So, projected winners of all campaigns (NA)

Shaggygaming

Permafrost wrote: »

I clearly am not a fan of Lowbei at the moment, but he's described it pretty well. It's just the way those of us from the old-school competitive scene see things.

Please remind me how big a group is in ESO? Exactly..

Agrippa_Invisus

Adonikam wrote: »

Permafrost wrote: »

I clearly am not a fan of Lowbei at the moment, but he's described it pretty well. It's just the way those of us from the old-school competitive scene see things.

Please remind me how big a group is in ESO? Exactly..

It's a variable sized based on the biases of the poster making statements about it.

Lowbei

imo a group is whatever the game says it is, which is 4 in eso

Shaggygaming

Lowbei wrote: »

imo a group is whatever the game says it is, which is 4 in eso

I disagree. ZOS designed PVP groups as the "Large" groups which is why the Alliance War skills are designed for more than AOE cap.

Shaggygaming

Lowbei wrote: »

imo a group is whatever the game says it is, which is 4 in eso

I disagree. ZOS designed PVP groups as the "Large" groups which is why the Alliance War skills are designed for more than AOE cap. 4 player groups are for PVE dungeons and 12 are for Trials.

Lowbei

imo "large group" is their nice way of saying "zerg group"

Agrippa_Invisus

It's very obvious all the Assault/Support tools in the Alliance War trees were designed with large groups in mind, as is the difficulty level of the objectives (such as keeps).

Any attempt to designate some significance onto a 4 to 8 (or some other number) team as a more 'pure' form of AvAvA is meaningless self deception.

This isn't DAoC, the devs haven't catered to the gank squad crowd by turning the Imperial island into a roaming gank squad paradise like they did in DAoC with that island between the frontiers. AvAvA was designed with large group fighting in mind and everything's built around it. If you want to fight as a smaller team, you're free to, but understand the inherent risks involved and know what when dealing with the zerg, the results of your smaller numbers will be severe.

Lowbei

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

It's very obvious all the Assault/Support tools in the Alliance War trees were designed with large groups in mind, as is the difficulty level of the objectives (such as keeps).

Any attempt to designate some significance onto a 4 to 8 (or some other number) team as a more 'pure' form of AvAvA is meaningless self deception.

This isn't DAoC, the devs haven't catered to the gank squad crowd by turning the Imperial island into a roaming gank squad paradise like they did in DAoC with that island between the frontiers. AvAvA was designed with large group fighting in mind and everything's built around it. If you want to fight as a smaller team, you're free to, but understand the inherent risks involved and know what when dealing with the zerg, the results of your smaller numbers will be severe.

zos did mess up by not making the middle island the "paradise" as you put it, but they are working on arenas now to fix it, and hopefully they place them in the imperial city.

Shaggygaming

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

It's very obvious all the Assault/Support tools in the Alliance War trees were designed with large groups in mind, as is the difficulty level of the objectives (such as keeps).

Any attempt to designate some significance onto a 4 to 8 (or some other number) team as a more 'pure' form of AvAvA is meaningless self deception.

This isn't DAoC, the devs haven't catered to the gank squad crowd by turning the Imperial island into a roaming gank squad paradise like they did in DAoC with that island between the frontiers. AvAvA was designed with large group fighting in mind and everything's built around it. If you want to fight as a smaller team, you're free to, but understand the inherent risks involved and know what when dealing with the zerg, the results of your smaller numbers will be severe.

Well said, Some of these players who run in small groups are good players. The problem is that they're so stuck on their small group they don't see the big picture. If they knew anything about software development they would have understood why previous games from the early 2k were designed around small groups. Call it zerg, call it whatever makes you feel better. PVP groups are 12+. So form up a large group that you can keep coordinated and join the men.

Agrippa_Invisus

Lowbei wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

It's very obvious all the Assault/Support tools in the Alliance War trees were designed with large groups in mind, as is the difficulty level of the objectives (such as keeps).

Any attempt to designate some significance onto a 4 to 8 (or some other number) team as a more 'pure' form of AvAvA is meaningless self deception.

This isn't DAoC, the devs haven't catered to the gank squad crowd by turning the Imperial island into a roaming gank squad paradise like they did in DAoC with that island between the frontiers. AvAvA was designed with large group fighting in mind and everything's built around it. If you want to fight as a smaller team, you're free to, but understand the inherent risks involved and know what when dealing with the zerg, the results of your smaller numbers will be severe.

zos did mess up by not making the middle island the "paradise" as you put it, but they are working on arenas now to fix it, and hopefully they place them in the imperial city.

*yawn*

Shorter Lowbei: imma gonna call you a zerger cuz I don't have an argument!

Whatevs, dude. You can go hide in your arenas when they're released. I couldn't give two cares about them.

If they do it right, access to the Imperial City will somehow be tied to the level of keep ownership, giving even more significance to the AvAvA going on around it.

Bramir

AD (or at least a couple organized raids worth of AD) tried to help DC win on Wabba a few weeks back, but failed. Now DC has given up on Wabba, and AD is nothing but fodder without pressure on EP from the west.

The main reason so many people think Wabba is the only campaign that matters, is it is the only one where one raid won't cause population imbalance by joining. Whether the players on small pop servers are doing 'real pvp' is a question that will never be answered, because there is too much chance that these small scale campaigns have major numbers advantages for one side. On Wabba, all sides have high numbers (or used to anyway), so the numbers on both sides in a fight tend to be closer based on ratios.

The part most of the Wabba-haters are missing is that small scale pvp happens all the time on Wabba. Raids don't necessarily stay with the other raids. There are certainly zergs going on, but they do not stay together long, at least on the EP side.

Now, if you want to see an ongoing zerg, just head south...you can always tell AD is coming by the wave of lag that precedes their giant zerg. Having more players in one place makes AD good at pvp, right?

Permafrost

We feel plenty manly enough trouncing people triple our size. Furthermore, I get absolutely zero satisfaction from running with 20+ people. People can make boatloads of mistakes and just hide. With 8-10 you must be on your A-game all the time. Wasting an ability, throwing in an unnecessary dodge roll, fat-fingering a single ultimate... it's the difference between winning and losing. I like that high stakes atmosphere.

I see the big picture just fine. It's why, despite frequent invitations, we did not choose Wabba; we did not want to go to a server where "large group" would be the meta. You guys enjoy that. I understand. I could assume you don’t like that pressure or you have some kind of fetish for pretending that you’re coordinating an attack on Helm’s Deep, but it doesn’t matter. You’re going to keep on enjoying that style and I’m going to keep on preferring combat that discourages it.

I never intended to have to defend PvP tastes; this started over judgment being passed by large meta campaigns against smaller meta campaigns.

Lowbei

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

Lowbei wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

It's very obvious all the Assault/Support tools in the Alliance War trees were designed with large groups in mind, as is the difficulty level of the objectives (such as keeps).

Any attempt to designate some significance onto a 4 to 8 (or some other number) team as a more 'pure' form of AvAvA is meaningless self deception.

This isn't DAoC, the devs haven't catered to the gank squad crowd by turning the Imperial island into a roaming gank squad paradise like they did in DAoC with that island between the frontiers. AvAvA was designed with large group fighting in mind and everything's built around it. If you want to fight as a smaller team, you're free to, but understand the inherent risks involved and know what when dealing with the zerg, the results of your smaller numbers will be severe.

zos did mess up by not making the middle island the "paradise" as you put it, but they are working on arenas now to fix it, and hopefully they place them in the imperial city.

*yawn*

Shorter Lowbei: imma gonna call you a zerger cuz I don't have an argument!

Whatevs, dude. You can go hide in your arenas when they're released. I couldn't give two cares about them.

i wouldnt call it hiding. my group simply hasnt ran into any other "groups" of anything less than 50ish people who can beat our 6. i assume that arenas will encourage some of these zergers to learn to play better, which is good for all sides, and provides much needed competition, because farming bads gets old when the ap ranks do nothing.

in about 3 months the only decent fight my 6man ran into was fixates 9man, who folded fast and wouldnt respond to my request for more fights.

arenas cant get here fast enough

Shaggygaming

Permafrost wrote: »

We feel plenty manly enough trouncing people triple our size. Furthermore, I get absolutely zero satisfaction from running with 20+ people. People can make boatloads of mistakes and just hide. With 8-10 you must be on your A-game all the time. Wasting an ability, throwing in an unnecessary dodge roll, fat-fingering a single ultimate... it's the difference between winning and losing. I like that high stakes atmosphere.

I see the big picture just fine. It's why, despite frequent invitations, we did not choose Wabba; we did not want to go to a server where "large group" would be the meta. You guys enjoy that. I understand. I could assume you don’t like that pressure or you have some kind of fetish for pretending that you’re coordinating an attack on Helm’s Deep, but it doesn’t matter. You’re going to keep on enjoying that style and I’m going to keep on preferring combat that discourages it.

I never intended to have to defend PvP tastes; this started over judgment being passed by large meta campaigns against smaller meta campaigns.

You don't see the big picture. You really don't.. You can sit back and call large groups bad all you want, but I can sit back and say well you're bad because you can't get 12 people who know how to play. It doesn't make large groups bad because you can't field 12 people who know what they're doing.

Fuzzylumpkins

Rylana wrote: »

AD will win four (Auriels Bow, Dawnbreaker, Hopesfire, and Skullcrusher)
DC will win three (Bloodthorn, Chrysamere, and Volendrung*)
EP will win one (Goldbrand)

Wabbajack is too close to call, but based on current trends is likely to go to DC for a final score of 4AD, 4DC, 1EP

umadreds trollface.jpg

Dont worry, we will spot you Scourge as a consolation prize.

=D

*Volendrung is technically not a lock yet as the point spread is less than 50k as of this post, but trends show there is zero chance of AD actually making a meaningful comeback on this campaign

Disclaimer: the 90 day campaigns were way too long, early AP generation exploits ruined the contest, and the only campaign that actually has population and ever mattered is Wabbajack anyway, but gg.

Wabbajack actually does not matter either. 40 people running around spamming impulse. How awful can players be at RvR? watch any fight in TESO for that answer.

Looking at your displayed character list, short of a disability or some type of govt fund/parent leeching disability, you have way too much time to play this crap. Took me 1 vr12 to realise it did not matter what class you played as long as you could manage to link up 5 decent abilities and pan while fighting, you win.

Permafrost

I didn't say the word "bad" once in that post, so apparently "all I want" is none. Competitive on the other hand? You're not competitive in the sense of pure player skill. I don't WANT more than 12 who know what they are doing. Defeats the point of the competition I seek.

Lowbei

^ by that same logic you could say that its your fault if you cant field 500 people.

there are two group options.

A. "group"
B. "large group"

so group v group = 4v4

Shaggygaming

Bramir wrote: »

AD (or at least a couple organized raids worth of AD) tried to help DC win on Wabba a few weeks back, but failed. Now DC has given up on Wabba, and AD is nothing but fodder without pressure on EP from the west.

Yes, you did fail miserably. I say that because if you were smart you would of gone for the 2nd place team. You know, you gain up on 2nd place and that helps put you in 2nd place? Instead, you poked the bear and you got mauled. I really enjoyed the AD fights the last few weeks, but you don't understand how to win.

Bramir

Adonikam wrote: »

Bramir wrote: »

AD (or at least a couple organized raids worth of AD) tried to help DC win on Wabba a few weeks back, but failed. Now DC has given up on Wabba, and AD is nothing but fodder without pressure on EP from the west.

Yes, you did fail miserably. I say that because if you were smart you would of gone for the 2nd place team. You know, you gain up on 2nd place and that helps put you in 2nd place? Instead, you poked the bear and you got mauled. I really enjoyed the AD fights the last few weeks, but you don't understand how to win.

I play for Ebonheart Pact...

Zintair

Adonikam wrote: »

Permafrost wrote: »

We feel plenty manly enough trouncing people triple our size. Furthermore, I get absolutely zero satisfaction from running with 20+ people. People can make boatloads of mistakes and just hide. With 8-10 you must be on your A-game all the time. Wasting an ability, throwing in an unnecessary dodge roll, fat-fingering a single ultimate... it's the difference between winning and losing. I like that high stakes atmosphere.

I see the big picture just fine. It's why, despite frequent invitations, we did not choose Wabba; we did not want to go to a server where "large group" would be the meta. You guys enjoy that. I understand. I could assume you don’t like that pressure or you have some kind of fetish for pretending that you’re coordinating an attack on Helm’s Deep, but it doesn’t matter. You’re going to keep on enjoying that style and I’m going to keep on preferring combat that discourages it.

I never intended to have to defend PvP tastes; this started over judgment being passed by large meta campaigns against smaller meta campaigns.

You don't see the big picture. You really don't.. You can sit back and call large groups bad all you want, but I can sit back and say well you're bad because you can't get 12 people who know how to play. It doesn't make large groups bad because you can't field 12 people who know what they're doing.

Anything for people to remain relevant.

It doesn't matter what your group size is. If you want to go have a debate about actual group size and balanced small scale fighting go play WoW Arenas, or BGs.

Those were created to have the small scale GvG balance you are looking for.

The part of Open World PvP that is so epic is ANYTHING can happen. You can come on 3 people with a group of 20 or you can come up on a group of 80 with a group of 20.

Terrain constantly changes, situations vary, it's all spontaneous.

In DAOC when I ran with my 8 man we used to wiped 5x our number. That isn't small scale even if we were. In that game you were offered mechanics to combat larger numbers.

Leaok

Not offered the same tools to combat large numbers here, which makes it more challenging but at the same time rewarding when you do wipe superior numbers.

TheHumanClone

What is DAOC?

Cody

this thread has become nothing but a place for drama. it should be closed

Lowbei

why does some grandmother always come try to get the thread closed because some adults had an argument in a place designed for "pvp discussion"?

Gundorf_GA

NookyZooky wrote: »

this thread has become nothing but a place for drama. it should be closed

I agree. PvP forums are no place for drama!

TheHumanClone

NookyZooky wrote: »

this thread has become nothing but a place for drama. it should be closed

Hey you there , i asked what DAOC was.... you seem knowledgeable.

Rylana

I has a sad

reften

Rylana wrote: »

AD will win four (Auriels Bow, Dawnbreaker, Hopesfire, and Skullcrusher)
DC will win three (Bloodthorn, Chrysamere, and Volendrung*)
EP will win one (Goldbrand)

Wabbajack is too close to call, but based on current trends is likely to go to DC for a final score of 4AD, 4DC, 1EP

umadreds trollface.jpg

Dont worry, we will spot you Scourge as a consolation prize.

=D

*Volendrung is technically not a lock yet as the point spread is less than 50k as of this post, but trends show there is zero chance of AD actually making a meaningful comeback on this campaign

Disclaimer: the 90 day campaigns were way too long, early AP generation exploits ruined the contest, and the only campaign that actually has population and ever mattered is Wabbajack anyway, but gg.

Magicka rules this game
High Elves and Breton's do it best. EP left out in the cold.

It's that simple.

quakedawg_ESO

DAOC is Dark age of Camelot. Fun times for the first 1.5 yrs despite the flaws. Different crowd back then ......with fewer choices.

bruceb14_ESO5

And who will win each campaign?
Auriel's Bow - AD
Dawnbreaker - AD
Wabba - Beats me
Goldthorn - EP
I don't really play on others except for Celarus once in a while. Bloodthorn appears all DC with esostats but I just remember being mowed down by huge zergs trampling through...can't remember the colors of those trains. But I do remember playing around in the field and dueling a bit with some DC. That was fun!