Siege will either be too hard and ppl who want to do it will complain, or it will be too easy and ppl who get sieged will complain. (basically siege impossible vs siege possible)
Sieges of inactive settlements + hermits are not sieges, just a formality of placing a ram + thingpeace breaking does not make it a siege if they don't defend.
Expecting attackers to be up for 24h while defenders can storm out with EVERYONE and bash catas in 5 minutes is cringe, spamming walls and huge villages taking over 48h of continuous siege is cringe.
You could hear the lack of excitement when people on WB siege after the successful siege (wall breach) heard that we will be defending another catapult for another 24 hours because the alternative is walking the catapult to the center for 30 hours to pillage (without a break since the last ~24h).
I kinda liked how shield system abstracted the siege to a point where you were fighting against a shield and not against spammable walls and once you broke the shield you won, the claim was down. Current system incentivizes a wall spam and making your village an ugly piece of shit filled with walls and tight corridors, shield system doesn't. Then again shield system had like 20 other issues so meh.