Zerg trains are ruining this game. It's sad SAD

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

While I will agree most above, the whole issue resides on a single ability.

Pulsar. Replace the damn thing and it's morphs, and we will be ok.
Is too powerful for a game that we do not have any other resistance but blocking.

Because Spell Resistance is pathetic to boot since even an average magicka user like myself, has 5000 spell penetration with 2 light armour parts. (The Spell resistance cap is hard to get more than 2200).

You cant block impulse or its morphs, nor can you dodge them with dodgeroll or any dodge increasing skills.

Impulse is a pbaoe, you see the guy charging at you to try and use it, that's how you dodge. Worst case scenario, you use dodge roll to compensate for you being surprised.

Impulse is strong only due to the current meta of stacking.
it is easy to use as a group when all you have to do is follow the crown and be rewarded for it with a passive dodge chance on aoes.
It's especially hard to notice a pbaoe user when everyone and their grandmother is one and you're in the middle of a moshpit of your group and the enemies being crammed in the same physical space.

But when you play agaisnt groups that don't know that the target cap is a thing, or if it was removed, then there is an actual skrimmage line to cross before getting in melee/pbaoe range.
In this case, you have a risk to compensate for the slightly larger aoe.
People will see the impulse user come, dodge him and focus him.
Actual gameplay.

demonlkojipub19_ESO

Impulse is strong period. Its unblockable and it doesn't cost a lot of magicka to use. Just by being unblockable makes it OP. Only ultimates should be unblockable.

Where is this "one impulse user" thing coming from too? Your scenerio is unrealistic .Rarely does one guy try to come at you with impulse. Of course a group is going to kill that one guy moseying on up to you and decides to just impulse. and even then that impulse is going to do a lot of damage to up to 6 people by the time he dies.

And even then, certain sudden 1v1 encounters with said impulse spammers, tho I may survive, they do a lot of damage with just that, simply because they can block me and I cant block them. I hit them with any of my blockable melee attacks and deal less than 150 per hit, dropping all the way down to the 40's with some more rapid attacks, while they can throw a consistent 300+ with just impulse right through my block. One guy I was lucky that he forgot to block, but still ended up taking 3/4 of my HP down before I killed him, by just using impulse.

2 Impulses and I would have been done for, while 2 normal mode players I have a chance against. In actual gameplay, there are more than 4 people, which usually ends up more than 10, moseying on up to you to one button impulse. Thats what AOE caps are causing. AOE caps need to go away and AOE damage, mainly from impulse, needs to be nerfed. Impulse some day needs to become blockable at the very least.

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO

Impulse is just a symptom.
As you said there is never one user because of the aoe cap and the current meta it causes.
But in a vacuum, impulse is a weak spell. And without aoe cap there will be a line of skrimmage for its would be users to cross.

Heck, even now it works this way when facing uncoordinated forces.
Impulse is not a threat and most of the other aoes do more damage with better secundary effects and less personal risks.

I guess that what I'm saying is: How about we get the real issue fixed first rather than finding a scapegoat.

Remove aoe cap, don't double nerf an ability into oblivion and then see how things play out in a sane meta game.
If it turns out impulse is still an issue in this new context, then it can easily be addressed.
But one thing at a time, and the caps are the biggest threat.

deepseamk20b14_ESO

Collision wouldn't be to bad. Just fight your way through them like a real man. Use tactics. Don't all attack from one side. Plan siege weapon spots. use KOCOA for goodness sakes. I'm all for uncapped AoE as well, but it would have to be done carefully or it could be so OP it would break the games current siege mechanics. I liked the on idea I read of only X amount effecting a player at a given time so if 30 people spam on area, he isn't getting hit with all 30 directions of damage. That wouldn't bode to well for people trying to enter a fallen wall or gate lol.

c0rp

Are "combat" devs allowed to talk or post on forms? Just curious. If the AvA devs arent going to deal with it, can anyone else say they are?

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO

deepseamk20b14_ESO wrote: »

Collision wouldn't be to bad. Just fight your way through them like a real man. Use tactics. Don't all attack from one side. Plan siege weapon spots. use KOCOA for goodness sakes. I'm all for uncapped AoE as well, but it would have to be done carefully or it could be so OP it would break the games current siege mechanics. I liked the on idea I read of only X amount effecting a player at a given time so if 30 people spam on area, he isn't getting hit with all 30 directions of damage. That wouldn't bode to well for people trying to enter a fallen wall or gate lol.

It's pretty much the other way around. The target cap is messing with the siege mechanics and removing it would fix sieges.
Now, you get groups sitting on top of each other lasting way longer than they should because of the random miss chances. It creates artificial stalemates.

Remove the target cap, and defenders are just fishes in a barrel and charging in a breach is an actual danger.

And the "reverse target cap" idea is just as bad as the target cap itself. An arbitrary, luck based, chance of not being hit when standing in a group is what causes all the issues in the first place.

Xanthro

It's pretty simple. Make Block very effective against all AOE, and make it so you can't move through player of another faction that is blocking.
You could have shield walls that the zerg is stopped by, while people behind the wall tear up the zerg.
You'd still be able to take down the blocking wall with single target attacks, and abuse would be very hard because you'd have to be blocking.

Francescolg

The reason why so many ppl use IMMOVABLE is simply that everybody and their grandma use CC effetcs (way too many in game), so, even as a healer, Immovable is the way to go, if you want to fight "normally".

Second, and the more aggravating reason, is the f#*ßng not-working system with CC-immunities. Even when you use Immovable a DK comes and roots you and then you need to purge/roll. So Immovable helps vs a "felt 50%" of all spells, while for Oil-Catapult/DKs/etc you need to spam purge. Immovable shouls help vs. all forms of CC, imo!

So, make the CC-immunity a REAL CC IMMUNITY THAT REALLY HELPS VS ALL CC (underlined a 100 times!). Make PURGE HELP VS ALL CC AND EVEN BREAK OUT OF CC (!!!) and then we can talk about spamming Immovable... Then, and only then, when Immovable will also help vs DK root (just one example), then, and only then..

It's funny that some still think that Immovable helps always --> IMMOVABLE does not avoid all types of CC...!

And there is your answer: "how to combat bomb squads/zerg", you simply use skills like Oil Catapult/Meatbag/Calltrops / DK root skill/ability, etc. etc. You'll find enough stuff that is not negated by Immovable or that requires constant-purge.

Wanna stress zergs with just 5-15 people = go for strategy + coordinated siege fire with the right siege weapons = win.

synnerman

Well. I'm afraid this has got the better of me, the total lack of communication on this problem has now took its toll on me and my friends in the guild. I have only logged in the last 3 days to feed my alts horses and it looks the same with my guildies. I have 11 days left on my sub and I think that will be the end for me .

Such a shame a great game is being spoiled by lack of attention to game breaking problems such as this and others.

wllstrt75b14_ESO

You are never going to get rid of zergs...the zerg provides a sense of safety to those in the zerg and therefore attract people like flies to honey. Not tactic you implement will remove the feeling you get from the notion of safety in numbers it is ingrained in every human.

I have seen plenty of zergs fail due to intelligent tactics.

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO

Xanthro wrote: »

It's pretty simple. Make Block very effective against all AOE, and make it so you can't move through player of another faction that is blocking.
You could have shield walls that the zerg is stopped by, while people behind the wall tear up the zerg.
You'd still be able to take down the blocking wall with single target attacks, and abuse would be very hard because you'd have to be blocking.

I'm all for player collisions.
This would be a great feature, but it wouldn't address the issue at hand.

Those groups would still stack as they do it for protection against aoe damage.
And you've given them another protection against it in the form of blocking. They can even trap you now when you get on their way.
Remember, most abilities can be triggered despite blocking.

wllstrt75b14_ESO wrote: »

You are never going to get rid of zergs...the zerg provides a sense of safety to those in the zerg and therefore attract people like flies to honey. Not tactic you implement will remove the feeling you get from the notion of safety in numbers it is ingrained in every human.

I have seen plenty of zergs fail due to intelligent tactics.

You're not wrong, just completely missing the point of the discussion.

This isn't about zerging, large scale pvp depends on zergs.
This is about a "hidden" feature of the game that enforces stacking on top of each other.
The aoe target cap ensures that whatever tactic you use, it must start by stacking or you are doing it wrong.
A passive dodge chance that increases the more you are is just too good to pass.

There is even a point where stacking also protects against siege equipment as it also has a target cap. 21 people aren't exactly hard to round up and get them to follow a crown.

At no point should the logical response to an aoe be: Get all in the red circle.
Even when I play solo around uncoordinated troops I try to get in aoes and notice the miss chances.

trimsic_ESO

Yesterday, I had the opportunity to discuss with some of my former guild mates who cancelled their account. They are currently beta testing Archeage, and had many questions about ESO. They wanted to know if the metagame has changed, since the poor metagame of ESO was the main reason why they quit the game.

Unfortunately, nothing has changed. Stacking pulsar and bat swarm still remains the best option in Cyrodiil, leading to a situation where the biggest zerg almost always win. This is not about individual skills, nor about team play; this is all about numbers. And this is not fun at all.

Who could enjoy a game where the only thing you have to do is to follow the crown, stack as many people as you can, and chain PBAOE skills? Who could enjoy a game where the tactics are so narrowed that they lead to a brainless or at least an unskilled combat?

People I discussed with may come back to ESO, provided that the metagame is deeply changed, i.e. provided that the individual skills and the team play can make the difference; not the numbers.

It's up to the designers to understand that, and make ESO the greatest game ever. ESO has the potential to be a fantastic game. But in order to release this potential, the designers must first admit they were wrong and then propose something completely different. This is not easy; but this is the only way to go to save the game.

Some hints
- CC are tactical skills: they force people to split when they are engaged, and propose an alternative to the brute force zerg ball. They force people to well balance support, control, and DPS skills, and force them to play smartly or die. CC skills are one of the most important component of a well coordinated team play in mass PvP. They also encourage people to improve their individual skills, and reward those who have a good vision of the fight. CC should be strong, and not self purge-able.

- Solid tanks who can hold the line are an important part of tactical moves within a combat. They are the one who should be able to hinder the movement of their enemies in the middle of the fight, hence protecting their healers and damage dealers. They should be resistant to CC, and have strong support skills for themselves and their teammates.

- Damage dealers shall be able to deal a huge amount of damage, while being extremely fragile at the same time. They should have to take risks at each offensive move, and be rewarded when they act smartly. There should be able to deal damage to a great number of people, but they should have to stand still when they do so, therefore exposing themselves to a serious threat. They should be extremely fragile to physical damage, as a mean to compensate for their great ability to be dangerous in the battlefield with their magical spells.

Many people who read these lines will notice that I'm proposing a series of proposals that they could qualify as "old fashioned". And they would be right, definitely. But at the same time, no other combat system but this one as proved to work since 2002. Yes, it's legitimate and good to innovate, and this is actually what I'm doing daily at work. But innovation does not mean getting rid of what works perfectly well; it's all about improving what does not work as expected through some new concepts.

Flynch

Remove the 'max player hit' cap and have an allowance of, say, 5 AoEs (arbitrarily) going off having the fullest of impact against the opposition.

Any more than 5 AoEs will result in the overcharge becoming friendly-fire as well as damaging the opponent.

Vizier

Cathexis wrote: »

+1 for collision, people should be able to block access to things.

This would change combat for the better under most circumstances IMO. I don't think it would change much regarding large blobs AOE is pretty large and with multiple AOE overlaps the zerg ball won't be hindered.

Viable distance single target dps helps and increased effectiveness of stamina builds may help. A more robust system for identifying and calling targets in groups might be helpful as well. This way key players could be singled out and dispatched. (I don't know. It's kind of a train of thought idea. Not terribly fleshed out.)

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO

Flynch wrote: »

Remove the 'max player hit' cap and have an allowance of, say, 5 AoEs (arbitrarily) going off having the fullest of impact against the opposition.

Any more than 5 AoEs will result in the overcharge becoming friendly-fire as well as damaging the opponent.

I'm all for friendly fire, actually, eso is one of the first games I play without FF and it feels weird. But the arbitrary aspect doesn't sit well with me.

Everything should have an intuitive rule, something that do not require advanced thought to process and anticipate mid fight.

For instance, Elemental walls of different type overlaping and canceling each others could make sense if you wanted to be "nice". But 5 volleys of arrow at one location should equal 5 times more arrows.

Either way, I really don't get this whole "fear of aoes". The size of aoes in eso are fairly small and people are spread out enough to not be worth an aoe spell.
Aside from when they are stacking, there are rarely enough targets for aoes to warrant any weird or arbitrary features to counter aoes.

Morostyle

Maybe reduce the amount of players you can have in a team from 24 to maybe.. 12?

Tankqull

Morostyle wrote: »

Maybe reduce the amount of players you can have in a team from 24 to maybe.. 12?

who cares if one or two groups follow the same person?

uncap all dmg abilities, aply range dropoff to them and change pulse from an instant to a casted ae with 1,5sec CT but increased dmg to match the same dps. DAoC is ment to be ESO ancestor why not take working functionality from it instead of garbage functionality from gw2.

problem solved.

Krinaman

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO wrote: »

Either way, I really don't get this whole "fear of aoes". The size of aoes in eso are fairly small and people are spread out enough to not be worth an aoe spell.
Aside from when they are stacking, there are rarely enough targets for aoes to warrant any weird or arbitrary features to counter aoes.

I'm honestly starting to wonder if you are even playing this game.

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO wrote: »

I'm all for friendly fire, actually, eso is one of the first games I play without FF and it feels weird.

This probably explains why you don't realize that just about every major MMO has target caps without the blobbing issue. Obviously you haven't played them since none have friendly fire.

BTW - Friendly fire would be the biggest mistake you could possibly make in a MMO.

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO

Krinaman wrote: »

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO wrote: »

Either way, I really don't get this whole "fear of aoes". The size of aoes in eso are fairly small and people are spread out enough to not be worth an aoe spell.
Aside from when they are stacking, there are rarely enough targets for aoes to warrant any weird or arbitrary features to counter aoes.

I'm honestly starting to wonder if you are even playing this game.

I guess I'm the one playing the game too much.
Have you really never seen the game be played "normaly"?

This happens mostly during the afternoon or prime time but before organized groups get active farming ap in stacks.
Massive fights, spread out forces and aoes are pretty situational.

If you've seen only the balling aspect of the game, I'm actually sad for you in a non ironic way.
There is an amazing game hiding here, and you just can't get your head out of the current meta to see it.

Krinaman wrote: »

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO wrote: »

I'm all for friendly fire, actually, eso is one of the first games I play without FF and it feels weird.

This probably explains why you don't realize that just about every major MMO has target caps without the blobbing issue. Obviously you haven't played them since none have friendly fire.

Way to misread, yet again. I said "one of the first".
I've played, amongst others, aoc, sto, gw2 for 9 months each.
I just tend to stick longer(years) to games attempting to create a virtual world, and for that, good pvp systems are a great tool.
Anyway, moving on...

Not every major mmo has large scale PvP.
They usually can't even get "working" PvP.
Most aren't even good games.
I really don't think you should take inspiration from them.

Actually very few have anything that even tries to compare to the scale of Cyrodiil or Daoc's RvR.
Of those that did, GW2 and Shadowbane, both had caps, both had blobbing.
GW2 alone is a cautionary tale for this generation of mmos.

In the end, it doesn't even matter.
Even if there weren't any clear examples of how target caps are a flaw, it happens here, in our game.
You seriously need to work on your valuation skills if you don't estimate that passive dodges chances are the reason for the stacking we see in ESO.

I've been playing MMOs for 16 years, it's my hobby and passion, and tried and played my fair share of games with or without pvp.
There is one constant: Players are greedy min maxers, they will exploit the *** out of any advantages they can get their hands on.
Target caps are like the most juicy target ever for gamers.

That said, I am curious about what you consider a major game that has both large scale pvp and target caps?

Krinaman wrote: »

BTW - Friendly fire would be the biggest mistake you could possibly make in a MMO.

I do agree with you here.
FF wouldn't please the population targeted by ESO, it would be too hardcore for players expecting a mostly solo game. Heck, there are even players in this community that were against player collisions in PvP for reasons not related to performances.
It was just a passing remark to say I would enjoy it, but I don't want ff in eso.
Perhaps as a special rule campaign maybe? But even then, fragmenting the population even further would be a mistake.

However, FF in general is NOT a mistake at all, especially not for an MMO.
It is actually, along with player collisions, a great tool to balance PvP and create a deep experience.
Even in ESO it would work, you could just add "weapon lock" rules to avoid griefing, or even try to create a "justice" system.

I'll take as example Planetside 2 that, while it has fps controls, behaves very much like ESO's RvR combat and both games have a lot to learn from each other.

eventide03b14a_ESO

What if they just added a casting time and reduced movement speed to these? Then they could at least be somewhat avoidable.

Krinaman

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO wrote: »

Have you really never seen the game be played "normaly"?

I see it every day thanks...

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO wrote: »

That said, I am curious about what you consider a major game that has both large scale pvp and target caps?

I gave a list before but the best example would be Lotro. AOE caps and no blobs. Now that said, people still formed groups and did the exact same thing you see the zerg balls doing.

In Lotro the two factions would stand at range in skirmish lines and if somebody pushed too far forward they would get CCed and nuked. Eventually an organized group from one side or the other would run in and flank the opposing line wiping them all out. This of course was bemoaned and declared zerging etc. But there wasn't any stacking. People just stayed in range of the healers the group radius was determined purely by the range of healing and buffs. There was a couple of exceptions as a couple skills required you to be very near. Like tanks could absorb damage from one other player. So they would stack with a healer to defend them. Again the range determined purely by the buff.

I suppose you could argue Lotro had zerg balls just that the ball was bigger around. But the point is they weren't stacked to prevent AOEs from hitting the same target twice.

I can pretty much say that every other MMO I played was the same. The size of the "zerg ball" was determined by the range of healing/buffs. Which is why I am not in the least bit surprised the "zerg balls" are so stacked in this game with buffs being so short ranged.

grimjim398

If you anti-zerg-impulse guys would get together and find a strategy to beat the zerg instead of posting this thread over and over again, you might create some of that nice emergent gameplay stuff. Is is ZOS's job to win the fight for you?

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO

You see non stacking pvp everyday yet still think aoes have a large radius?
Or do you mean that for you stacking is "normal"?

As for lotro, I have a hard time finding any info about large scale pvp.
I either find troll posts saying it doesn't have pvp or videos with barely 10 v 10 spread out over an entire field.
The most useful resource I could find was about ranger skills that could increase their target cap to 14.
I could also find that raid size was of 24.

Any details on how large the fights could be and the average target cap?
Also how powerful were the aoes compared to single target abilities?

Where I'm getting at is that there is a context to take into account.
As I said in my previous post, what matters is that stacking occurs in eso. Even if there weren't any examples of caps elsewhere, it is an issue here.

First and foremost, eso get easily up to 40+ vs 40+. Even small scale, at 12v12, that's 50% of impact.

Also, aoes' damage in eso is balanced like if they weren't capped.

They are not very large, the largest being the size if the smallest positive aoe. They don't do much damage so they aren't a big threat in general use, yet they do enough damage in the situations they are relevant in to be worth defending against.
Especially since it takes so little effort to use the stacking technique.

We already went over the buffing/healing. It's just worth it thanks to the cap. You need to think outside the current meta and try to min-max in that new context.
Without the xx% dodge, healing and buffing in eso is just not able to soak in the output of damage aoes.
Maybe in other games, but not here.

Not to mention that if healing was a reason to stack, even players not aware of the target cap would organicaly stand closer to each other.
These info are in game knowlege. Players would act on them if they were noteworthy.

Instead they tend to be pretty far away of each other, far more than the 8-10m radius of the smalest healing/buffing abilities.

That's the reason we started seing stacked groups after the patch note that revealed them.
It's a matter of complete vs incomplete knowledge.

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO

grimjim398 wrote: »

Is is ZOS's job to win the fight for you?

No, and that's why I want the target cap gone.

I'm a group leader, well, more like a cat herder, and I play to win.
Stacking makes it far too easy to win and farm ap, it is bland and unfun. I should not have to accept to gimp myself in order to have fun.

I want a game with a high skill ceiling that will force me to improve and evolve new tactics to win.

It is zos's job to provide deep and engaging gameplay.

Krinaman

I see non-stacking pvp everyday and I have uses for AOEs in fact there are times I hit more than the cap.

In lotro groups could be up to 24 with multiple groups on either side. Not sure if there was a server limit but certainly it was over 100v100.

Caps at the time I played (years ago) were around 5 and the top DPS skills.

"We already went over the buffing/healing"

Yep, and I still disagree with you based on my past experience in other MMOs.

Xsorus

PvP in LOTRO was never really massive scale like it is in this game....It had an alright PvP map but usually the game just went back and forth between the Freeps being overpowered or the Creeps being overpowered...

It was originally designed to have the Freeps just be more powerful then Creeps, thus ya needed a large number of Creeps to take a Freep player on.. but it moved towards what i previously listed.

Hell my captain for example when Helm Deep came out was a god among men if I went tank...You could tank like 20+ people forever.

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO

Of course there are times you hit more than the cap. That's my point:
If you make an average, you get much more effective use out of single target abilities and the occasional aoe opportunity.
It's just a much more rounded experience.

By the way, which pvp do you enjoy more? Stacking or non stacking?

Interesting about lotro. I was involved in another game at the time and never gave it a chance.
Perhaps in its context, aoes were strong enough to be worth spreading out despite the cap?
Any memory of the cost per damage point?

For the healing, you need to work on your min maxing maths.
Look at the mana cost per hp healed / mitigated and compare it to the cost of mana/stam per aoe damage.
Also, look at the damage healed per second compared to the damage per second.
In both cases, damage wins by a fairly large margin.

Stacking without the damage mitigation of caps just isn't sustainable.
Perhaps it worked in other games, but in eso it wouldn't.

Krinaman

I don't need to work my min/maxing math at all. Stack you get shields, barriers, purges, and healers don't need to figure out where everyone is.

It also doesn't require math to know that the first time I started stacking in this game was when we got barrier. Suddenly it was "stack I'm going to pop barrier". Prior to that it was "stay close" or "stay in my healing circle".

I normally run solo . But I've done the stack thing as well. And no it isn't much fun running down rows of people with a mob.

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO

Well, at least you do see the problem of stacking. Or at least understand that it isn't fun.

Spend a bit more time to look at barrier, and try to see it in the context of uncapped aoes.

Let's consider the fact it is an ultimate, maybe all members in your group run it to rotate. That's a huge opportunity cost and it would be casted only once per engagement. Twice at best.
Your opponents have access to other ultimates and spammable damage.

Then look at how much hp barrier gives you, keep in mind that in 1.4, it should not stack with itself. Also damage shield don't have any damage mitigation. Heals would give more effective hp.
Your opponents have access to aoes that do at minimum 400 and aren't limited to one at a time.

Barrier has a 10m radius if I remember correctly. The smallest damage aoe is at 3m. Which means by stacking, you get at the very least one third of your group hit per aoe. And people will only use aoe against you. If they are uncapped, that 1/3 increases the more people you have rather than stop at only 6.

Spread out, aoes would hit less of you and people would be more likely to use single target abilities, reducing the incoming damage and, in itself, the need to use barrier in the first place.

These points, aside from the ultimate aspect, are valid for all buffs and heals.
They just aren't meant as sustainable tools but as reactive tools when applicable.

The first time you will stack without target caps, you will get aoe focused enough to negate any advantages you gained, and then take some more damage you would not have received.

It's not worth it without incredibly high dodge chances.

MrMT

trimsic_ESO wrote: »

In ESO, you can chain cast PBAOE damage, without taking any risk, as long as you are under the protection of immovable.

It's so sad, so sad

With vampire, you can do it while invisible.

With streak, you can effectively teleport in, go invisible, wipe an entire raid, then teleport out without the slightest bit of personal risk.

It's absurd.