Would ESO AvA be better without large ball groups?

Soul_Demon · February 2019

redspecter23 wrote: »

Ball groups in theory are fine. However, there should be more disadvantages to running in a large ball group and there currently are not. Highly skilled players can combat ball groups with smaller teams, but it's still an uphill battle and pug groups will simply have no chance against an organized ball group, even if they have double their numbers.

Give us more tools to break up ball groups or punish players running those playstyles in some way so that it's still an option, but there is more risk involved.

Have proxy det scale up to 48 players (standard scaling up to 6 players, then exponential scaling up to 48 players). Maybe have other abilities scale up depending on the number of targets hit. We have some options currently, but they are limited.

Fighting a skilled ball group takes far more skill and coordination than is required to run in a ball group and my thought is that it should be the reverse.

The things that make a group better than large mass' of pugs or even multiple small man groups is not coded.....its because they communicate, test often, practice together, formulate strategies and perfect movement. This takes an enormous amount of time, dedication and effort that is dismissed by those being farmed as "sure I could do that, but I am waaaayyyy too good now to do it. So I refuse to do it." As a result they will continue to be farmed and lose.

Every time you attempt to do none of those things and think there should be a "hey use this I win button" you are just fooling yourself. I am sure most of us would not do anything but laugh if this were a football forum where people who didn't speak, work together and put in the time demanded the NFL change the rules so that a random grouping of football players could always win over a professional team playing with some new rule or standard. In effect, that is what is being asked for here.

Anrose · February 2019

I think you guys would be surprised to learn how much feedback some GMs of very high level PvP guilds who run ball groups have given directly to ZOS in order to nerf ball groups.

frostz417 · February 2019

Soul_Demon wrote: »

redspecter23 wrote: »

Ball groups in theory are fine. However, there should be more disadvantages to running in a large ball group and there currently are not. Highly skilled players can combat ball groups with smaller teams, but it's still an uphill battle and pug groups will simply have no chance against an organized ball group, even if they have double their numbers.

Give us more tools to break up ball groups or punish players running those playstyles in some way so that it's still an option, but there is more risk involved.

Have proxy det scale up to 48 players (standard scaling up to 6 players, then exponential scaling up to 48 players). Maybe have other abilities scale up depending on the number of targets hit. We have some options currently, but they are limited.

Fighting a skilled ball group takes far more skill and coordination than is required to run in a ball group and my thought is that it should be the reverse.

The things that make a group better than large mass' of pugs or even multiple small man groups is not coded.....its because they communicate, test often, practice together, formulate strategies and perfect movement. This takes an enormous amount of time, dedication and effort that is dismissed by those being farmed as "sure I could do that, but I am waaaayyyy too good now to do it. So I refuse to do it." As a result they will continue to be farmed and lose.

Every time you attempt to do none of those things and think there should be a "hey use this I win button" you are just fooling yourself. I am sure most of us would not do anything but laugh if this were a football forum where people who didn't speak, work together and put in the time demanded the NFL change the rules so that a random grouping of football players could always win over a professional team playing with some new rule or standard. In effect, that is what is being asked for here.

Well said

VaranisArano · February 2019

redspecter23 wrote: »

Fighting a skilled ball group takes far more skill and coordination than is required to run in a ball group and my thought is that it should be the reverse.

Um.

Well, if you are going to fight said organized raid in a smaller group, well yes, it will take more skill and coordination because you are fighting outnumbered vs a coordinated team. Cyrodiil is designed for groups of 2 to 24 players, and so small groups are obviously at a disadvantage compared to groups of 12 to 24 players.

And if you are fighting in a mass of loosely organized PUGs, well yes, it is going to take those PUGs working together to take down the opposing organized group. That's going to take skill in herding cats or PUGs to get a clue to make that happen.

Now, if you want to be really effective vs an organized raid? Play in another organized raid. They've got the tools and tactics to face each other and the numbers to make them effective.

On the other hand, if you want to face them outnumbered or with unreliable PUGs at your side, I'm not sure why you are shocked that it takes skill to make up the disparity in numbers or teamwork. It seems to me like thats a natural extension of Cyrodiil's design for combat.

Sandman929 · February 2019

I just wish more groups were interested in playing the game objectives, but there's nothing any of us can do about other people's motivations. The map is stale, the keep fights are often an invitation to a faction stacking lagfest, and there is very little incentive to help your faction or win campaigns; so I get it, but I wish it weren't so.
Group play wouldn't have the stigma that it has now if so much of it wasn't about simply farming other players and groups were seen as a positive force for their factions.

ToRelax · February 2019

.

Soul_Demon wrote: »

redspecter23 wrote: »

Ball groups in theory are fine. However, there should be more disadvantages to running in a large ball group and there currently are not. Highly skilled players can combat ball groups with smaller teams, but it's still an uphill battle and pug groups will simply have no chance against an organized ball group, even if they have double their numbers.

Give us more tools to break up ball groups or punish players running those playstyles in some way so that it's still an option, but there is more risk involved.

Have proxy det scale up to 48 players (standard scaling up to 6 players, then exponential scaling up to 48 players). Maybe have other abilities scale up depending on the number of targets hit. We have some options currently, but they are limited.

Fighting a skilled ball group takes far more skill and coordination than is required to run in a ball group and my thought is that it should be the reverse.

The things that make a group better than large mass' of pugs or even multiple small man groups is not coded.....its because they communicate, test often, practice together, formulate strategies and perfect movement. This takes an enormous amount of time, dedication and effort that is dismissed by those being farmed as "sure I could do that, but I am waaaayyyy too good now to do it. So I refuse to do it." As a result they will continue to be farmed and lose.

Every time you attempt to do none of those things and think there should be a "hey use this I win button" you are just fooling yourself. I am sure most of us would not do anything but laugh if this were a football forum where people who didn't speak, work together and put in the time demanded the NFL change the rules so that a random grouping of football players could always win over a professional team playing with some new rule or standard. In effect, that is what is being asked for here.

Alright, let's look at some systems which influence the meta in favour of ball groups.

1.) Smart Healing
Makes AoE heals far more effective in groups exceeding the heal's AoE cap.
Makes all heals more effective compared to offensive single target abilities when used in a large group that makes targeting difficult.

2.) Limited bar space/single purpose skills
Gives a massive advantage to large groups who stick close enough together to support each other directly at all times.
Dramatically lower effectiveness of any player trying to be effective in different settings, thus pitting ball groups against unprepared enemies.

3.) Scaling support sets/skills
Provide an inherently higher efficiency to specialized builds in ball groups than a small or spread out group would receive even when using the same builds.

4.) Power disparity between PBAoEs and ranged AoEs / effective splash damage being tied to killing blows
Gives an advantage to groups sticking together in one spot in order to deal AoE damage, rather than spreading out.
Diminishes the defensive disadvantage against AoEs created by stacking up.

5.) Removal of ground effects via Negate
Creates a situation in which negatable ground based AoEs don't function well as area denial, giving an advantage to groups centered around PBAoE (which stack to deal damage), as you don't need to stack players to stack ground effects.

6.) Earthgore
Carries anyone, but more efficient in stacked large groups.

But yeah, these things aren't coded, really. They're more a result of the enormous amount of time, dedication and effort put in by ball groups.

DivineFirstYOLO · February 2019

Iskiab wrote: »

BS! The reason Ball Groups have existed for so long is as soon as a counter is made to them they cry on the forums and it gets quickly nerfed. Time stop, inevitable detonation, etc... Anything that effects clustered groups from range is cried about until it's gone or ineffective. The only reason why proximity detonation is still around is because ball groups use them.

Ball Groups suck, big time. They're a one trick pony - first to negate wins. What's fun about large scale pvp are things like keep fights where you have all three factions fighting at once, and multiple guilds of each faction. What ruins is is when it becomes about who negates first and coordinating dawnbreakers for burst. It's the prolonged engagements that are fun.

What the devs should do is start ignoring the people who are trying to steer the game mechanics to their advantage.

Did you know you can counter negate them? Stay away from your zerg and counter negate the ball group?
Getting killed by burst damage? - How about getting more resistance, major protection, shields, crit resistance, major vitality, more hp and keeping healing springs up even before you enter a certain area?

Ball groups play to fight massive zergs or other ball groups (talking about the decent ones, not the bad pieces of sh*t that hunt 2-3 people in the middle of nowhere), if they don't find anyone to fight they are getting bored and log off.
Think about it.

Derra · February 2019

The recent pvp events performance - as a consequence from ballgrps not being able to play all on the same servers - strongly indicates that pvp would be better without anything resembling that playstyle.

It´s not purely ballgrps but also when you have enough brainbugs in the faction zerg to keep it alive and in relatively tight formation.

All of this needs to go. Aoe buttonmashing (heal-, support and damage abilities) has to be exterminated as a valid strategy for pvp encounters of any kind.
Just as only clicking left mouse in siege.

frostz417 · February 2019

Derra wrote: »

The recent pvp events performance - as a consequence from ballgrps not being able to play all on the same servers - strongly indicates that pvp would be better without anything resembling that playstyle.

It´s not purely ballgrps but also when you have enough brainbugs in the faction zerg to keep it alive and in relatively tight formation.

All of this needs to go. Aoe buttonmashing (heal-, support and damage abilities) has to be exterminated as a valid strategy for pvp encounters of any kind.
Just as only clicking left mouse in siege.

Ball groups don’t contribute to lag. The 60 man zerg made of tanks and healbots do...

Astien · February 2019

I just want to clarify. ESO PVP would not be better without raids. Like that's definitely part of the game. However, I do think it would be better without "Ball Groups" that never go further than 10 squares away from each other, that all use prox det, or the same skill, all using the same ultis IE. Destro ult ETC. Unfortunately the game caters to these people running in a ball and using AOE skills to wipe larger groups.

I think the game would be more fun if some AOE skills were nerfed and people had to kind of rely on Single Target or DOTs to bring people down. If perhaps a raid leader needed to call out names to bring down healers, tanks High damage dealers ETC. It would take MUCH more skill and I think would be alot more fun for everyone. EVEN the people in the ball groups who are farming AP would have fun. Of course winning is fun, thats the human condition and i'm not here to dispute that. but I think the way that i've mentioned people in general would have alot more fun both winning and loosing.

Soul_Demon · February 2019

ToRelax wrote: »

.

Soul_Demon wrote: »

redspecter23 wrote: »

Ball groups in theory are fine. However, there should be more disadvantages to running in a large ball group and there currently are not. Highly skilled players can combat ball groups with smaller teams, but it's still an uphill battle and pug groups will simply have no chance against an organized ball group, even if they have double their numbers.

Give us more tools to break up ball groups or punish players running those playstyles in some way so that it's still an option, but there is more risk involved.

Have proxy det scale up to 48 players (standard scaling up to 6 players, then exponential scaling up to 48 players). Maybe have other abilities scale up depending on the number of targets hit. We have some options currently, but they are limited.

Fighting a skilled ball group takes far more skill and coordination than is required to run in a ball group and my thought is that it should be the reverse.

The things that make a group better than large mass' of pugs or even multiple small man groups is not coded.....its because they communicate, test often, practice together, formulate strategies and perfect movement. This takes an enormous amount of time, dedication and effort that is dismissed by those being farmed as "sure I could do that, but I am waaaayyyy too good now to do it. So I refuse to do it." As a result they will continue to be farmed and lose.

Every time you attempt to do none of those things and think there should be a "hey use this I win button" you are just fooling yourself. I am sure most of us would not do anything but laugh if this were a football forum where people who didn't speak, work together and put in the time demanded the NFL change the rules so that a random grouping of football players could always win over a professional team playing with some new rule or standard. In effect, that is what is being asked for here.

Alright, let's look at some systems which influence the meta in favour of ball groups.

1.) Smart Healing
Makes AoE heals far more effective in groups exceeding the heal's AoE cap.
Makes all heals more effective compared to offensive single target abilities when used in a large group that makes targeting difficult.

2.) Limited bar space/single purpose skills
Gives a massive advantage to large groups who stick close enough together to support each other directly at all times.
Dramatically lower effectiveness of any player trying to be effective in different settings, thus pitting ball groups against unprepared enemies.

3.) Scaling support sets/skills
Provide an inherently higher efficiency to specialized builds in ball groups than a small or spread out group would receive even when using the same builds.

4.) Power disparity between PBAoEs and ranged AoEs / effective splash damage being tied to killing blows
Gives an advantage to groups sticking together in one spot in order to deal AoE damage, rather than spreading out.
Diminishes the defensive disadvantage against AoEs created by stacking up.

5.) Removal of ground effects via Negate
Creates a situation in which negatable ground based AoEs don't function well as area denial, giving an advantage to groups centered around PBAoE (which stack to deal damage), as you don't need to stack players to stack ground effects.

6.) Earthgore
Carries anyone, but more efficient in stacked large groups.

But yeah, these things aren't coded, really. They're more a result of the enormous amount of time, dedication and effort put in by ball groups.

1. How does 'exceeding the cap' make something more effective that you state has been exceeded? And why would you compare single target offensive abilities to AOE heals? They are not the same thing and are not reasonably close to one another.

2. Bar space limits each and every player, not any one over another. What you suggest is "coordinated playing' is better than randomized players just throwing what they interpret as needed unreliably. Not really a solid argument that disputes what I said, in fact it supports the 'practice' and 'communicate' portions.

3. Statement doesn't 'show' anything....basically just 'saying' it works that way without back up of any kind. If anything you suggest being near to each other is beneficial where being apart is not.....Yeah. If some guy is de-buffed by a random, he is STILL de-buffed, stunned or damaged if you hit him from another location, the closer you are when that happens is of benefit. The faster you can respond is of benefit. But its not exclusive to a group, any random can do this too. They can also hit someone who was hit by someone else already.

4. Damage is damage....when, how and in what situation you use one vs the other makes all the difference. Just because one skill works well in one scenario does not mean it should work for ALL of them. Every player makes choices for what they WANT to load on those bars, and each choice has a cost associated. Again, you support the 'test, practice, communicate' portions. Every pick on a bar means one less slot for 'other' stuff...for all of the players.

5. What does removal of ground effects with negate have to do with one play style vs another? Seems random skill you seem to not like is just kind of thrown in. But of course Negate is Ulti and MUCH more expensive then the ground effects....so how is that a comparison of how the game "meta" is being supported exactly? Are you claiming one guy should have ground effect that has no counter and should kill all in it instantly? Don't follow you here.

6. Never used it in group as tactic and more than likely never would....as a build, sure...but never as tactical base for building a group or as only mechanism for survival for the entire group. Its RNG- I dislike all RNG type 'triggers' for healing and always will. Who uses a single monster set as the answer to how to heal players?

Ruckly · February 2019

I think it is a question of extremes that should be asked. One extreme being very mobile tanky heal stacking ball group and the other being a 1 shot KO coordinated spike magblade group. And the question should be how extreme should those groups be. Both can be countered. If you have a group full of sorcerers you can fire off one negate after another. That would be another extreme which is extremely boring.

One problem with fighting ball groups is magicka toons are better equipped than stamina toons typically. Werewolves might work well and some super tanks might work well. Magicka toons have immobilizes, pulls, purges; stuff to throw off the rhythm of a ball group and maybe get a kill. On a stamina toon you stand around waiting for a negate or waiting for someone to pull off a pull-->immobilize and then pounce on the stray. I suppose people fighting ball groups is sort of like hyenas chasing goats.

Gnortranermara · February 2019

ESO is best when there's a variety of activities available for groups of all sizes, not just your preferred size.

zyk · February 2019

SidewalkChalk5 wrote: »

ESO is best when there's a variety of activities available for groups of all sizes, not just your preferred size.

Again, this isn't a poll about group size. It's about a specific large group playstyle.

ToRelax · February 2019

Soul_Demon wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

.

Soul_Demon wrote: »

redspecter23 wrote: »

Ball groups in theory are fine. However, there should be more disadvantages to running in a large ball group and there currently are not. Highly skilled players can combat ball groups with smaller teams, but it's still an uphill battle and pug groups will simply have no chance against an organized ball group, even if they have double their numbers.

Give us more tools to break up ball groups or punish players running those playstyles in some way so that it's still an option, but there is more risk involved.

Have proxy det scale up to 48 players (standard scaling up to 6 players, then exponential scaling up to 48 players). Maybe have other abilities scale up depending on the number of targets hit. We have some options currently, but they are limited.

Fighting a skilled ball group takes far more skill and coordination than is required to run in a ball group and my thought is that it should be the reverse.

The things that make a group better than large mass' of pugs or even multiple small man groups is not coded.....its because they communicate, test often, practice together, formulate strategies and perfect movement. This takes an enormous amount of time, dedication and effort that is dismissed by those being farmed as "sure I could do that, but I am waaaayyyy too good now to do it. So I refuse to do it." As a result they will continue to be farmed and lose.

Every time you attempt to do none of those things and think there should be a "hey use this I win button" you are just fooling yourself. I am sure most of us would not do anything but laugh if this were a football forum where people who didn't speak, work together and put in the time demanded the NFL change the rules so that a random grouping of football players could always win over a professional team playing with some new rule or standard. In effect, that is what is being asked for here.

Alright, let's look at some systems which influence the meta in favour of ball groups.

1.) Smart Healing
Makes AoE heals far more effective in groups exceeding the heal's AoE cap.
Makes all heals more effective compared to offensive single target abilities when used in a large group that makes targeting difficult.

2.) Limited bar space/single purpose skills
Gives a massive advantage to large groups who stick close enough together to support each other directly at all times.
Dramatically lower effectiveness of any player trying to be effective in different settings, thus pitting ball groups against unprepared enemies.

3.) Scaling support sets/skills
Provide an inherently higher efficiency to specialized builds in ball groups than a small or spread out group would receive even when using the same builds.

4.) Power disparity between PBAoEs and ranged AoEs / effective splash damage being tied to killing blows
Gives an advantage to groups sticking together in one spot in order to deal AoE damage, rather than spreading out.
Diminishes the defensive disadvantage against AoEs created by stacking up.

5.) Removal of ground effects via Negate
Creates a situation in which negatable ground based AoEs don't function well as area denial, giving an advantage to groups centered around PBAoE (which stack to deal damage), as you don't need to stack players to stack ground effects.

6.) Earthgore
Carries anyone, but more efficient in stacked large groups.

But yeah, these things aren't coded, really. They're more a result of the enormous amount of time, dedication and effort put in by ball groups.

1. How does 'exceeding the cap' make something more effective that you state has been exceeded? And why would you compare single target offensive abilities to AOE heals? They are not the same thing and are not reasonably close to one another.

2. Bar space limits each and every player, not any one over another. What you suggest is "coordinated playing' is better than randomized players just throwing what they interpret as needed unreliably. Not really a solid argument that disputes what I said, in fact it supports the 'practice' and 'communicate' portions.

3. Statement doesn't 'show' anything....basically just 'saying' it works that way without back up of any kind. If anything you suggest being near to each other is beneficial where being apart is not.....Yeah. If some guy is de-buffed by a random, he is STILL de-buffed, stunned or damaged if you hit him from another location, the closer you are when that happens is of benefit. The faster you can respond is of benefit. But its not exclusive to a group, any random can do this too. They can also hit someone who was hit by someone else already.

4. Damage is damage....when, how and in what situation you use one vs the other makes all the difference. Just because one skill works well in one scenario does not mean it should work for ALL of them. Every player makes choices for what they WANT to load on those bars, and each choice has a cost associated. Again, you support the 'test, practice, communicate' portions. Every pick on a bar means one less slot for 'other' stuff...for all of the players.

5. What does removal of ground effects with negate have to do with one play style vs another? Seems random skill you seem to not like is just kind of thrown in. But of course Negate is Ulti and MUCH more expensive then the ground effects....so how is that a comparison of how the game "meta" is being supported exactly? Are you claiming one guy should have ground effect that has no counter and should kill all in it instantly? Don't follow you here.

6. Never used it in group as tactic and more than likely never would....as a build, sure...but never as tactical base for building a group or as only mechanism for survival for the entire group. Its RNG- I dislike all RNG type 'triggers' for healing and always will. Who uses a single monster set as the answer to how to heal players?

Well there seems to have been some trouble in understanding what I wrote. I'm going to assume you just read in bad faith, because that would just be embarrassing otherwise. With that being said, let's go over your replies again.

1.)
- Smart Healing is helping to mitigate the impact of the AoE healing cap. Not the AoE cap is helping to mitigate itself...
- I am comparing certain healing to certain damage skills to determine their effectiveness. What do you compare your healing values with, the enemy's heals or what?

2.)
This point has nothing to do with practice or skill in any way, it's about the amount of skill slots available to different group sizes and playstyles and how versatile they can be used.

3.)
It appears you didn't quite get the topic of this one. It's about scaling support. Scaling with players. Your own players.
Since you asked for back up: There's Rapid Maneuver, which is about to be nerfed again. You see, the more group mates are close to the caster, the more effective the skill becomes.

4.)
Are you talking about 2.) again? This one was about different types of AoE, how one is much more powerful than another, and what that means.

5.)
This isn't about what I like or not like, it's a list of mechanics contributing to the effectiveness of stacking up as part of large scale playstyle. This particular point is even about just part of one skill. There's also the unbreakable ranged AoE silence, which is very much not encouraging anyone to stack up.

6.)
It's funny how in this instance you didn't even oppose my point but still felt the need to protest somehow.

A bit sorry to OP for the snark; I don't want to endanger the topic, so I may decide not to reply again if there's no fruitful discussion coming out of this.

Nermy · February 2019

Soul_Demon wrote: »

redspecter23 wrote: »

Ball groups in theory are fine. However, there should be more disadvantages to running in a large ball group and there currently are not. Highly skilled players can combat ball groups with smaller teams, but it's still an uphill battle and pug groups will simply have no chance against an organized ball group, even if they have double their numbers.

Give us more tools to break up ball groups or punish players running those playstyles in some way so that it's still an option, but there is more risk involved.

Have proxy det scale up to 48 players (standard scaling up to 6 players, then exponential scaling up to 48 players). Maybe have other abilities scale up depending on the number of targets hit. We have some options currently, but they are limited.

Fighting a skilled ball group takes far more skill and coordination than is required to run in a ball group and my thought is that it should be the reverse.

The things that make a group better than large mass' of pugs or even multiple small man groups is not coded.....its because they communicate, test often, practice together, formulate strategies and perfect movement. This takes an enormous amount of time, dedication and effort that is dismissed by those being farmed as "sure I could do that, but I am waaaayyyy too good now to do it. So I refuse to do it." As a result they will continue to be farmed and lose.

Every time you attempt to do none of those things and think there should be a "hey use this I win button" you are just fooling yourself. I am sure most of us would not do anything but laugh if this were a football forum where people who didn't speak, work together and put in the time demanded the NFL change the rules so that a random grouping of football players could always win over a professional team playing with some new rule or standard. In effect, that is what is being asked for here.

This^^

It's taken a long time for my guild to get where it is today, lots of discussion around builds, roles and what skills to be used when. A lot of heartache and head scratching. We now consider ourselves to have a good guild raid due to us working hard as a team and a guild. We do not just turn up and go and fight, it takes lots of preparation, discussion and time.

If anyone thinks they can just walk into an organised group and be amazing, awesome and the dogs bollocks... sorry, doesn't work like that. It requires dedication and hard work.

Soul_Demon · February 2019

Was true the first time and even more so now.....oh how the times change here.

ToRelax wrote: »

Soul_Demon wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

.

Soul_Demon wrote: »

redspecter23 wrote: »

Ball groups in theory are fine. However, there should be more disadvantages to running in a large ball group and there currently are not. Highly skilled players can combat ball groups with smaller teams, but it's still an uphill battle and pug groups will simply have no chance against an organized ball group, even if they have double their numbers.

Give us more tools to break up ball groups or punish players running those playstyles in some way so that it's still an option, but there is more risk involved.

Have proxy det scale up to 48 players (standard scaling up to 6 players, then exponential scaling up to 48 players). Maybe have other abilities scale up depending on the number of targets hit. We have some options currently, but they are limited.

Fighting a skilled ball group takes far more skill and coordination than is required to run in a ball group and my thought is that it should be the reverse.

The things that make a group better than large mass' of pugs or even multiple small man groups is not coded.....its because they communicate, test often, practice together, formulate strategies and perfect movement. This takes an enormous amount of time, dedication and effort that is dismissed by those being farmed as "sure I could do that, but I am waaaayyyy too good now to do it. So I refuse to do it." As a result they will continue to be farmed and lose.

Every time you attempt to do none of those things and think there should be a "hey use this I win button" you are just fooling yourself. I am sure most of us would not do anything but laugh if this were a football forum where people who didn't speak, work together and put in the time demanded the NFL change the rules so that a random grouping of football players could always win over a professional team playing with some new rule or standard. In effect, that is what is being asked for here.

Alright, let's look at some systems which influence the meta in favour of ball groups.

1.) Smart Healing
Makes AoE heals far more effective in groups exceeding the heal's AoE cap.
Makes all heals more effective compared to offensive single target abilities when used in a large group that makes targeting difficult.

2.) Limited bar space/single purpose skills
Gives a massive advantage to large groups who stick close enough together to support each other directly at all times.
Dramatically lower effectiveness of any player trying to be effective in different settings, thus pitting ball groups against unprepared enemies.

3.) Scaling support sets/skills
Provide an inherently higher efficiency to specialized builds in ball groups than a small or spread out group would receive even when using the same builds.

4.) Power disparity between PBAoEs and ranged AoEs / effective splash damage being tied to killing blows
Gives an advantage to groups sticking together in one spot in order to deal AoE damage, rather than spreading out.
Diminishes the defensive disadvantage against AoEs created by stacking up.

5.) Removal of ground effects via Negate
Creates a situation in which negatable ground based AoEs don't function well as area denial, giving an advantage to groups centered around PBAoE (which stack to deal damage), as you don't need to stack players to stack ground effects.

6.) Earthgore
Carries anyone, but more efficient in stacked large groups.

But yeah, these things aren't coded, really. They're more a result of the enormous amount of time, dedication and effort put in by ball groups.

1. How does 'exceeding the cap' make something more effective that you state has been exceeded? And why would you compare single target offensive abilities to AOE heals? They are not the same thing and are not reasonably close to one another.

2. Bar space limits each and every player, not any one over another. What you suggest is "coordinated playing' is better than randomized players just throwing what they interpret as needed unreliably. Not really a solid argument that disputes what I said, in fact it supports the 'practice' and 'communicate' portions.

3. Statement doesn't 'show' anything....basically just 'saying' it works that way without back up of any kind. If anything you suggest being near to each other is beneficial where being apart is not.....Yeah. If some guy is de-buffed by a random, he is STILL de-buffed, stunned or damaged if you hit him from another location, the closer you are when that happens is of benefit. The faster you can respond is of benefit. But its not exclusive to a group, any random can do this too. They can also hit someone who was hit by someone else already.

4. Damage is damage....when, how and in what situation you use one vs the other makes all the difference. Just because one skill works well in one scenario does not mean it should work for ALL of them. Every player makes choices for what they WANT to load on those bars, and each choice has a cost associated. Again, you support the 'test, practice, communicate' portions. Every pick on a bar means one less slot for 'other' stuff...for all of the players.

5. What does removal of ground effects with negate have to do with one play style vs another? Seems random skill you seem to not like is just kind of thrown in. But of course Negate is Ulti and MUCH more expensive then the ground effects....so how is that a comparison of how the game "meta" is being supported exactly? Are you claiming one guy should have ground effect that has no counter and should kill all in it instantly? Don't follow you here.

6. Never used it in group as tactic and more than likely never would....as a build, sure...but never as tactical base for building a group or as only mechanism for survival for the entire group. Its RNG- I dislike all RNG type 'triggers' for healing and always will. Who uses a single monster set as the answer to how to heal players?

Well there seems to have been some trouble in understanding what I wrote. I'm going to assume you just read in bad faith, because that would just be embarrassing otherwise. With that being said, let's go over your replies again.

1.)
- Smart Healing is helping to mitigate the impact of the AoE healing cap. Not the AoE cap is helping to mitigate itself...
- I am comparing certain healing to certain damage skills to determine their effectiveness. What do you compare your healing values with, the enemy's heals or what?

2.)
This point has nothing to do with practice or skill in any way, it's about the amount of skill slots available to different group sizes and playstyles and how versatile they can be used.

3.)
It appears you didn't quite get the topic of this one. It's about scaling support. Scaling with players. Your own players.
Since you asked for back up: There's Rapid Maneuver, which is about to be nerfed again. You see, the more group mates are close to the caster, the more effective the skill becomes.

4.)
Are you talking about 2.) again? This one was about different types of AoE, how one is much more powerful than another, and what that means.

5.)
This isn't about what I like or not like, it's a list of mechanics contributing to the effectiveness of stacking up as part of large scale playstyle. This particular point is even about just part of one skill. There's also the unbreakable ranged AoE silence, which is very much not encouraging anyone to stack up.

6.)
It's funny how in this instance you didn't even oppose my point but still felt the need to protest somehow.

A bit sorry to OP for the snark; I don't want to endanger the topic, so I may decide not to reply again if there's no fruitful discussion coming out of this.

1. You said "Makes AoE heals far more effective in groups exceeding the heal's AoE cap." How does being in a group change the way heals works.....they are about proximity to those heals and knowing who has them and when they go down. Groups don't have a coded benift- coordination and communication does. And you would compare AOE heals to AOE damage....smart damage, where it hits all in proximity of the effect as heals do. So this is about effect of players playing in a coordinated fashion and knowing where heals are, not a coded benefit of the groups.

2. This doesn't favor the group but favors 'experience' to know what you will likely need and why- practice and playing with each other keeps you from loading up say one skill on every one causing overlap. Wasted slots. If you don't practice or communicate you don't know what others in pug groups are running.

3. You say "scaling' then don't show something that scales with anything. Rapids has a range and max number of people hit- again knowing where the ones who you are playing with makes the player who casts it effective or wasteful with its cost. Communication, practice. Needs to be mentioned a nice little test for all to know what it does, when it does it and how it can be removed.

4. Of course, and different types of AOE is something each player can use or not use. One working well in one case vs another is product of knowing when where and how to use each one to max effectiveness. Generally speaking groups are quite good a knowing when and where those are to be used. Random pug players load what they THINK will work well and are often very wrong. Practice, communicate, test. One is NOT the singular answer to anything, never will be. By having variations on skills ZOS does not code benefit to groups.

5. It isn't overpowered in any way....its expensive and there is direct counter to it that is not only cheap but take fractions of a second to do. As far as ranged unbreakable silence you will need to specify the skill specifically you are talking about.

6. Because to oppose the point you said it 'carried everyone and is more efficient in group' the claim falls flat if not everyone uses it and that is not the secret to healing in group, it is not. You suggest the healing in groups is one single set and that set is "I win" with heals when in fact it has quite a few counters......but it seems you don't have any idea what they are.

I don't want to appear snarky either, but the things you say are simply not true and smack of player who would benefit from the environment a guild and organized raid provides.

Reverb · February 2019

Organized ball groups are my least favorite to fight against. But things would not be better without them. I used to belive that there’s value in every play style in Cyrodiil. Chaos zergs, Ball groups, bombers, gankers, resource farmers, solos, and pug herds all have a place.

There’s no place for a 70-man voicecomm zerg sweeping the map like locusts, but that’s another topic.

Ball On @zyk

ToRelax · February 2019

Soul_Demon wrote: »

Was true the first time and even more so now.....oh how the times change here.

ToRelax wrote: »

Soul_Demon wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

.

Soul_Demon wrote: »

redspecter23 wrote: »

Ball groups in theory are fine. However, there should be more disadvantages to running in a large ball group and there currently are not. Highly skilled players can combat ball groups with smaller teams, but it's still an uphill battle and pug groups will simply have no chance against an organized ball group, even if they have double their numbers.

Give us more tools to break up ball groups or punish players running those playstyles in some way so that it's still an option, but there is more risk involved.

Have proxy det scale up to 48 players (standard scaling up to 6 players, then exponential scaling up to 48 players). Maybe have other abilities scale up depending on the number of targets hit. We have some options currently, but they are limited.

Fighting a skilled ball group takes far more skill and coordination than is required to run in a ball group and my thought is that it should be the reverse.

The things that make a group better than large mass' of pugs or even multiple small man groups is not coded.....its because they communicate, test often, practice together, formulate strategies and perfect movement. This takes an enormous amount of time, dedication and effort that is dismissed by those being farmed as "sure I could do that, but I am waaaayyyy too good now to do it. So I refuse to do it." As a result they will continue to be farmed and lose.

Every time you attempt to do none of those things and think there should be a "hey use this I win button" you are just fooling yourself. I am sure most of us would not do anything but laugh if this were a football forum where people who didn't speak, work together and put in the time demanded the NFL change the rules so that a random grouping of football players could always win over a professional team playing with some new rule or standard. In effect, that is what is being asked for here.

Alright, let's look at some systems which influence the meta in favour of ball groups.

1.) Smart Healing
Makes AoE heals far more effective in groups exceeding the heal's AoE cap.
Makes all heals more effective compared to offensive single target abilities when used in a large group that makes targeting difficult.

2.) Limited bar space/single purpose skills
Gives a massive advantage to large groups who stick close enough together to support each other directly at all times.
Dramatically lower effectiveness of any player trying to be effective in different settings, thus pitting ball groups against unprepared enemies.

3.) Scaling support sets/skills
Provide an inherently higher efficiency to specialized builds in ball groups than a small or spread out group would receive even when using the same builds.

4.) Power disparity between PBAoEs and ranged AoEs / effective splash damage being tied to killing blows
Gives an advantage to groups sticking together in one spot in order to deal AoE damage, rather than spreading out.
Diminishes the defensive disadvantage against AoEs created by stacking up.

5.) Removal of ground effects via Negate
Creates a situation in which negatable ground based AoEs don't function well as area denial, giving an advantage to groups centered around PBAoE (which stack to deal damage), as you don't need to stack players to stack ground effects.

6.) Earthgore
Carries anyone, but more efficient in stacked large groups.

But yeah, these things aren't coded, really. They're more a result of the enormous amount of time, dedication and effort put in by ball groups.

1. How does 'exceeding the cap' make something more effective that you state has been exceeded? And why would you compare single target offensive abilities to AOE heals? They are not the same thing and are not reasonably close to one another.

2. Bar space limits each and every player, not any one over another. What you suggest is "coordinated playing' is better than randomized players just throwing what they interpret as needed unreliably. Not really a solid argument that disputes what I said, in fact it supports the 'practice' and 'communicate' portions.

3. Statement doesn't 'show' anything....basically just 'saying' it works that way without back up of any kind. If anything you suggest being near to each other is beneficial where being apart is not.....Yeah. If some guy is de-buffed by a random, he is STILL de-buffed, stunned or damaged if you hit him from another location, the closer you are when that happens is of benefit. The faster you can respond is of benefit. But its not exclusive to a group, any random can do this too. They can also hit someone who was hit by someone else already.

4. Damage is damage....when, how and in what situation you use one vs the other makes all the difference. Just because one skill works well in one scenario does not mean it should work for ALL of them. Every player makes choices for what they WANT to load on those bars, and each choice has a cost associated. Again, you support the 'test, practice, communicate' portions. Every pick on a bar means one less slot for 'other' stuff...for all of the players.

5. What does removal of ground effects with negate have to do with one play style vs another? Seems random skill you seem to not like is just kind of thrown in. But of course Negate is Ulti and MUCH more expensive then the ground effects....so how is that a comparison of how the game "meta" is being supported exactly? Are you claiming one guy should have ground effect that has no counter and should kill all in it instantly? Don't follow you here.

6. Never used it in group as tactic and more than likely never would....as a build, sure...but never as tactical base for building a group or as only mechanism for survival for the entire group. Its RNG- I dislike all RNG type 'triggers' for healing and always will. Who uses a single monster set as the answer to how to heal players?

Well there seems to have been some trouble in understanding what I wrote. I'm going to assume you just read in bad faith, because that would just be embarrassing otherwise. With that being said, let's go over your replies again.

1.)
- Smart Healing is helping to mitigate the impact of the AoE healing cap. Not the AoE cap is helping to mitigate itself...
- I am comparing certain healing to certain damage skills to determine their effectiveness. What do you compare your healing values with, the enemy's heals or what?

2.)
This point has nothing to do with practice or skill in any way, it's about the amount of skill slots available to different group sizes and playstyles and how versatile they can be used.

3.)
It appears you didn't quite get the topic of this one. It's about scaling support. Scaling with players. Your own players.
Since you asked for back up: There's Rapid Maneuver, which is about to be nerfed again. You see, the more group mates are close to the caster, the more effective the skill becomes.

4.)
Are you talking about 2.) again? This one was about different types of AoE, how one is much more powerful than another, and what that means.

5.)
This isn't about what I like or not like, it's a list of mechanics contributing to the effectiveness of stacking up as part of large scale playstyle. This particular point is even about just part of one skill. There's also the unbreakable ranged AoE silence, which is very much not encouraging anyone to stack up.

6.)
It's funny how in this instance you didn't even oppose my point but still felt the need to protest somehow.

A bit sorry to OP for the snark; I don't want to endanger the topic, so I may decide not to reply again if there's no fruitful discussion coming out of this.

1. You said "Makes AoE heals far more effective in groups exceeding the heal's AoE cap." How does being in a group change the way heals works.....they are about proximity to those heals and knowing who has them and when they go down. Groups don't have a coded benift- coordination and communication does. And you would compare AOE heals to AOE damage....smart damage, where it hits all in proximity of the effect as heals do. So this is about effect of players playing in a coordinated fashion and knowing where heals are, not a coded benefit of the groups.

2. This doesn't favor the group but favors 'experience' to know what you will likely need and why- practice and playing with each other keeps you from loading up say one skill on every one causing overlap. Wasted slots. If you don't practice or communicate you don't know what others in pug groups are running.

3. You say "scaling' then don't show something that scales with anything. Rapids has a range and max number of people hit- again knowing where the ones who you are playing with makes the player who casts it effective or wasteful with its cost. Communication, practice. Needs to be mentioned a nice little test for all to know what it does, when it does it and how it can be removed.

4. Of course, and different types of AOE is something each player can use or not use. One working well in one case vs another is product of knowing when where and how to use each one to max effectiveness. Generally speaking groups are quite good a knowing when and where those are to be used. Random pug players load what they THINK will work well and are often very wrong. Practice, communicate, test. One is NOT the singular answer to anything, never will be. By having variations on skills ZOS does not code benefit to groups.

5. It isn't overpowered in any way....its expensive and there is direct counter to it that is not only cheap but take fractions of a second to do. As far as ranged unbreakable silence you will need to specify the skill specifically you are talking about.

6. Because to oppose the point you said it 'carried everyone and is more efficient in group' the claim falls flat if not everyone uses it and that is not the secret to healing in group, it is not. You suggest the healing in groups is one single set and that set is "I win" with heals when in fact it has quite a few counters......but it seems you don't have any idea what they are.

I don't want to appear snarky either, but the things you say are simply not true and smack of player who would benefit from the environment a guild and organized raid provides.

Well thank you for staying civil.

1.) It does appear to me like there is still a fundamental disconnect between what you are discussing and what the OP wanted to address.
You are right in that groups don't have a coded benefit when it comes to healing specifically (they do for some support sets and skills), but the "ball group" playstyle does have an inherent benefit, whether the members are grouped or not - and this playstyle vs other organized large scale playstyles is what the topic is about from what I understand.
You are then talking about proximity and organization/experience to receive healing in group, but my original point was only about smart healing (which also happens to make it much easier to receive heals) and the fact that it mititgates another mechanic - AoE healing cap - which would otherwise hurt groups using AoE heals while exceeding that cap.

About the "comparing heals to damage" part: I was comparing all healing to all damage. But since AoE damage is uncapped it is no longer at a disadvantage due to smart healing, while the targeting system (or lack thereof, however you look at it) can not compete well with smart healing. It is not relevant whether those heals are part of an AoE or single target healing ability.

2.) I don't know what more I can say here, really. A build that is not part of a ball group has to be more self sufficient, and even more so if it's not part of a large group or any group at all. That costs skill slots. Additionally certain skills like Purge and Rapids don't even work on non group members.

3.) Uhm... rapids does scale. Like, the more group mates affected, the greater the total effect. Maybe it's easier to understand what I'm talking about with Spell Power Cure? The more people you can proc it on, the higher amount of total weapon/spell damage the set will provide. Now let's say you have one player running solo, then Spell Power Cure doesn't sound too great. Make it two, and now using Spell Power Cure on one build and Transmutation on the other seems like an okay option. A few more and it's a no brainer to use some sort of scaling support when applicable.
Now the point was about these providing another incentive to stay close enough together to reap the benefits, rather than spreading out.

4.) Okay, so you are thinking about when one type of AoE is preferable to another. My point was about one type of AoE being largely inferior in almost any situation. There are very few powerful sources of splash damage in the game, mostly Vicious Death, Shatter Soul, Crystal Blast and Inevitable Detonation. Two of them have cast times on them and two are tied to killing blows, all of them are very weak for anything but hitting a stacked group/random zerg.

5.) I am only talking about Negate here. It's not an evaluation of it's power either, nor a declaration about all the impacts it has on the game. It is merely pointing out how one part of the skill - the removal of ground effects - by it's mere existence, influences the meta when it comes to ground based AoE vs PBAoE.

6.) I am not suggesting any such thing. I'm sorry if you interpreted this point as saying players who aren't directly affected by Earthgore were carried by it as well. I thought it was obvious that was not what I meant.
It is a set that rewards large groups for staying close to each other by saving their asses now and then. That is all.

edit: typo

Mintaka5 · February 2019

Would be nice to not have them. But how would the devs subdue that?

Soul_Demon · February 2019

ToRelax wrote: »

Soul_Demon wrote: »

Was true the first time and even more so now.....oh how the times change here.

ToRelax wrote: »

Soul_Demon wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

.

Soul_Demon wrote: »

redspecter23 wrote: »

Ball groups in theory are fine. However, there should be more disadvantages to running in a large ball group and there currently are not. Highly skilled players can combat ball groups with smaller teams, but it's still an uphill battle and pug groups will simply have no chance against an organized ball group, even if they have double their numbers.

Give us more tools to break up ball groups or punish players running those playstyles in some way so that it's still an option, but there is more risk involved.

Have proxy det scale up to 48 players (standard scaling up to 6 players, then exponential scaling up to 48 players). Maybe have other abilities scale up depending on the number of targets hit. We have some options currently, but they are limited.

Fighting a skilled ball group takes far more skill and coordination than is required to run in a ball group and my thought is that it should be the reverse.

The things that make a group better than large mass' of pugs or even multiple small man groups is not coded.....its because they communicate, test often, practice together, formulate strategies and perfect movement. This takes an enormous amount of time, dedication and effort that is dismissed by those being farmed as "sure I could do that, but I am waaaayyyy too good now to do it. So I refuse to do it." As a result they will continue to be farmed and lose.

Every time you attempt to do none of those things and think there should be a "hey use this I win button" you are just fooling yourself. I am sure most of us would not do anything but laugh if this were a football forum where people who didn't speak, work together and put in the time demanded the NFL change the rules so that a random grouping of football players could always win over a professional team playing with some new rule or standard. In effect, that is what is being asked for here.

Alright, let's look at some systems which influence the meta in favour of ball groups.

1.) Smart Healing
Makes AoE heals far more effective in groups exceeding the heal's AoE cap.
Makes all heals more effective compared to offensive single target abilities when used in a large group that makes targeting difficult.

2.) Limited bar space/single purpose skills
Gives a massive advantage to large groups who stick close enough together to support each other directly at all times.
Dramatically lower effectiveness of any player trying to be effective in different settings, thus pitting ball groups against unprepared enemies.

3.) Scaling support sets/skills
Provide an inherently higher efficiency to specialized builds in ball groups than a small or spread out group would receive even when using the same builds.

4.) Power disparity between PBAoEs and ranged AoEs / effective splash damage being tied to killing blows
Gives an advantage to groups sticking together in one spot in order to deal AoE damage, rather than spreading out.
Diminishes the defensive disadvantage against AoEs created by stacking up.

5.) Removal of ground effects via Negate
Creates a situation in which negatable ground based AoEs don't function well as area denial, giving an advantage to groups centered around PBAoE (which stack to deal damage), as you don't need to stack players to stack ground effects.

6.) Earthgore
Carries anyone, but more efficient in stacked large groups.

But yeah, these things aren't coded, really. They're more a result of the enormous amount of time, dedication and effort put in by ball groups.

1. How does 'exceeding the cap' make something more effective that you state has been exceeded? And why would you compare single target offensive abilities to AOE heals? They are not the same thing and are not reasonably close to one another.

2. Bar space limits each and every player, not any one over another. What you suggest is "coordinated playing' is better than randomized players just throwing what they interpret as needed unreliably. Not really a solid argument that disputes what I said, in fact it supports the 'practice' and 'communicate' portions.

3. Statement doesn't 'show' anything....basically just 'saying' it works that way without back up of any kind. If anything you suggest being near to each other is beneficial where being apart is not.....Yeah. If some guy is de-buffed by a random, he is STILL de-buffed, stunned or damaged if you hit him from another location, the closer you are when that happens is of benefit. The faster you can respond is of benefit. But its not exclusive to a group, any random can do this too. They can also hit someone who was hit by someone else already.

4. Damage is damage....when, how and in what situation you use one vs the other makes all the difference. Just because one skill works well in one scenario does not mean it should work for ALL of them. Every player makes choices for what they WANT to load on those bars, and each choice has a cost associated. Again, you support the 'test, practice, communicate' portions. Every pick on a bar means one less slot for 'other' stuff...for all of the players.

5. What does removal of ground effects with negate have to do with one play style vs another? Seems random skill you seem to not like is just kind of thrown in. But of course Negate is Ulti and MUCH more expensive then the ground effects....so how is that a comparison of how the game "meta" is being supported exactly? Are you claiming one guy should have ground effect that has no counter and should kill all in it instantly? Don't follow you here.

6. Never used it in group as tactic and more than likely never would....as a build, sure...but never as tactical base for building a group or as only mechanism for survival for the entire group. Its RNG- I dislike all RNG type 'triggers' for healing and always will. Who uses a single monster set as the answer to how to heal players?

Well there seems to have been some trouble in understanding what I wrote. I'm going to assume you just read in bad faith, because that would just be embarrassing otherwise. With that being said, let's go over your replies again.

1.)
- Smart Healing is helping to mitigate the impact of the AoE healing cap. Not the AoE cap is helping to mitigate itself...
- I am comparing certain healing to certain damage skills to determine their effectiveness. What do you compare your healing values with, the enemy's heals or what?

2.)
This point has nothing to do with practice or skill in any way, it's about the amount of skill slots available to different group sizes and playstyles and how versatile they can be used.

3.)
It appears you didn't quite get the topic of this one. It's about scaling support. Scaling with players. Your own players.
Since you asked for back up: There's Rapid Maneuver, which is about to be nerfed again. You see, the more group mates are close to the caster, the more effective the skill becomes.

4.)
Are you talking about 2.) again? This one was about different types of AoE, how one is much more powerful than another, and what that means.

5.)
This isn't about what I like or not like, it's a list of mechanics contributing to the effectiveness of stacking up as part of large scale playstyle. This particular point is even about just part of one skill. There's also the unbreakable ranged AoE silence, which is very much not encouraging anyone to stack up.

6.)
It's funny how in this instance you didn't even oppose my point but still felt the need to protest somehow.

A bit sorry to OP for the snark; I don't want to endanger the topic, so I may decide not to reply again if there's no fruitful discussion coming out of this.

1. You said "Makes AoE heals far more effective in groups exceeding the heal's AoE cap." How does being in a group change the way heals works.....they are about proximity to those heals and knowing who has them and when they go down. Groups don't have a coded benift- coordination and communication does. And you would compare AOE heals to AOE damage....smart damage, where it hits all in proximity of the effect as heals do. So this is about effect of players playing in a coordinated fashion and knowing where heals are, not a coded benefit of the groups.

2. This doesn't favor the group but favors 'experience' to know what you will likely need and why- practice and playing with each other keeps you from loading up say one skill on every one causing overlap. Wasted slots. If you don't practice or communicate you don't know what others in pug groups are running.

3. You say "scaling' then don't show something that scales with anything. Rapids has a range and max number of people hit- again knowing where the ones who you are playing with makes the player who casts it effective or wasteful with its cost. Communication, practice. Needs to be mentioned a nice little test for all to know what it does, when it does it and how it can be removed.

4. Of course, and different types of AOE is something each player can use or not use. One working well in one case vs another is product of knowing when where and how to use each one to max effectiveness. Generally speaking groups are quite good a knowing when and where those are to be used. Random pug players load what they THINK will work well and are often very wrong. Practice, communicate, test. One is NOT the singular answer to anything, never will be. By having variations on skills ZOS does not code benefit to groups.

5. It isn't overpowered in any way....its expensive and there is direct counter to it that is not only cheap but take fractions of a second to do. As far as ranged unbreakable silence you will need to specify the skill specifically you are talking about.

6. Because to oppose the point you said it 'carried everyone and is more efficient in group' the claim falls flat if not everyone uses it and that is not the secret to healing in group, it is not. You suggest the healing in groups is one single set and that set is "I win" with heals when in fact it has quite a few counters......but it seems you don't have any idea what they are.

I don't want to appear snarky either, but the things you say are simply not true and smack of player who would benefit from the environment a guild and organized raid provides.

Well thank you for staying civil.

1.) It does appear to me like there is still a fundamental disconnect between what you are discussing and what the OP wanted to address.
You are right in that groups don't have a coded benefit when it comes to healing specifically (they do for some support sets and skills), but the "ball group" playstyle does have an inherent benefit, whether the members are grouped or not - and this playstyle vs other organized large scale playstyles is what the topic is about from what I understand.
You are then talking about proximity and organization/experience to receive healing in group, but my original point was only about smart healing (which also happens to make it much easier to receive heals) and the fact that it mititgates another mechanic - AoE healing cap - which would otherwise hurt groups using AoE heals while exceeding that cap.

About the "comparing heals to damage" part: I was comparing all healing to all damage. But since AoE damage is uncapped it is no longer at a disadvantage due to smart healing, while the targeting system (or lack thereof, however you look at it) can not compete well with smart healing. It is not relevant whether those heals are part of an AoE or single target healing ability.

2.) I don't know what more I can say here, really. A build that is not part of a ball group has to be more self sufficient, and even more so if it's not part of a large group or any group at all. That costs skill slots. Additionally certain skills like Purge and Rapids don't even work on non group members.

3.) Uhm... rapids does scale. Like, the more group mates affected, the greater the total effect. Maybe it's easier to understand what I'm talking about with Spell Power Cure? The more people you can proc it on, the higher amount of total weapon/spell damage the set will provide. Now let's say you have one player running solo, then Spell Power Cure doesn't sound too great. Make it two, and now using Spell Power Cure on one build and Transmutation on the other seems like an okay option. A few more and it's a no brainer to use some sort of scaling support when applicable.
Now the point was about these providing another incentive to stay close enough together to reap the benefits, rather than spreading out.

4.) Okay, so you are thinking about when one type of AoE is preferable to another. My point was about one type of AoE being largely inferior in almost any situation. There are very few powerful sources of splash damage in the game, mostly Vicious Death, Shatter Soul, Crystal Blast and Inevitable Detonation. Two of them have cast times on them and two are tied to killing blows, all of them are very weak for anything but hitting a stacked group/random zerg.

5.) I am only talking about Negate here. It's not an evaluation of it's power either, nor a declaration about all the impacts it has on the game. It is merely pointing out how one part of the skill - the removal of ground effects - by it's mere existence, influences the meta when it comes to ground based AoE vs PBAoE.

6.) I am not suggesting any such thing. I'm sorry if you interpreted this point as saying players who aren't directly affected by Earthgore were carried by it as well. I thought it was obvious that was not what I meant.
It is a set that rewards large groups for staying close to each other by saving their asses now and then. That is all.

edit: typo

1. "groups don't have a coded benefit when it comes to healing specifically" and we are on same page it seems. As to the rest, if AOE heals have a cap- and AOE damage does not- do you not see the inherent benefit being on damage side of equation rendering any benefit to 'smart heals' mute point as that is capped where damage is not?

2. Absolutely. Builds are indeed very different from solo to 1vx to group- champ points gear ect. But those skill bars are limited with every one of them. Groups communicate and are better able to prevent overlap than a pug group is and as result by their nature are more efficient with their uses.

3. Rapids has been capped and has doubled in cost now one time and with next patch will be changed a third time to further make it difficult to use. It isn't alone and many skills over the years have been altered to make them less attractive to groups.These changes were intended to make it 'inefficient' for groups to use and therefore give the benefit to smaller groups. It does not scale in any way- it never scaled but I think you are referring to 'efficiency' rather than scale. Groups are able to use extremely costly and limited window of opportunity skills because of communication and practice with one another. The utility of a skill drops if coordinated play is not possible- the skill is useless if others can not take advantage of it in many cases, whereas if other can make use of it suddenly its great- communication. Using SPC in non coordinated group would give a random person you heal (who doesn't notice maybe) a 258 boost to spell/weap damage, not more damage exponentially with the more you hit, they need to notice or know its happening to make use of it. Coordination and practice helps you see what works well and what does not. Otherwise there is one five piece spot gone- for largely no gain.

4. Seems you left a few off and some that were even created to kill groups of players by ZOS specifically. It even scales in the way you are thinking that rapids does- it does more damage the more players that are in the AOE. That is scaling the way I understand it. Regardless the game has a huge amount of choice in sets, races, passives, class skills, weapon skills, armor skills, guild skills and world skills..... to include many morphs to choose from. Experienced players will often use things for a benefit you don't immediately see and groups use things as do solo players that the other does not immediately see the utility of. Theory crafting in groups can help see this stuff more clearly, but they in no way give unimpeded benefit to one play style. To coordinated efforts, yes.

5. Negates cost so very much, are limited to what class you play and has so many counters I just don't see why this is a problem....guessing with how you say it you expect people to continuously stand in ground based effects for indeterminate amounts of time. I don't so don't understand the issue at all, and in fact the work done on perfection of movement for most groups should tell you they don't either.

6. Well, we do agree here for sure....don't see it as much benefit beyond the occasional player who likes the set, but even then not a real game changer for players.

ToRelax · February 2019

Soul_Demon wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

Soul_Demon wrote: »

Was true the first time and even more so now.....oh how the times change here.

ToRelax wrote: »

Soul_Demon wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

.

Soul_Demon wrote: »

redspecter23 wrote: »

Ball groups in theory are fine. However, there should be more disadvantages to running in a large ball group and there currently are not. Highly skilled players can combat ball groups with smaller teams, but it's still an uphill battle and pug groups will simply have no chance against an organized ball group, even if they have double their numbers.

Give us more tools to break up ball groups or punish players running those playstyles in some way so that it's still an option, but there is more risk involved.

Have proxy det scale up to 48 players (standard scaling up to 6 players, then exponential scaling up to 48 players). Maybe have other abilities scale up depending on the number of targets hit. We have some options currently, but they are limited.

Fighting a skilled ball group takes far more skill and coordination than is required to run in a ball group and my thought is that it should be the reverse.

The things that make a group better than large mass' of pugs or even multiple small man groups is not coded.....its because they communicate, test often, practice together, formulate strategies and perfect movement. This takes an enormous amount of time, dedication and effort that is dismissed by those being farmed as "sure I could do that, but I am waaaayyyy too good now to do it. So I refuse to do it." As a result they will continue to be farmed and lose.

Every time you attempt to do none of those things and think there should be a "hey use this I win button" you are just fooling yourself. I am sure most of us would not do anything but laugh if this were a football forum where people who didn't speak, work together and put in the time demanded the NFL change the rules so that a random grouping of football players could always win over a professional team playing with some new rule or standard. In effect, that is what is being asked for here.

Alright, let's look at some systems which influence the meta in favour of ball groups.

1.) Smart Healing
Makes AoE heals far more effective in groups exceeding the heal's AoE cap.
Makes all heals more effective compared to offensive single target abilities when used in a large group that makes targeting difficult.

2.) Limited bar space/single purpose skills
Gives a massive advantage to large groups who stick close enough together to support each other directly at all times.
Dramatically lower effectiveness of any player trying to be effective in different settings, thus pitting ball groups against unprepared enemies.

3.) Scaling support sets/skills
Provide an inherently higher efficiency to specialized builds in ball groups than a small or spread out group would receive even when using the same builds.

4.) Power disparity between PBAoEs and ranged AoEs / effective splash damage being tied to killing blows
Gives an advantage to groups sticking together in one spot in order to deal AoE damage, rather than spreading out.
Diminishes the defensive disadvantage against AoEs created by stacking up.

5.) Removal of ground effects via Negate
Creates a situation in which negatable ground based AoEs don't function well as area denial, giving an advantage to groups centered around PBAoE (which stack to deal damage), as you don't need to stack players to stack ground effects.

6.) Earthgore
Carries anyone, but more efficient in stacked large groups.

But yeah, these things aren't coded, really. They're more a result of the enormous amount of time, dedication and effort put in by ball groups.

1. How does 'exceeding the cap' make something more effective that you state has been exceeded? And why would you compare single target offensive abilities to AOE heals? They are not the same thing and are not reasonably close to one another.

2. Bar space limits each and every player, not any one over another. What you suggest is "coordinated playing' is better than randomized players just throwing what they interpret as needed unreliably. Not really a solid argument that disputes what I said, in fact it supports the 'practice' and 'communicate' portions.

3. Statement doesn't 'show' anything....basically just 'saying' it works that way without back up of any kind. If anything you suggest being near to each other is beneficial where being apart is not.....Yeah. If some guy is de-buffed by a random, he is STILL de-buffed, stunned or damaged if you hit him from another location, the closer you are when that happens is of benefit. The faster you can respond is of benefit. But its not exclusive to a group, any random can do this too. They can also hit someone who was hit by someone else already.

4. Damage is damage....when, how and in what situation you use one vs the other makes all the difference. Just because one skill works well in one scenario does not mean it should work for ALL of them. Every player makes choices for what they WANT to load on those bars, and each choice has a cost associated. Again, you support the 'test, practice, communicate' portions. Every pick on a bar means one less slot for 'other' stuff...for all of the players.

5. What does removal of ground effects with negate have to do with one play style vs another? Seems random skill you seem to not like is just kind of thrown in. But of course Negate is Ulti and MUCH more expensive then the ground effects....so how is that a comparison of how the game "meta" is being supported exactly? Are you claiming one guy should have ground effect that has no counter and should kill all in it instantly? Don't follow you here.

6. Never used it in group as tactic and more than likely never would....as a build, sure...but never as tactical base for building a group or as only mechanism for survival for the entire group. Its RNG- I dislike all RNG type 'triggers' for healing and always will. Who uses a single monster set as the answer to how to heal players?

Well there seems to have been some trouble in understanding what I wrote. I'm going to assume you just read in bad faith, because that would just be embarrassing otherwise. With that being said, let's go over your replies again.

1.)
- Smart Healing is helping to mitigate the impact of the AoE healing cap. Not the AoE cap is helping to mitigate itself...
- I am comparing certain healing to certain damage skills to determine their effectiveness. What do you compare your healing values with, the enemy's heals or what?

2.)
This point has nothing to do with practice or skill in any way, it's about the amount of skill slots available to different group sizes and playstyles and how versatile they can be used.

3.)
It appears you didn't quite get the topic of this one. It's about scaling support. Scaling with players. Your own players.
Since you asked for back up: There's Rapid Maneuver, which is about to be nerfed again. You see, the more group mates are close to the caster, the more effective the skill becomes.

4.)
Are you talking about 2.) again? This one was about different types of AoE, how one is much more powerful than another, and what that means.

5.)
This isn't about what I like or not like, it's a list of mechanics contributing to the effectiveness of stacking up as part of large scale playstyle. This particular point is even about just part of one skill. There's also the unbreakable ranged AoE silence, which is very much not encouraging anyone to stack up.

6.)
It's funny how in this instance you didn't even oppose my point but still felt the need to protest somehow.

A bit sorry to OP for the snark; I don't want to endanger the topic, so I may decide not to reply again if there's no fruitful discussion coming out of this.

1. You said "Makes AoE heals far more effective in groups exceeding the heal's AoE cap." How does being in a group change the way heals works.....they are about proximity to those heals and knowing who has them and when they go down. Groups don't have a coded benift- coordination and communication does. And you would compare AOE heals to AOE damage....smart damage, where it hits all in proximity of the effect as heals do. So this is about effect of players playing in a coordinated fashion and knowing where heals are, not a coded benefit of the groups.

2. This doesn't favor the group but favors 'experience' to know what you will likely need and why- practice and playing with each other keeps you from loading up say one skill on every one causing overlap. Wasted slots. If you don't practice or communicate you don't know what others in pug groups are running.

3. You say "scaling' then don't show something that scales with anything. Rapids has a range and max number of people hit- again knowing where the ones who you are playing with makes the player who casts it effective or wasteful with its cost. Communication, practice. Needs to be mentioned a nice little test for all to know what it does, when it does it and how it can be removed.

4. Of course, and different types of AOE is something each player can use or not use. One working well in one case vs another is product of knowing when where and how to use each one to max effectiveness. Generally speaking groups are quite good a knowing when and where those are to be used. Random pug players load what they THINK will work well and are often very wrong. Practice, communicate, test. One is NOT the singular answer to anything, never will be. By having variations on skills ZOS does not code benefit to groups.

5. It isn't overpowered in any way....its expensive and there is direct counter to it that is not only cheap but take fractions of a second to do. As far as ranged unbreakable silence you will need to specify the skill specifically you are talking about.

6. Because to oppose the point you said it 'carried everyone and is more efficient in group' the claim falls flat if not everyone uses it and that is not the secret to healing in group, it is not. You suggest the healing in groups is one single set and that set is "I win" with heals when in fact it has quite a few counters......but it seems you don't have any idea what they are.

I don't want to appear snarky either, but the things you say are simply not true and smack of player who would benefit from the environment a guild and organized raid provides.

Well thank you for staying civil.

1.) It does appear to me like there is still a fundamental disconnect between what you are discussing and what the OP wanted to address.
You are right in that groups don't have a coded benefit when it comes to healing specifically (they do for some support sets and skills), but the "ball group" playstyle does have an inherent benefit, whether the members are grouped or not - and this playstyle vs other organized large scale playstyles is what the topic is about from what I understand.
You are then talking about proximity and organization/experience to receive healing in group, but my original point was only about smart healing (which also happens to make it much easier to receive heals) and the fact that it mititgates another mechanic - AoE healing cap - which would otherwise hurt groups using AoE heals while exceeding that cap.

About the "comparing heals to damage" part: I was comparing all healing to all damage. But since AoE damage is uncapped it is no longer at a disadvantage due to smart healing, while the targeting system (or lack thereof, however you look at it) can not compete well with smart healing. It is not relevant whether those heals are part of an AoE or single target healing ability.

2.) I don't know what more I can say here, really. A build that is not part of a ball group has to be more self sufficient, and even more so if it's not part of a large group or any group at all. That costs skill slots. Additionally certain skills like Purge and Rapids don't even work on non group members.

3.) Uhm... rapids does scale. Like, the more group mates affected, the greater the total effect. Maybe it's easier to understand what I'm talking about with Spell Power Cure? The more people you can proc it on, the higher amount of total weapon/spell damage the set will provide. Now let's say you have one player running solo, then Spell Power Cure doesn't sound too great. Make it two, and now using Spell Power Cure on one build and Transmutation on the other seems like an okay option. A few more and it's a no brainer to use some sort of scaling support when applicable.
Now the point was about these providing another incentive to stay close enough together to reap the benefits, rather than spreading out.

4.) Okay, so you are thinking about when one type of AoE is preferable to another. My point was about one type of AoE being largely inferior in almost any situation. There are very few powerful sources of splash damage in the game, mostly Vicious Death, Shatter Soul, Crystal Blast and Inevitable Detonation. Two of them have cast times on them and two are tied to killing blows, all of them are very weak for anything but hitting a stacked group/random zerg.

5.) I am only talking about Negate here. It's not an evaluation of it's power either, nor a declaration about all the impacts it has on the game. It is merely pointing out how one part of the skill - the removal of ground effects - by it's mere existence, influences the meta when it comes to ground based AoE vs PBAoE.

6.) I am not suggesting any such thing. I'm sorry if you interpreted this point as saying players who aren't directly affected by Earthgore were carried by it as well. I thought it was obvious that was not what I meant.
It is a set that rewards large groups for staying close to each other by saving their asses now and then. That is all.

edit: typo

1. "groups don't have a coded benefit when it comes to healing specifically" and we are on same page it seems. As to the rest, if AOE heals have a cap- and AOE damage does not- do you not see the inherent benefit being on damage side of equation rendering any benefit to 'smart heals' mute point as that is capped where damage is not?

2. Absolutely. Builds are indeed very different from solo to 1vx to group- champ points gear ect. But those skill bars are limited with every one of them. Groups communicate and are better able to prevent overlap than a pug group is and as result by their nature are more efficient with their uses.

3. Rapids has been capped and has doubled in cost now one time and with next patch will be changed a third time to further make it difficult to use. It isn't alone and many skills over the years have been altered to make them less attractive to groups.These changes were intended to make it 'inefficient' for groups to use and therefore give the benefit to smaller groups. It does not scale in any way- it never scaled but I think you are referring to 'efficiency' rather than scale. Groups are able to use extremely costly and limited window of opportunity skills because of communication and practice with one another. The utility of a skill drops if coordinated play is not possible- the skill is useless if others can not take advantage of it in many cases, whereas if other can make use of it suddenly its great- communication. Using SPC in non coordinated group would give a random person you heal (who doesn't notice maybe) a 258 boost to spell/weap damage, not more damage exponentially with the more you hit, they need to notice or know its happening to make use of it. Coordination and practice helps you see what works well and what does not. Otherwise there is one five piece spot gone- for largely no gain.

4. Seems you left a few off and some that were even created to kill groups of players by ZOS specifically. It even scales in the way you are thinking that rapids does- it does more damage the more players that are in the AOE. That is scaling the way I understand it. Regardless the game has a huge amount of choice in sets, races, passives, class skills, weapon skills, armor skills, guild skills and world skills..... to include many morphs to choose from. Experienced players will often use things for a benefit you don't immediately see and groups use things as do solo players that the other does not immediately see the utility of. Theory crafting in groups can help see this stuff more clearly, but they in no way give unimpeded benefit to one play style. To coordinated efforts, yes.

5. Negates cost so very much, are limited to what class you play and has so many counters I just don't see why this is a problem....guessing with how you say it you expect people to continuously stand in ground based effects for indeterminate amounts of time. I don't so don't understand the issue at all, and in fact the work done on perfection of movement for most groups should tell you they don't either.

6. Well, we do agree here for sure....don't see it as much benefit beyond the occasional player who likes the set, but even then not a real game changer for players.

1.) Well that's why I didn't discuss AoE damage vs AoE healing at first, because I was pointing out the benefits of stacking up, and defense against AoE damage isn't one of them. However, PBAoEs, which are the dominant form of AoE in PvP, work best when stacking up, which is why them working well against stacked groups doesn't actually discourage stacking up much at all, except for short amounts of time.
The point I did make then, was about smart healing working against the aoe cap (thus making them more effective) without comparing it to anything at all on one side and then on it's effectiveness against offensive single target abilities.
I did make points about other kinds of AoE (splash/ranged target and ground based) later.

2. Yes, exactly. That is one part, now my point as it pertains to this topic was about the discrepancy between efficiency for spread out groups vs stacked ones, where we can see another benefit of keeping everyone close together.

3.) I'd say the total effectivity, and thus at the same cost, the efficiency, scales with the amount of players you can effect. But it doesn't matter, we can use different terminology.

4.) This seems to be about Inevitable Detonation? I'm not sure what you mean by me leaving a few off though, because I mentioned it? There are more sources of splash damage, I just mentioned the theoretically most powerful ones.
Anyway, yes, on Magicka Detonation both the total and individual damage scale with amount of enemies hit. It's a good thing, too, that this isn't present on support or healing skills.

5.) I'm still not saying anything of this is a problem necessarily, but the sum of the different mechanics as they currently are create the situation we see ingame.
I mentioned using ground based AoE for area denial btw, that's like the opposite of expecting players to stand in them.

montiferus · February 2019

It would be nice to see a group size reduction especially on Xbox where the servers are barely hanging on by a thread. Then again the servers are so bad I am not sure anything will fix them at this point.

Derra · February 2019

frostz417 wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

The recent pvp events performance - as a consequence from ballgrps not being able to play all on the same servers - strongly indicates that pvp would be better without anything resembling that playstyle.

It´s not purely ballgrps but also when you have enough brainbugs in the faction zerg to keep it alive and in relatively tight formation.

All of this needs to go. Aoe buttonmashing (heal-, support and damage abilities) has to be exterminated as a valid strategy for pvp encounters of any kind.
Just as only clicking left mouse in siege.

Ball groups don’t contribute to lag. The 60 man zerg made of tanks and healbots do...

So why did the server run better when there was only a 60 man zerg of tanks an healbots with no ballgroups on the map?

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO · February 2019

Derra wrote: »

frostz417 wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

The recent pvp events performance - as a consequence from ballgrps not being able to play all on the same servers - strongly indicates that pvp would be better without anything resembling that playstyle.

It´s not purely ballgrps but also when you have enough brainbugs in the faction zerg to keep it alive and in relatively tight formation.

All of this needs to go. Aoe buttonmashing (heal-, support and damage abilities) has to be exterminated as a valid strategy for pvp encounters of any kind.
Just as only clicking left mouse in siege.

Ball groups don’t contribute to lag. The 60 man zerg made of tanks and healbots do...

So why did the server run better when there was only a 60 man zerg of tanks an healbots with no ballgroups on the map?

Because everyone was avoiding eachother pvding the map

Sacredx · February 2019

zyk wrote: »

Do you think ESO AvA PVP would be better without large ball groups? I'm referring specifically to ball groups.

Wouldn't make any difference. They need to fix the poor game mechanics, game breaking bugs and an AvA point system that is easily manipulated, outdated and basically meaningless before anything else will matter.

It's like asking would it be better to be 1 minute earlier to class when you're already 1 hour late. The bigger picture speaks for itself.

frostz417 · February 2019

Derra wrote: »

frostz417 wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

The recent pvp events performance - as a consequence from ballgrps not being able to play all on the same servers - strongly indicates that pvp would be better without anything resembling that playstyle.

It´s not purely ballgrps but also when you have enough brainbugs in the faction zerg to keep it alive and in relatively tight formation.

All of this needs to go. Aoe buttonmashing (heal-, support and damage abilities) has to be exterminated as a valid strategy for pvp encounters of any kind.
Just as only clicking left mouse in siege.

Ball groups don’t contribute to lag. The 60 man zerg made of tanks and healbots do...

So why did the server run better when there was only a 60 man zerg of tanks an healbots with no ballgroups on the map?

Because all the bots did was PvDoor and avoid each other

Ahtu · February 2019

Guilds who force their members to run certain builds are the ones making their members ineffective, not large zergs. Zerg surfers can create their own build and make sure they are effective in battlegrounds and Cyrodiil, whereas guilds with predefined roles' members are completely defenseless when separated from the group. As long as AP is around, these guilds will continue to be ineffective until they can stop making excuses and make the necessary adjustments, or fade from existence as more players catch onto the current era of armies dominating in Cyrodiil (Vivec).

Ender1310 · February 2019

Soul_Demon wrote: »

redspecter23 wrote: »

Ball groups in theory are fine. However, there should be more disadvantages to running in a large ball group and there currently are not. Highly skilled players can combat ball groups with smaller teams, but it's still an uphill battle and pug groups will simply have no chance against an organized ball group, even if they have double their numbers.

Give us more tools to break up ball groups or punish players running those playstyles in some way so that it's still an option, but there is more risk involved.

Have proxy det scale up to 48 players (standard scaling up to 6 players, then exponential scaling up to 48 players). Maybe have other abilities scale up depending on the number of targets hit. We have some options currently, but they are limited.

Fighting a skilled ball group takes far more skill and coordination than is required to run in a ball group and my thought is that it should be the reverse.

The things that make a group better than large mass' of pugs or even multiple small man groups is not coded.....its because they communicate, test often, practice together, formulate strategies and perfect movement. This takes an enormous amount of time, dedication and effort that is dismissed by those being farmed as "sure I could do that, but I am waaaayyyy too good now to do it. So I refuse to do it." As a result they will continue to be farmed and lose.

Every time you attempt to do none of those things and think there should be a "hey use this I win button" you are just fooling yourself. I am sure most of us would not do anything but laugh if this were a football forum where people who didn't speak, work together and put in the time demanded the NFL change the rules so that a random grouping of football players could always win over a professional team playing with some new rule or standard. In effect, that is what is being asked for here.

It's not fine. It looks like crap and isn't realistic. Remove the ability to group in Cyrodil period. Or keep groups at a small group level.

VaranisArano · February 2019

Ahtu wrote: »

Guilds who force their members to run certain builds are the ones making their members ineffective, not large zergs. Zerg surfers can create their own build and make sure they are effective in battlegrounds and Cyrodiil, whereas guilds with predefined roles' members are completely defenseless when separated from the group. As long as AP is around, these guilds will continue to be ineffective until they can stop making excuses and make the necessary adjustments, or fade from existence as more players catch onto the current era of armies dominating in Cyrodiil (Vivec).

Eh, I don't really see it that way. I think its the difference between "effective when separated" vs "effectiveness in the group". Those are two different metrics and players will have different preferences.

Moreover, there's a difference in risk/reward and total effectiveness of the different playstyles.

In a PUG raid (at least, the PUG raids I've been in) or zerg surfing, sure I can build myself to be effective without depending on the players around me. That's because I can't depend on anyone around me. We're not really a group - we're a bunch of people soloing next to each other at the same objective. So I'd build to be a self-sufficient solo player who just happens to have a bunch of other people around. If I heal, I'm less effective because its much harder to heal a loose group than a tightly organized one, and I'm much more vulnerable because I can't depend on anyone to protect me. Same goes for sieging.

I'm certainly more effective when I get separated from the zerg/PUG raid. But I'm not that effective in terms of actually accomplishing anything of note when I'm in the PUG raid or zerg surfing.

Compare that to my large organized raid healer. In my raid, I'm specialized for healing, protecting the group under siege, and crowd control. No, sorry, none of our healers were ever one-button-spammers. While I'm in the raid, my whole team benefits from my heals, buffs, siege shields, and crowd control. I benefit in turn from their buffs, healing, and damage. If I get pulled out of raid, or fall behind because I stopped to attack some random or whatever, the entire raid is weaker without me and I'm left on my own in a healer build. Facing another organized raid, I'm going to be dead if I get singled out (exactly like any solo player would be facing an organized raid, to be honest, so dying in that situation would happen to most anyone). Finally, I can be certain my raid won't abandon people on siege at an objective.

So in an organized raid build, I'm less effective when singled out, but orders of magnitude more effective for the benefit of my group.

This plays out in the risk/reward and total effectiveness of the playstyles.

A PUG raider or a zergsurfer is more effective singled out, but contributes less to group success. In the same way, PUG raids and zergs are less effective in competitive battles where coordination beats sheer numbers of less coordinated players.

A member of an organized group with a group build is less effective singled out, but contributes far more to group success. Because of this coordinated group effort, organized groups are able to leverage this to dominate the battlefield.

There's still a risk/reward. We've all see the organized raid that isnt coordinated enough or loses enough members that it gets wrecked on the battlefield. Similarly, PUG raids and zergsurfers can be like fighting water sometimes - a raid pushes, and they all just move out of the way and then press back in because they aren't actually sticking together. But we've also seen the large organized raids dominate the battlefield, night after night, campaign after campaign. If you want group effectiveness, it's harder to ask for better than a large organized raid executing its tactics well.

Personally, I've done PUG raiding, zergsurfing, and been in a large organized raid. I prefer to make the greatest possible contribution I can make to the group effort and that's meant playing with an organized raid even though it means that if I get singled out in the middle of a raid v raid battle I'm probably very dead, very quickly. I find that PUG raiding means I and my group are slower to respond and less effective on the battlefield, while zerg-surfing means I'm just soloing next to a bunch of other people and thus have even less effect on the outcome.

But everyone has different preferences.

If you like being self-sufficient and being able to back off from a fight that's gone south, zerg-surfing is a good way to do that.

If you like running with a large group but don't want to commit to the risk/reward of full organized group tactics, PUG raiding can be a lot of fun.

I just find that I have less fun and have less effect on the outcome of the battle when I'm not with an organized raid even if I am more effective when singled out of the pack in a non-group build.