Congrats ZOS you've added nothing and effectively killed your game.

CN_Daniel

24 vs 24 is just sooooooo fun when there's no lag.

OK so what about the senior citizen aged player who doesn't have the dexterity to compete with a Fengrush? What about the mentally challenged individual? What about the newby with 60 champion points?

They can't have fun 1v1'ing people like Fengrush in this game... And 4v4 with people like I mentioned above vs a team of Fengrush lvl players would be EVEN WORSE.

So, they group up together, and in mass.


I blame all of the problems on Fengrush, people like him are too good, and force lesser player's hand. Sarcastic, yes, but somewhere in there you can see truth...


Edit: just trying to provide some perspective from the other side here.

Winnamine

NPK Daniel wrote: »

24 vs 24 is just sooooooo fun when there's no lag.

OK so what about the senior citizen aged player who doesn't have the dexterity to compete with a Fengrush? What about the mentally challenged individual? What about the newby with 60 champion points?

They can't have fun 1v1'ing people like Fengrush in this game... And 4v4 with people like I mentioned above vs a team of Fengrush lvl players would be EVEN WORSE.

So, they group up together, and in mass.


I blame all of the problems on Fengrush, people like him are too good, and force lesser player's hand. Sarcastic, yes, but somewhere in there you can see truth...


Edit: just trying to provide some perspective from the other side here.

Ok...
1. In organized groups, there is no such thing as 24 v 24 with no lag. This is ESO.
2. Did you just confirm that zerg guilds are full of uncoordinated senior citizens and mentally challenged individuals?

Jolinius

Yeah this isnt the game i bought and love.This isnt the game that won game of the year.The game just keeps getting worse.........wtb 1.5 but just tweak stamina builds pst.

CN_Daniel

Winnamine wrote: »

NPK Daniel wrote: »

24 vs 24 is just sooooooo fun when there's no lag.

OK so what about the senior citizen aged player who doesn't have the dexterity to compete with a Fengrush? What about the mentally challenged individual? What about the newby with 60 champion points?

They can't have fun 1v1'ing people like Fengrush in this game... And 4v4 with people like I mentioned above vs a team of Fengrush lvl players would be EVEN WORSE.

So, they group up together, and in mass.


I blame all of the problems on Fengrush, people like him are too good, and force lesser player's hand. Sarcastic, yes, but somewhere in there you can see truth...


Edit: just trying to provide some perspective from the other side here.

Ok...
1. In organized groups, there is no such thing as 24 v 24 with no lag. This is ESO.
2. Did you just confirm that zerg guilds are full of uncoordinated senior citizens and mentally challenged individuals?

We have that experience of 24 vs 24 frequently vs Nexus without lag.

I'm trying illustrate the point that not everyone is capable of having fun in a small team environment. That people like Fengrush, who are that **** good will just destroy them. And 'getting better' really isn't an option.

tordr86b16_ESO

ShadoPanauin wrote: »

Thank you for covering the universe in salt. We sure could use the extinction of slugs, snails etc.

Seriously though, none of the things you said were true other than the fact that questing is boring.

TheElementalPlatypus wrote: »

Class balance? Nope 1-2 classes dominating cyrodiil (NB and sorc).

Class balance is perfectly fine. It only seems imbalanced when the class's player is skilled.

There will also never be perfectly balanced classes.

shield stacking is not skillful. no other *** class can do what sorcs can in FULL LIGHT ARMOR and keep on tanking dozen of people.

ToRelax

Why do so many posters on these forums seem to think breaking up zergballs would destroy large scale PvP...

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Dreyloch wrote: »

TheElementalPlatypus wrote: »

ShadoPanauin wrote: »

Thank you for covering the universe in salt. We sure could use the extinction of slugs, snails etc.

Seriously though, none of the things you said were true other than the fact that questing is boring.

TheElementalPlatypus wrote: »

Class balance? Nope 1-2 classes dominating cyrodiil (NB and sorc).

Class balance is perfectly fine. It only seems imbalanced when the class's player is skilled.

There will also never be perfectly balanced classes.

TheElementalPlatypus wrote: »

Enhanced group play? Nope screwed small groups BECAUSE ZERGS FTW.

I don't know who you're playing with, but small group play is perfectly viable.

TheElementalPlatypus wrote: »

More variety? RIP stamina builds unless you're a spin2win zergling.

Non-steel-tornado builds are still perfectly viable.

TheElementalPlatypus wrote: »

You've effectively made numbers matter even more now that everyone can survive a 5 second conceal weapon and not be punished for it, grab a few pocket healers and shazam your a walking raid boss (except this one isnt killable).

It's right that people aren't being one shot.

Pocket healers are a perfectly valid tactic.

TheElementalPlatypus wrote: »

Congratulations ZOS, you've added nothing, and made what we already had worse.

Crown store? Mounts? Imperial City? I don't know what you're talking about.

Obviously I'm talking IC. Also if you think small group is viable without dynamic ulti and with this new damage nerf I challenge you to wipe a raid like what used to be possible with 4-8 people against 24

Actually stamina builds got the KO hammer with that dodge roll nerf, I didnt expect it to be that bad, but lets face it, they dont have instant heals or shields, they must facetank while doing damage, with damage being so low, they cant facetank with 4 dodge rolls max before having to stay out of it for a solid 6 seconds (Yes I said 6 seconds as that IS what it is from start of dodge roll to finish).

Never did I say pocket healers weren't a tactic but they dont consist much outside of zergs ahem your main style of play.

But I mean hey, if you wanna spam 3 buttons with 23 other people around you and feel like you genuinely are contributing largely and with skill then whatever floats your boat.

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Naming and Shaming comments]

I don't care how skilled you are

A lot of people dont - thats why they max out their group size instead of striving to be a better player.

TheElementalPlatypus

Bromburak wrote: »

TheElementalPlatypus wrote: »

Sure the random players looking for a skyrim itch will buy it and be bored after the first 50 go and fetch quests.

What did you add this patch?

Class balance? Nope 1-2 classes dominating cyrodiil (NB and sorc).
Enhanced group play? Nope screwed small groups BECAUSE ZERGS FTW.

...

Congratulations ZOS, you've added nothing, and made what we already had worse.

Congratulations that you are not able to find a group or matching guild to play this game ...

We (my group) don't join zergs , we don't add random AP leecher, we play as a small group, we have our own objectives and we are very successful. Because we have something you don't have, team spirit and discipline.

I am certain that you prefer playing solo but you are not good at it and unfortunately you didn't find any
matching guild or group or you are the one that doesn't like working to succeed as a team.

Every MMO is full of players that TAKE but don't GIVE, thats why we have thousands of guilds that are not stable but always think they are something special. But when it comes to team play they only average for a reason.

Your choice, always.

Actually my friend, a buddy of mine @Asweetroll and one or two others had a day where we made quick work of massive numbers on the bridge abusing the heck out of oils and ballistas. He decided to form a small group guild, which was actually (not sure if he's still active as I'm not) but it was very successful but you dont realize not everyone LIKES that style of play.

Also you nailed it I do prefer playing solo/with 1 or two more people.

I think you missed my thread entirely, pointing out the direction the game is going due to mechanics, rather you decided to (without any previous information) assume I cant find a group so I qq'd because I cant solo either.

You know what they say about assuming

TheElementalPlatypus

NPK Daniel wrote: »

Winnamine wrote: »

NPK Daniel wrote: »

24 vs 24 is just sooooooo fun when there's no lag.

OK so what about the senior citizen aged player who doesn't have the dexterity to compete with a Fengrush? What about the mentally challenged individual? What about the newby with 60 champion points?

They can't have fun 1v1'ing people like Fengrush in this game... And 4v4 with people like I mentioned above vs a team of Fengrush lvl players would be EVEN WORSE.

So, they group up together, and in mass.


I blame all of the problems on Fengrush, people like him are too good, and force lesser player's hand. Sarcastic, yes, but somewhere in there you can see truth...


Edit: just trying to provide some perspective from the other side here.

Ok...
1. In organized groups, there is no such thing as 24 v 24 with no lag. This is ESO.
2. Did you just confirm that zerg guilds are full of uncoordinated senior citizens and mentally challenged individuals?

We have that experience of 24 vs 24 frequently vs Nexus without lag.

I'm trying illustrate the point that not everyone is capable of having fun in a small team environment. That people like Fengrush, who are that **** good will just destroy them. And 'getting better' really isn't an option.

Fair enough, BUT like you said 24 people are NORMALLY in a group of 24 because well.... they suck without numbers.

So why shouldnt 6-8 skilled players be able to take down that force?

You see it doesnt matter how good you are, numbers will always win.

jkemmery

TheElementalPlatypus wrote: »

NPK Daniel wrote: »

Winnamine wrote: »

NPK Daniel wrote: »

24 vs 24 is just sooooooo fun when there's no lag.

OK so what about the senior citizen aged player who doesn't have the dexterity to compete with a Fengrush? What about the mentally challenged individual? What about the newby with 60 champion points?

They can't have fun 1v1'ing people like Fengrush in this game... And 4v4 with people like I mentioned above vs a team of Fengrush lvl players would be EVEN WORSE.

So, they group up together, and in mass.


I blame all of the problems on Fengrush, people like him are too good, and force lesser player's hand. Sarcastic, yes, but somewhere in there you can see truth...


Edit: just trying to provide some perspective from the other side here.

Ok...
1. In organized groups, there is no such thing as 24 v 24 with no lag. This is ESO.
2. Did you just confirm that zerg guilds are full of uncoordinated senior citizens and mentally challenged individuals?

We have that experience of 24 vs 24 frequently vs Nexus without lag.

I'm trying illustrate the point that not everyone is capable of having fun in a small team environment. That people like Fengrush, who are that **** good will just destroy them. And 'getting better' really isn't an option.

Fair enough, BUT like you said 24 people are NORMALLY in a group of 24 because well.... they suck without numbers.

So why shouldnt 6-8 skilled players be able to take down that force?

You see it doesnt matter how good you are, numbers will always win.

Which is basically the same as real life ...

Lord_Hev

..

jkemmery wrote: »

TheElementalPlatypus wrote: »

NPK Daniel wrote: »

Winnamine wrote: »

NPK Daniel wrote: »

24 vs 24 is just sooooooo fun when there's no lag.

OK so what about the senior citizen aged player who doesn't have the dexterity to compete with a Fengrush? What about the mentally challenged individual? What about the newby with 60 champion points?

They can't have fun 1v1'ing people like Fengrush in this game... And 4v4 with people like I mentioned above vs a team of Fengrush lvl players would be EVEN WORSE.

So, they group up together, and in mass.


I blame all of the problems on Fengrush, people like him are too good, and force lesser player's hand. Sarcastic, yes, but somewhere in there you can see truth...


Edit: just trying to provide some perspective from the other side here.

Ok...
1. In organized groups, there is no such thing as 24 v 24 with no lag. This is ESO.
2. Did you just confirm that zerg guilds are full of uncoordinated senior citizens and mentally challenged individuals?

We have that experience of 24 vs 24 frequently vs Nexus without lag.

I'm trying illustrate the point that not everyone is capable of having fun in a small team environment. That people like Fengrush, who are that **** good will just destroy them. And 'getting better' really isn't an option.

Fair enough, BUT like you said 24 people are NORMALLY in a group of 24 because well.... they suck without numbers.

So why shouldnt 6-8 skilled players be able to take down that force?

You see it doesnt matter how good you are, numbers will always win.

Which is basically the same as real life ...

ESO is not real life.

Joy_Division

jkemmery wrote: »

TheElementalPlatypus wrote: »

NPK Daniel wrote: »

Winnamine wrote: »

NPK Daniel wrote: »

24 vs 24 is just sooooooo fun when there's no lag.

OK so what about the senior citizen aged player who doesn't have the dexterity to compete with a Fengrush? What about the mentally challenged individual? What about the newby with 60 champion points?

They can't have fun 1v1'ing people like Fengrush in this game... And 4v4 with people like I mentioned above vs a team of Fengrush lvl players would be EVEN WORSE.

So, they group up together, and in mass.


I blame all of the problems on Fengrush, people like him are too good, and force lesser player's hand. Sarcastic, yes, but somewhere in there you can see truth...


Edit: just trying to provide some perspective from the other side here.

Ok...
1. In organized groups, there is no such thing as 24 v 24 with no lag. This is ESO.
2. Did you just confirm that zerg guilds are full of uncoordinated senior citizens and mentally challenged individuals?

We have that experience of 24 vs 24 frequently vs Nexus without lag.

I'm trying illustrate the point that not everyone is capable of having fun in a small team environment. That people like Fengrush, who are that **** good will just destroy them. And 'getting better' really isn't an option.

Fair enough, BUT like you said 24 people are NORMALLY in a group of 24 because well.... they suck without numbers.

So why shouldnt 6-8 skilled players be able to take down that force?

You see it doesnt matter how good you are, numbers will always win.

Which is basically the same as real life ...

Nope.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cannae

CN_Daniel

An elite team of 12-18 can easily defend a keep against twice their numbers. But you cannot expect to win 12 vs 40 or 16 vs 60 with any regularity. You might a few times, and at those times you'll get a Wikipedia article written about it.

TheElementalPlatypus

NPK Daniel wrote: »

An elite team of 12-18 can easily defend a keep against twice their numbers. But you cannot expect to win 12 vs 40 or 16 vs 60 with any regularity. You might a few times, and at those times you'll get a Wikipedia article written about it.

Actually it was quite common pre 1.6

FENGRUSH

Lord FENGRUSH - slayer of senior citizens; vanquisher of the mentally challenged!

All that should be expected is that 24 players best defense against AOE is NOT to stack inside of AOE. They should not get the best damage mitigation in the game by clumping together versus the very mechanic that is intended to stop that behavior.

When ESO came out of beta, we didnt have AOE caps and huge damage mitigation. Now we have a hybrid of epic disaster. Damage occuring and being calculated on every person - but people not dying because targets are chosen at random offensively, and specifically when healing - leading to long drawn out fights with lots of damage happening.

Aside from the obvious technical snafu present from a design perspective - why are we giving 24 people an advantage of damage mitigation in the first place for stacking up? While this question has been asked countless times on the forums, the designers @ZOS_BrianWheeler will not explain it - why is it there or more importantly.. how is this logical/a good idea? The short answer is likely because casual players wont find any purpose otherwise and will become part of an endless meat grinder from those destroying said group types.

So essentially one can only presume the hybrid of AOE caps is put in place to keep bad players from losing their minds. The product of this though has created an environment that cannot support this design, causes massive lag, and has driven away players from all spectrums of gameplay. It doesnt matter how good a product is if it cannot work properly. People stay because it works sometimes, and when things work, its very enjoyable.

Dynamic ult gen was taken out, sad to say but at this point I dont care about getting it back because Im used to it. But why when I AOE 7 people will 3 be hit for 6k and one hit for 3k? Why in a 1v7 does somebody have to take half damage? Thank you in advance for not providing an answer. Also - awesome stream of IC @ZOS_BrianWheeler. I was hoping one of the famous ball groups would go on the IC while hes streaming and sit under his respawn and destroy the PTS so we can observe first-hand reactions.

CN_Daniel

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Lord FENGRUSH - slayer of senior citizens; vanquisher of the mentally challenged!

All that should be expected is that 24 players best defense against AOE is NOT to stack inside of AOE. They should not get the best damage mitigation in the game by clumping together versus the very mechanic that is intended to stop that behavior.

When ESO came out of beta, we didnt have AOE caps and huge damage mitigation. Now we have a hybrid of epic disaster. Damage occuring and being calculated on every person - but people not dying because targets are chosen at random offensively, and specifically when healing - leading to long drawn out fights with lots of damage happening.

Aside from the obvious technical snafu present from a design perspective - why are we giving 24 people an advantage of damage mitigation in the first place for stacking up? While this question has been asked countless times on the forums, the designers @ZOS_BrianWheeler will not explain it - why is it there or more importantly.. how is this logical/a good idea? The short answer is likely because casual players wont find any purpose otherwise and will become part of an endless meat grinder from those destroying said group types.

So essentially one can only presume the hybrid of AOE caps is put in place to keep bad players from losing their minds. The product of this though has created an environment that cannot support this design, causes massive lag, and has driven away players from all spectrums of gameplay. It doesnt matter how good a product is if it cannot work properly. People stay because it works sometimes, and when things work, its very enjoyable.

Dynamic ult gen was taken out, sad to say but at this point I dont care about getting it back because Im used to it. But why when I AOE 7 people will 3 be hit for 6k and one hit for 3k? Why in a 1v7 does somebody have to take half damage? Thank you in advance for not providing an answer. Also - awesome stream of IC @ZOS_BrianWheeler. I was hoping one of the famous ball groups would go on the IC while hes streaming and sit under his respawn and destroy the PTS so we can observe first-hand reactions.

Tell me when he's there somebody lol; If he ain't blue i will gladly bring the pain.

TheElementalPlatypus

FENGRUSH wrote: »

I was hoping one of the famous ball groups would go on the IC while hes streaming and sit under his respawn and destroy the PTS so we can observe first-hand reactions.

They would call it a clever use of mechanics.

Either that or some other copy/paste excuse they overuse.

SkylarkAU

iirc the anti zerg movement came about because of issues around lag in cyrodil.. assuming that's fixed in 1.7 then the 24 man 'zerg' issue really boils down to individual opinion/preference doesn't it?

I think it's pretty clear that ESO encourages playing with friends and in groups and has done from the get go, the gear sets in 1.7 only reinforce this approach. Every game has to take a direction and for ESO this is a key part of theirs, from pvp to pve content the social/community/group experience is the cornerstone of the end game.

If you're a small group player as I usually am, you can't reasonably expect to face roll a 24 man raid (though it is amazing when it happens), you have to adapt your playstyle and develop counter strategies to maximize damage and disruption and so on.. imo the reason ESO is such a great game is because it isn't handed to you on a silver platter, you actually have to work at it to get the best results.

ToRelax

SkylarkAU wrote: »

iirc the anti zerg movement came about because of issues around lag in cyrodil.. assuming that's fixed in 1.7 then the 24 man 'zerg' issue really boils down to individual opinion/preference doesn't it?

I think it's pretty clear that ESO encourages playing with friends and in groups and has done from the get go, the gear sets in 1.7 only reinforce this approach. Every game has to take a direction and for ESO this is a key part of theirs, from pvp to pve content the social/community/group experience is the cornerstone of the end game.

If you're a small group player as I usually am, you can't reasonably expect to face roll a 24 man raid (though it is amazing when it happens), you have to adapt your playstyle and develop counter strategies to maximize damage and disruption and so on.. imo the reason ESO is such a great game is because it isn't handed to you on a silver platter, you actually have to work at it to get the best results.

Hey, I would really love to play large scale PvP, in that coordination of spread out forces matters.
But the stack up and spam AoE meta I find absolutely disgusting, as it takes out the skill and feels very unintuitive, yet is just the most effective.
I wouldn't care if this behaviour was a viable tactic amongst many, with positives, but also negatives and counters. But it isn't, there are no other effective formations in large scale.

SkylarkAU

ToRelax wrote: »

SkylarkAU wrote: »

iirc the anti zerg movement came about because of issues around lag in cyrodil.. assuming that's fixed in 1.7 then the 24 man 'zerg' issue really boils down to individual opinion/preference doesn't it?

I think it's pretty clear that ESO encourages playing with friends and in groups and has done from the get go, the gear sets in 1.7 only reinforce this approach. Every game has to take a direction and for ESO this is a key part of theirs, from pvp to pve content the social/community/group experience is the cornerstone of the end game.

If you're a small group player as I usually am, you can't reasonably expect to face roll a 24 man raid (though it is amazing when it happens), you have to adapt your playstyle and develop counter strategies to maximize damage and disruption and so on.. imo the reason ESO is such a great game is because it isn't handed to you on a silver platter, you actually have to work at it to get the best results.

Hey, I would really love to play large scale PvP, in that coordination of spread out forces matters.
But the stack up and spam AoE meta I find absolutely disgusting, as it takes out the skill and feels very unintuitive, yet is just the most effective.
I wouldn't care if this behaviour was a viable tactic amongst many, with positives, but also negatives and counters. But it isn't, there are no other effective formations in large scale.

I get it man, I would really like battlefield tactics, maneuvers and smaller group to be more viable in situations where a full enemy raid is present. In some cases they definitely can be but not consistently and I think that's where the problem lies. That said I don't think the answer is to break up or nerf large group play - I think it's to empower smaller group coordination to open up new methods of play to compete in battle within the scope of their capabilities.

There are couple of things I would suggest to start with that could shift things in that direction..

1. Allow large groups to subdivide in to squads with squad leaders and additional map chevrons/indicators etc. The ability to do this while remaining in a larger organised force combined with some of the new gear synergies that provide buffs to 4 nearby players would open up alternative methods of group play that are more tactical/objective oriented. This can actually work pretty well with the TS commander channel feature but that goes beyond ESO..

2. Provide the ability for leaders of groups with say 4+ members to say/yell/zone in chat under a unique text color, so other players and groups can better coordinate and respond to situations on the map or around a local battle. I think this would equally aid smaller groups in coordinating with other groups and ungrouped players. I know from experience that getting players working together in chat is the first best step in overcoming the odds on the field.

If anyone else has more ideas pls chime in

Rune_Relic

SkylarkAU wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

SkylarkAU wrote: »

iirc the anti zerg movement came about because of issues around lag in cyrodil.. assuming that's fixed in 1.7 then the 24 man 'zerg' issue really boils down to individual opinion/preference doesn't it?

I think it's pretty clear that ESO encourages playing with friends and in groups and has done from the get go, the gear sets in 1.7 only reinforce this approach. Every game has to take a direction and for ESO this is a key part of theirs, from pvp to pve content the social/community/group experience is the cornerstone of the end game.

If you're a small group player as I usually am, you can't reasonably expect to face roll a 24 man raid (though it is amazing when it happens), you have to adapt your playstyle and develop counter strategies to maximize damage and disruption and so on.. imo the reason ESO is such a great game is because it isn't handed to you on a silver platter, you actually have to work at it to get the best results.

Hey, I would really love to play large scale PvP, in that coordination of spread out forces matters.
But the stack up and spam AoE meta I find absolutely disgusting, as it takes out the skill and feels very unintuitive, yet is just the most effective.
I wouldn't care if this behaviour was a viable tactic amongst many, with positives, but also negatives and counters. But it isn't, there are no other effective formations in large scale.

I get it man, I would really like battlefield tactics, maneuvers and smaller group to be more viable in situations where a full enemy raid is present. In some cases they definitely can be but not consistently and I think that's where the problem lies. That said I don't think the answer is to break up or nerf large group play - I think it's to empower smaller group coordination to open up new methods of play to compete in battle within the scope of their capabilities.

There are couple of things I would suggest to start with that could shift things in that direction..

1. Allow large groups to subdivide in to squads with squad leaders and additional map chevrons/indicators etc. The ability to do this while remaining in a larger organised force combined with some of the new gear synergies that provide buffs to 4 nearby players would open up alternative methods of group play that are more tactical/objective oriented. This can actually work pretty well with the TS commander channel feature but that goes beyond ESO..

2. Provide the ability for leaders of groups with say 4+ members to say/yell/zone in chat under a unique text color, so other players and groups can better coordinate and respond to situations on the map or around a local battle. I think this would equally aid smaller groups in coordinating with other groups and ungrouped players. I know from experience that getting players working together in chat is the first best step in overcoming the odds on the field.

If anyone else has more ideas pls chime in

Formation synergies would be nice (size limited).
The ability to focus/unify fire power on a single target where the group lead takes over player control and positions them.
The ability to focus and unify a shield to act as a shield wall where the group lead takes over player control and positions them.

eg.
1. A rank of archers to apply combined and synced damage to a specific area.
2. A shield wall to slow down an enemy pathway.
3. A defensive ring to protect a single spot

Basically we need a set of "formation" synergies that people can opt into or not for a limited time.
Slightly more powerful than the individual, but non functional as a large group.

It would also be nice to see specialist groups in PVP. Gankers, archers, tanks, healers etc. So they can be positioned where they can do most damage and receive least damage.

SkylarkAU

Rune_Relic wrote: »

SkylarkAU wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

SkylarkAU wrote: »

iirc the anti zerg movement came about because of issues around lag in cyrodil.. assuming that's fixed in 1.7 then the 24 man 'zerg' issue really boils down to individual opinion/preference doesn't it?

I think it's pretty clear that ESO encourages playing with friends and in groups and has done from the get go, the gear sets in 1.7 only reinforce this approach. Every game has to take a direction and for ESO this is a key part of theirs, from pvp to pve content the social/community/group experience is the cornerstone of the end game.

If you're a small group player as I usually am, you can't reasonably expect to face roll a 24 man raid (though it is amazing when it happens), you have to adapt your playstyle and develop counter strategies to maximize damage and disruption and so on.. imo the reason ESO is such a great game is because it isn't handed to you on a silver platter, you actually have to work at it to get the best results.

Hey, I would really love to play large scale PvP, in that coordination of spread out forces matters.
But the stack up and spam AoE meta I find absolutely disgusting, as it takes out the skill and feels very unintuitive, yet is just the most effective.
I wouldn't care if this behaviour was a viable tactic amongst many, with positives, but also negatives and counters. But it isn't, there are no other effective formations in large scale.

I get it man, I would really like battlefield tactics, maneuvers and smaller group to be more viable in situations where a full enemy raid is present. In some cases they definitely can be but not consistently and I think that's where the problem lies. That said I don't think the answer is to break up or nerf large group play - I think it's to empower smaller group coordination to open up new methods of play to compete in battle within the scope of their capabilities.

There are couple of things I would suggest to start with that could shift things in that direction..

1. Allow large groups to subdivide in to squads with squad leaders and additional map chevrons/indicators etc. The ability to do this while remaining in a larger organised force combined with some of the new gear synergies that provide buffs to 4 nearby players would open up alternative methods of group play that are more tactical/objective oriented. This can actually work pretty well with the TS commander channel feature but that goes beyond ESO..

2. Provide the ability for leaders of groups with say 4+ members to say/yell/zone in chat under a unique text color, so other players and groups can better coordinate and respond to situations on the map or around a local battle. I think this would equally aid smaller groups in coordinating with other groups and ungrouped players. I know from experience that getting players working together in chat is the first best step in overcoming the odds on the field.

If anyone else has more ideas pls chime in

Formation synergies would be nice (size limited).
The ability to focus/unify fire power on a single target where the group lead takes over player control and positions them.
The ability to focus and unify a shield to act as a shield wall where the group lead takes over player control and positions them.

eg.
1. A rank of archers to apply combined and synced damage to a specific area.
2. A shield wall to slow down an enemy pathway.
3. A defensive ring to protect a single spot

Basically we need a set of "formation" synergies that people can opt into or not for a limited time.
Slightly more powerful than the individual, but non functional as a large group.

It would also be nice to see specialist groups in PVP. Gankers, archers, tanks, healers etc. So they can be positioned where they can do most damage and receive least damage.

That would tie in nicely with sub divisions, more so if the group or squad leaders could set a secondary tab target for all players under their command so, group leader -> squad leader -> squad players

R3DTHR3AT

Nice criticism, such analytics, very much

TheElementalPlatypus

SkylarkAU wrote: »

imo the reason ESO is such a great game is because it isn't handed to you on a silver platter.

It isnt handed a silver platter for small groups but the big groups yes. Why do you think so many ineffective players run in large groups? Because they are handed easy AP and are given 1 or 2 buttons to spam as their role.

I played in Nexus for a little because I was farming some AP for bags, however I soon realized it had been the most boring style of play.

What I did consisted of sitting in a TS, stacking on crown, stacking on crown, spamming a few buttons, and (when we came against another zerg) 9/10 times the larger one would win.

SkylarkAU

TheElementalPlatypus wrote: »

SkylarkAU wrote: »

imo the reason ESO is such a great game is because it isn't handed to you on a silver platter.

It isnt handed a silver platter for small groups but the big groups yes. Why do you think so many ineffective players run in large groups? Because they are handed easy AP and are given 1 or 2 buttons to spam as their role.

I played in Nexus for a little because I was farming some AP for bags, however I soon realized it had been the most boring style of play.

What I did consisted of sitting in a TS, stacking on crown, stacking on crown, spamming a few buttons, and (when we came against another zerg) 9/10 times the larger one would win.

I think yes and no.. mid sized groups of 12-16 can wipe a group of 24 but again, only if they work at it in terms of discipline, experience, synergies, etc..

Juraigr

SkylarkAU wrote: »

TheElementalPlatypus wrote: »

SkylarkAU wrote: »

imo the reason ESO is such a great game is because it isn't handed to you on a silver platter.

It isnt handed a silver platter for small groups but the big groups yes. Why do you think so many ineffective players run in large groups? Because they are handed easy AP and are given 1 or 2 buttons to spam as their role.

I played in Nexus for a little because I was farming some AP for bags, however I soon realized it had been the most boring style of play.

What I did consisted of sitting in a TS, stacking on crown, stacking on crown, spamming a few buttons, and (when we came against another zerg) 9/10 times the larger one would win.

I think yes and no.. mid sized groups of 12-16 can wipe a group of 24 but again, only if they work at it in terms of discipline, experience, synergies, etc..

used to be able to do that with 5 people

TheElementalPlatypus

SkylarkAU wrote: »

TheElementalPlatypus wrote: »

SkylarkAU wrote: »

imo the reason ESO is such a great game is because it isn't handed to you on a silver platter.

It isnt handed a silver platter for small groups but the big groups yes. Why do you think so many ineffective players run in large groups? Because they are handed easy AP and are given 1 or 2 buttons to spam as their role.

I played in Nexus for a little because I was farming some AP for bags, however I soon realized it had been the most boring style of play.

What I did consisted of sitting in a TS, stacking on crown, stacking on crown, spamming a few buttons, and (when we came against another zerg) 9/10 times the larger one would win.

I think yes and no.. mid sized groups of 12-16 can wipe a group of 24 but again, only if they work at it in terms of discipline, experience, synergies, etc..

16 might as well be a zerg. I dont consider anything above 8-10 really a "small group".