alberichtano wrote: »So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.
gariondavey wrote: »Objective players think they can just run to where there isn't any fighting !
gariondavey wrote: »Objective players think they can just run to where there isn't any fighting !
Objective players are not trying to run away from anyone. They just like a BG match with more depth to it, one that requires strategy and a higher level of game play than just DM.
alberichtano wrote: »So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.
alberichtano wrote: »So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.
Ruining it?
The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.
So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.
dinokstrunz wrote: »alberichtano wrote: »So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.
Ruining it?
The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.
So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.
exactly this, how on earth do people not understand the most effective strategy is to actually PvP?
_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »dinokstrunz wrote: »alberichtano wrote: »So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.
Ruining it?
The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.
So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.
exactly this, how on earth do people not understand the most effective strategy is to actually PvP?
experienced players know that fighting for kills IS part of the picture with objective based maps, its the same in any other AAAa mmorpg out there. , The issue is some DM only fans struggle with the concept of fighting for kill while also juggling and reacting to other objectives.
dinokstrunz wrote: »_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »dinokstrunz wrote: »alberichtano wrote: »So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.
Ruining it?
The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.
So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.
exactly this, how on earth do people not understand the most effective strategy is to actually PvP?
experienced players know that fighting for kills IS part of the picture with objective based maps, its the same in any other AAAa mmorpg out there. , The issue is some DM only fans struggle with the concept of fighting for kill while also juggling and reacting to other objectives.
There is no struggling of the concept. There's just no reason to do so. BGs are majorly unrewarding and people just want to PvP. At the end of the day this is ZoS problem resolve and those who are playing DM in objective and doing the right thing as its an effective strategy. I've won plenty of objective games just by focusing on kills, you can't lose flags if the opponents are dead.
_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »dinokstrunz wrote: »_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »dinokstrunz wrote: »alberichtano wrote: »So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.
Ruining it?
The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.
So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.
exactly this, how on earth do people not understand the most effective strategy is to actually PvP?
experienced players know that fighting for kills IS part of the picture with objective based maps, its the same in any other AAAa mmorpg out there. , The issue is some DM only fans struggle with the concept of fighting for kill while also juggling and reacting to other objectives.
There is no struggling of the concept. There's just no reason to do so. BGs are majorly unrewarding and people just want to PvP. At the end of the day this is ZoS problem resolve and those who are playing DM in objective and doing the right thing as its an effective strategy. I've won plenty of objective games just by focusing on kills, you can't lose flags if the opponents are dead.
oh there is struggling, DMers are evidently following a simplistic single-tactic script in their head because it suits them, applying tactics that are often sub optimal but validating through confirmation bias. They are also clearly ignoring the team tactics at times while they are at it.
dinokstrunz wrote: »_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »dinokstrunz wrote: »_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »dinokstrunz wrote: »alberichtano wrote: »So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.
Ruining it?
The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.
So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.
exactly this, how on earth do people not understand the most effective strategy is to actually PvP?
experienced players know that fighting for kills IS part of the picture with objective based maps, its the same in any other AAAa mmorpg out there. , The issue is some DM only fans struggle with the concept of fighting for kill while also juggling and reacting to other objectives.
There is no struggling of the concept. There's just no reason to do so. BGs are majorly unrewarding and people just want to PvP. At the end of the day this is ZoS problem resolve and those who are playing DM in objective and doing the right thing as its an effective strategy. I've won plenty of objective games just by focusing on kills, you can't lose flags if the opponents are dead.
oh there is struggling, DMers are evidently following a simplistic single-tactic script in their head because it suits them, applying tactics that are often sub optimal but validating through confirmation bias. They are also clearly ignoring the team tactics at times while they are at it.
Do you even play BGs? I've done thousands of BGs and in Solo games people barely communicate with each other. The only time I've seen real organised team tactics is in premades who play Deathmatch which requires real coordination, reaction and position awareness. This whole "DM is simple minded" logic is really quite laughable when you get down into the thick of it.
Since you are on about tactics can you show me where there is any written or video guides for objective game modes in BGs? I'll wait.
gariondavey wrote: »I think some of you are missing the 2nd of the 3 options up top.
Objectives can be fun in bgs, and many people who play dm feel this way, but the way eso does it is wrong.
No other pvp game has 3 team capture the flag, etc. There are 2 teams. They have to fight each other in order to win the game.
Objectives in eso are not like that. I've been in capture the relic games where someone does 0 damage, 0 healing, 0 kda and run 5 flags in 2 minutes.
If you had 2 teams, it would be an excellent game mode. A throwback to warsong gulch days.
Or 3 teams but 1 flag in the middle that you have to get to your base.
Bottom line is many of the objective modes discourage actual pvp. This does a disservice to players who will never develop actual pvp skills other than "oh enemies there - that's bad - I'll go somewhere else". If zos reworked objective modes they could bring the 2 player groups together into something everyone can appreciate.
Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »alberichtano wrote: »So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.
Players farming players out of protest is nothing new. They did it before the queue changes as well. But yes, the community likes to keep shooting itself in the foot.
dinokstrunz wrote: »Do you even play BGs? I've done thousands of BGs and in Solo games people barely communicate with each other. The only time I've seen real organised team tactics is in premades who play Deathmatch which requires real coordination, reaction and position awareness. This whole "DM is simple minded" logic is really quite laughable when you get down into the thick of it.
Since you are on about tactics can you show me where there is any written or video guides for objective game modes in BGs? I'll wait.
gariondavey wrote: »I think some of you are missing the 2nd of the 3 options up top.
Objectives can be fun in bgs, and many people who play dm feel this way, but the way eso does it is wrong.
No other pvp game has 3 team capture the flag, etc. There are 2 teams. They have to fight each other in order to win the game.
Objectives in eso are not like that. I've been in capture the relic games where someone does 0 damage, 0 healing, 0 kda and run 5 flags in 2 minutes.
If you had 2 teams, it would be an excellent game mode. A throwback to warsong gulch days.
Or 3 teams but 1 flag in the middle that you have to get to your base.
Bottom line is many of the objective modes discourage actual pvp. This does a disservice to players who will never develop actual pvp skills other than "oh enemies there - that's bad - I'll go somewhere else". If zos reworked objective modes they could bring the 2 player groups together into something everyone can appreciate.
_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »dinokstrunz wrote: »alberichtano wrote: »So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.
Ruining it?
The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.
So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.
exactly this, how on earth do people not understand the most effective strategy is to actually PvP?
experienced players know that fighting for kills IS part of the picture with objective based maps, its the same in any other AAAa mmorpg out there. , The issue is some DM only fans struggle with the concept of fighting for kill while also juggling and reacting to other objectives.
gariondavey wrote: »I think some of you are missing the 2nd of the 3 options up top.
Objectives can be fun in bgs, and many people who play dm feel this way, but the way eso does it is wrong.
No other pvp game has 3 team capture the flag, etc. There are 2 teams. They have to fight each other in order to win the game.
Objectives in eso are not like that. I've been in capture the relic games where someone does 0 damage, 0 healing, 0 kda and run 5 flags in 2 minutes.
If you had 2 teams, it would be an excellent game mode. A throwback to warsong gulch days.
Or 3 teams but 1 flag in the middle that you have to get to your base.
Bottom line is many of the objective modes discourage actual pvp. This does a disservice to players who will never develop actual pvp skills other than "oh enemies there - that's bad - I'll go somewhere else". If zos reworked objective modes they could bring the 2 player groups together into something everyone can appreciate.
The only problem is then one alliance will always miss. Or they need to just do battleground not involving alliances. Like a sort of training ......
PhoenixGrey wrote: »_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »dinokstrunz wrote: »alberichtano wrote: »So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.
Ruining it?
The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.
So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.
exactly this, how on earth do people not understand the most effective strategy is to actually PvP?
experienced players know that fighting for kills IS part of the picture with objective based maps, its the same in any other AAAa mmorpg out there. , The issue is some DM only fans struggle with the concept of fighting for kill while also juggling and reacting to other objectives.
You do realize fighting is optional in winning objective games right ?
There is no objective mode where you need to fight in order to win. Which is the whole reason why it should not be in the PVP category
Necrotech_Master wrote: »before all this nonsense with the queues