topic is tricky... Balancing Castle Siege is not something that can be easily done. Changing just one kit for the Defender team can drastically alter the "funk sway" of the team itself. This is more so applicable towards Defender kits than Undead kits, due to the nature of how each team works.

    The Undead's tactics rely on swarming choke points and continuing to inflict wave after wave of damage to front linesmen over several assaults, eventually weakening the individuals defending these front lines and either killing them outright or forcing them to pull back to the next level of the map.

    All undead kits utilize this concept. Ghouls are able to leap behind defenders and distract them and/or knock them off of their current layer. Zombies can poke at Defender lines, backup, regenerate their health a bit, and poke again. Skeletons can continually "annoy" marksmen to the point where either their health is too low and they have to find cover to regain their health or to the point where several marksmen are focusing all of their arrows on a handful of skeletons rather than supporting the individuals defending the front lines. Summoners can throw mobs into defender lines to inflict additional damage, and can also throw mobs on routes where wolves travel through to keep them away from the Undead advancement.

    Defender kits are built to rely entirely on team coordination to make the best use of their abilities. Knights hold the front lines of choke points, tanking damage, and utilizing melee attacks to fight off undead swarms. Marksmen provide ranged cover and target TNT and focus arrow fire into large crowds of Undead players to weaken them up a bit, making Knights' lives easier. Paladins provide buffs to groups of Defenders to allow them to avoid pulling back as soon (resistance I, for instance, goes a long way in helping knights tank TNT explosions). Wolves work in packs to assist Knights in taking down Undead swarms in ways Knights cannot afford to do themselves (often swarming past the front lines and targeting TNT carriers and their escorts). Maps are also designed to make Wolves responsible for protecting a route. Wolfbite does 3 hearts of damage to Undead mobs. When being spawn camped by Undead zombies, three wolves hitting a single zombie together can flat out kill that zombie. Maps utilize this concept and place Wolves in areas where, upon being spawn camped, these wolves are still able to protect an area utilizing the fact that they ae being spawn camped. This is why Wolf Bite has a 60-second timer that resets as soon as they are killed or after 60 seconds have passed.

    Changing just one variable for either team must be observed throughout the entire game, with the teams' strategies, balances, and overall methodology for attaining their goals. Dying as a knight on the front lines as a defender removes a front linesman, but gains another individual that can sacrifice themselves to targeting a TNT carrier, helping to prevent an entire group of Defenders from being killed. Removing the wolf respawn timer makes trying to hold off wolf assaults on the routes that they are responsible for protecting nearly impossible, due to the fact that their wolf bite cooldown resets upon dying, allowing just one wolf to continuously hit a zombie with wolf bite over the course of just a few seconds. Now imagine that the zombie is trying to carry a TNT to an area, and these routes are unviable as an Undead player.

    Giving Paladin too strong of potency for regeneration, for instance, makes continuous pounding on the front lines simply not possible over a longer period of time due to the rate at which these front linesmen can regain health relative to the rate at which undead swarms can deal damage as a group. Think of it as a wall that you must continue to ram yourself and 30 other players into over and over again until it begins to budge. If the wall is repaired too quickly, this strategy no longer works. If the wall is unrepairable, the wall can break too quickly. One of the topics we are discussing in CSGI is the possibility of having Paladins give regeneration I to nearby defenders over 8 seconds. This gives defenders 2 hearts over the course of these 8 seconds. If it were Regeneration II over 4 seconds, defenders would gain 2 hearts over just four seconds. This creates a scenario where this "wall" repairs itself way too quickly and makes these ramming tactics no longer possible. However, with Regeneration I over 8 seconds, Defenders are able to repair their wall at a rate that does not prevent these ramming tactics from working, while also allowing for this wall to live just a bit longer. And, as a side note, giving paladins too strong of an offensive ability creates a scenario where it becomes more difficult for Undead to actually get the chance to ram these front line walls, as they get slaughtered before they are able to get close enough to deal this compounded damage.

    So far, the most viable way we've discussed with regards to rebalances has to do with lowering the timer slightly. When the server lags and drops down from 20 TPS to, say, 5 TPS, the server's timer runs 4 times as slowly. Minutes are comprised of seconds which are comprised of ticks. 20 ticks per second means that every 1 second, the game runs 20 ticks. All in-game timers are built around this idea, whether it be with Java development or with command blocks. Thus, every 20 ticks, the game counts down by 1 second. When the server goes down to, say, 5 ticks per second, the game's internal clock is still processing a 1-second change every 20 ticks. Except now, every 1 second of real-time, the game only runs 5 ticks. This means that, in a 5 TPS lobby, 1 second is removed from the game's timer every 4 seconds (20 ticks are now processed every 4 seconds due to the server only running 5 ticks every second).

    Aside from preventing this lag from happening, the only way to combat this concept- or so we've hypothesized- would be to outsource the game's internal clock to a constant 20 TPS external server whose performance is independent of the lag present on the game's server itself. Essentially, all of the game's timers would be handled externally, and specific game events would occur upon a specific value in this external timer being reached and received. Needless to say. this would require a complete rework of the game's code, as everything currently runs on a clock built within the game's code.

    And yes, this is complete speculation. None of us are developers, and these are no more than a wild guess.

    Nevertheless, the only other alternative to these two ideas is to reduce the effects lagging lobbies would have on the game's duration. By lowering the game's duration, when the server lags and makes these timers slow down, the extended time would be reduced.

    These are just some of the topics that our CSGI team is currently discussing. Any/all decisions that our team makes will be forwarded over to Sam (Moppletop) should the game ever get reimplemented onto the live Network. This will allow for the game to be reimplemented with the above criticisms and concerns taken into consideration and- hopefully- even outright solved.


    Edit: 12.29.20

    As a side note, for those wondering about player counts, I have been tracking the numbers periodically and will be able to show this tracked data after the start of the New Year once the game is re-removed.
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted Dec 29, 2020,
    Last edited Dec 29, 2020
  19. lol a lot of paragraphs just to say that you will do nothing to balance the game. The only thing they want to fix is a bug that makes the game take longer. Since from what was read, it appears they are against making the achievement kit useful in this game lmao.
    Posted Dec 29, 2020
  20. Dan actually talked about buffing paladin further:
    Balancing CS is tricky because there are so many aspects of the game to consider, but rest assured, it is a constant undertaking.
    Posted Dec 29, 2020
    SALB, rmotheram and EpicEnderDragon1 like this.

Share This Page