Better group leader or better player to win in PVP?

demustacio

Hello guys,

I know there are lots of factor that dictates the PVP, but today i'd like to start a poll and a discussion on which is more the more important factor to be winning in PVP, better group leaders or better player? What do you guys think?

I personally think that better group leaders are more important and needed to win PVP. With skills to manage the group movement, coordination, anticipation, and planning they can turn the tide of battles. I have seen an out-numbered faction capturing keeps and winning battles against a faction with more population with their creative tactics and coordination with the group. Of course being a leader in PVP is hard, most of the time people won't really listen to the leader and just went off on their own only to be killed. The leader -- in my opinion -- need to have charisma in order to make the group members listen to the leader, even when a questionable order has been given out. Thus they need to have the ability to make some tough calls that normal people won't think of.

Don't get me wrong, better players are important as well to win in PVP. With better players the faction can easily gain ground against other faction, kill zergs easily, and win battles. But if the good players are all out there soloing cyrodiil, can the faction win against other faction? Okay, even if these 'better' players are grouped together with a leader that is not competent, will they be able to out smart an enemy group with smart and creative leader?

Well, at least those are my opinion. I'd like to hear yours

Regards,
demustacio

PS: sorry if i don't make sense, english is not my first language

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, concerned citizens can change world. Indeed it is the only thing that ever has.” – Margaret Mead

Minno

Better players

3rd option should have said "both".
It's a " chicken or the egg" argument because you can have an amazing leader, but if the players are low lvl gear-less noobs you can kiss any success goodbye. And obviously vice-versa.

Moral of the story? L2P lol

DannyLV702

Better players

All the way. There is a really good leader I've seen, whose team works in synchronization at all times because the leader really knows what he's doing. they still got wiped by a group of good players though. Better players will always win.

Cathexis

zerg zerg zerg zerg zerg zerg

Leaders are only as strong as the coordination of their followers.

That said, all you need is a zerg. Leading just allows you to compensate for fewer players.

Also I would not confuse leading and zerging with being a skilled player. There are lots of good leaders out there who are crap players without a group.

thelordoffelines

zerg zerg zerg zerg zerg zerg

Why lead when you can just get more players? Why learn to play when more players is always the best strategy?

lolo_01b16_ESO

zerg zerg zerg zerg zerg zerg

No matter how good you as player are or how advanced your group leader is, with the current combat system there will be always point where the enemy zerg is to big to handle it.

kojou

Better group leaders

I think a combination of a good leader that knows the group and the groups limitations will be able to choose appropriate battles and win them.

Some battles should be recognized as beyond the groups capabilities (outnumbered, out-geared, out-skilled, etc), but all in all if a leader can position the group, know when to apply aggression, and when to fall back they can take on much larger groups and win more than they lose.

I have been in so many disorganized groups full of decent players that accomplished nothing, so I would take a good leader and players that listen to said leader over more skilled players any day.

eliisra

zerg zerg zerg zerg zerg zerg

One raid with good players and good leader, cant cover an entire map. Numbers will always win campaigns.

When it comes to actual combat, there's also a breaking point now when a skill+ tactic just cant beat bigger numbers. They will revive faster than you can kill them of, for once. They will place new siege, faster than you can burn or kill.

Also the massive lag that occurs in large battles, highly benefits raw numbers. One reason is how mobility goes kaput. Smaller forces needs to outmanoeuvre zergs and siege if they want to stay alive. In lag they cant. Than there's skills not working when they should go of, making coordinated nukes and focusing as a team, totally unreliable.

But with a massive zerg backing you up, there's no need to coordinate movement or dmg, so lag isn't a gamebreaker (just annoying). Keep burning and pewpew'ing, eventually the enemy breaks.

RAGUNAnoOne

Better players

As much as I hate to say it no matter how good a leader is the team is only as good as it's weakest link, if the leader fails the other players have to be counted on to pick up the slack. same for if another player fails. in a sense both are equally important...and in this game so are zergs...

Xexpo

Define the "to win" part of the poll question

Do you mean an open-field fight of similar numbers?
a keep Defense or Offense?
Scroll capping?
Emperor crowning?
Campaign victory for your alliance?

Opux

Better players

Leading isn't as hard as you make it out to be. You need 4 commands:

1. Follow crown.
2. Stealth.
3. Prox det.
4. Barrier.

Congratulations, you've reached the pinacle of so-called "group tactics" that bad individual players mistake for skill.

Bashev

zerg zerg zerg zerg zerg zerg

With AoE caps and no dynamic ultimates size matters.

WRX

Better group leaders

That's pretty impossible to answer.

If the players aren't the best, then a great lead can help make up for that.

If the players are top players, then a bad lead will sink the group.

You need both.

CatchMeTrolling

Better group leaders

I'd say better alliance leaders, this game is about taking and defending basically. A good leader will make bad players look good and not only that rally them enough to wipe...the other Zerg or bigger group.

Actually the biggest problem with this game is it lacks decent leaders and promotes "mlg" and "but can you 1vx" mindsets.

Jura23

Better players

Good group leader is somebody who isn't good enough to call himself good player.

driosketch

Better players

The best leaders in the world can't lead a herd of cats. The players need to understand their skills, their gear, and have the situational awareness both in the immediate fight and the map at large. Good players will be where they need to be, and will know better than to follow a bad leader.

If pugs are capable, they will end a ball of prox det players, or whatever passes for leadership and tactics in the current meta. I've been a part of that more than once. I wish I always had that level of player to run with, would never see an AP farm again.

CatchMeTrolling

Better group leaders

Jura23 wrote: »

Good group leader is somebody who isn't good enough to call himself good player.

Lol I run solo and find this funny...

Ffastyl

Better players

I know that group leaders command a powerful force on the battlefield, coordinating all players on their side. But a group leader is nothing if no one decides to follow. A leader can be amazing as both a commander and a combatant but without the loyalty of the troops, it's just one more pug barking orders at other pugs.

Daraugh

Better players

If you're an awesome leader but the players are too busy dancing in a fountain in the latest ball gowns, your skill won't matter much. Unless you're a great lute player too...

demustacio

Better group leaders

By most of your argument, the better players are in favour for winning PVP -- oh by winning pvp i mean winning the campaign -- @kaer426.

Hmmm it seems most of you are in favour on the "better players" choice. I still think that better group leaders are the one who makes their faction win. Deciding when to strike, for example: "it's about 15 minutes until the next score evaluation, let's capture ____ or let's defend ____". Or near the ending of the campaign, with 3 hours left and their faction are losing, they decide to do a scroll or emp push so in the start of the new campaign their faction will have the upper hand to accumulate more points before the other factions.

KillKapps

Better players

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I'd say better alliance leaders, this game is about taking and defending basically. A good leader will make bad players look good and not only that rally them enough to wipe...the other Zerg or bigger group.

Actually the biggest problem with this game is it lacks decent leaders and promotes "mlg" and "but can you 1vx" mindsets.

Better alliance leaders. That's why I ran your *** back then.

KillKapps

Better players

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

Jura23 wrote: »

Good group leader is somebody who isn't good enough to call himself good player.

Lol I run solo and find this funny...

Once again, running solo is completely different from being ungrouped in a zerg... learn the difference please.

CatchMeTrolling

Better group leaders

KillKapps wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I'd say better alliance leaders, this game is about taking and defending basically. A good leader will make bad players look good and not only that rally them enough to wipe...the other Zerg or bigger group.

Actually the biggest problem with this game is it lacks decent leaders and promotes "mlg" and "but can you 1vx" mindsets.

Better alliance leaders. That's why I ran your *** back then.

You stayed at your gate.

CatchMeTrolling

Better group leaders

KillKapps wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

Jura23 wrote: »

Good group leader is somebody who isn't good enough to call himself good player.

Lol I run solo and find this funny...

Once again, running solo is completely different from being ungrouped in a zerg... learn the difference please.

I don't run where the zergs go, I run wherever the action is, I even play in other alliances buff servers. You haven't seen me play in months so you sound stupid just from that reason.

CatchMeTrolling

Better group leaders

Actually @KillKapps if you're so "good" come play in haderus and not against pve players in buff campaigns btw haderus is completely DC dominated right now you try hard

KillKapps

Better players

Wouldn't that just mean you're playing in a DC buff server @CatchMeTrolling ?

CatchMeTrolling

Better group leaders

KillKapps wrote: »

Wouldn't that just mean you're playing in a DC buff server @CatchMeTrolling ?

No it means I'm playing in the last sever where its actually pop locked during prime time. DC still has the most numbers and AD does nothing. Plus we're usually getting jumped if they are doing something such as today when they're both at our home keeps...

KillKapps

Better players

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

Actually @KillKapps if you're so "good" come play in haderus and not against pve players in buff campaigns btw haderus is completely DC dominated right now you try hard

Sounds like a challenge. I accept. When the campaigns reset, you better be there.

ThePonzzz

You need both a good leader and a good group. If crown is just all over the place, no real direction, group won't work well. If people are dying and no one is rezzing, the group won't work well. If people fall behind or need help, and crown ignores, the group won't work well.

Rylana

Better group leaders

A good leader can take even the ragtag and make them do amazing things.

Even the best players, without coordination, will be cut to pieces without someone to direct the objective.

KillKapps

Better players

Rylana wrote: »

A good leader can take even the ragtag and make them do amazing things.

Even the best players, without coordination, will be cut to pieces without someone to direct the objective.

That's zerg zerg zerg zerg zerg zerg though. Good leaders leading ragtag is just a zerg.