How many people is a zerg?

HoloYoitsu

Since we've had 3 pages of arguing over what the definition of a 'zerg' is, I present the first in a series of polls in which we as a salty community attempt to define simple words!

I assert that anything over 4 people is a zerg and defy you to prove me wrong.

KenaPKK

None of the above. The word "zerg" is used relatively, so its definition must be relative as well.

A zerg is any group larger than is necessary to achieve its objective. If two people kill a new PvPer, they zerged him. If 24 or 40 or more people swarm a well-defended keep and barely take it, they are not a zerg. Your perspective of the "zerg" must change relative to what the group is trying to accomplish.

BigTone

24+

KenaPKK wrote: »

None of the above. The word "zerg" is used relatively, so its definition must be relative as well.

A zerg is any group larger than is necessary to achieve its objective. If two people kill a new PvPer, they zerged him. If 24 or 40 or more people swarm a well-defended keep and barely take it, they are not a zerg. Your perspective of the "zerg" must change relative to what the group is trying to accomplish.

I completely disagree with this. How can 2v1 be counted as a zerg but 40 players taking a keep not be a zerg???

There is no way anything less than 10 can be counted as a zerg.

CatchMeTrolling

Depends on what you're up against really, for example you can be in a 24 man group but in someone's buff server taking on 100 people. In that scenario I wouldn't call it a zerg, so yeah it is a pretty relative term.

and it also depends on the campaign.

CtrlAltDlt

9-10

To me, anything more than 8

Decado

I think it depends completely, a while back I was in a group of 20 people and we killed some EP who then whispered me and called me a zerger and blah blah blah, anyway about an hour later I was running around on my own, and I got ganked by 7 guys at a mile gate, one of which was the guy who whispered me earlier on, so I decided to stay dead and watch that gate for a few minutes, which these 7 guys stayed and and ganked 1 person at a time, so we killed them with around 3v1 and they called us zergers yet saw no problem in killing people 7v1 from stealth,

So I agree completely its relative, sometimes a full 24 man raid is a Zerg but the second we run into a certain red guild stacking 3 full groups we are the ones being zerged

HoloYoitsu

5-6

Intelligent points. So,

CatchMeTrolling

HoloYoitsu wrote: »

Intelligent points. So,

Depends on the scenario in which they're complaining, I would expect someone to complain about a 24 man group in a competitive server.

To me I don't care about big groups, I care more about large groups stacking together to zerg ball.

paul_j

The Zerg Swarm is a terrifying and ruthless amalgamation of biologically advanced, arthropodal aliens. Dedicated to the pursuit of genetic perfection, the zerg relentlessly hunt down and assimilate advanced species across the galaxy, incorporating useful genetic code into their own.[1] They are named "the Swarm" per their ability to rapidly create strains, and the relentless assaults they employ to overwhelm their foes.[2]

Edit source:
http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Zerg

CatchMeTrolling

paul_j wrote: »

The Zerg Swarm is a terrifying and ruthless amalgamation of biologically advanced, arthropodal aliens. Dedicated to the pursuit of genetic perfection, the zerg relentlessly hunt down and assimilate advanced species across the galaxy, incorporating useful genetic code into their own.[1] They are named "the Swarm" per their ability to rapidly create strains, and the relentless assaults they employ to overwhelm their foes.[2]

Just finished playing mass effect commander Shepard?

KenaPKK

BigTone wrote: »

KenaPKK wrote: »

None of the above. The word "zerg" is used relatively, so its definition must be relative as well.

A zerg is any group larger than is necessary to achieve its objective. If two people kill a new PvPer, they zerged him. If 24 or 40 or more people swarm a well-defended keep and barely take it, they are not a zerg. Your perspective of the "zerg" must change relative to what the group is trying to accomplish.

I completely disagree with this. How can 2v1 be counted as a zerg but 40 players taking a keep not be a zerg???

There is no way anything less than 10 can be counted as a zerg.

You're thinking too rigidly, Tone. You may not like largescale PvP, but since the game was made for it and some people do enjoy it, you have to step back from your preferences when making a judgment like this. If that keep is defended by 60 players, then the 40 assaulting it is surely not a zerg. And I would argue that if both Sypher and Fengrush -- or any two experienced PvPers -- came upon a lone Volunteer fresh to PvP and jumped on him with everything they've got, then they zerged him.

KenaPKK

HoloYoitsu wrote: »

Intelligent points. So,

Common complaints from people who enjoy playing in groups of smaller size. In other words, the vocal minority.

Notice that 24 man groups complain of 40+ man double raids stacking up as well, but their complains are not mentioned in threads like this because the smallscale players yell back at them too loudly. In reality, both sides have valid points.

Derra

13-14

I personally think the problem is not zerging and associating a number to it. If you´re asking for it i´d pin it down for anything bigger than the pve raidsize.

In my opinion esos "zerg" problems lie elsewhere:
It´s having large scale pvp with grps so big that organising forces is no longer an achievement. If battles are too easily organised numbers will always win.
Largescale pvp with many small grps (resulting in decentralisation and on top of that having certain abilities only working grpwide) creates possibilities of participation for every playstyle whereas having enough people in one large grp makes those grps the alpha and omega in terms of objective pvp excluding everyone not playing that way.

I ultimately think allowing 24 players into one grp is one of esos primary design failures in terms of pvp right beside of our beloved aoe caps.

Reznique

Low FPS? High Ping?

Thats the definition of a zerg.

BigTone

24+

KenaPKK wrote: »

BigTone wrote: »

KenaPKK wrote: »

None of the above. The word "zerg" is used relatively, so its definition must be relative as well.

A zerg is any group larger than is necessary to achieve its objective. If two people kill a new PvPer, they zerged him. If 24 or 40 or more people swarm a well-defended keep and barely take it, they are not a zerg. Your perspective of the "zerg" must change relative to what the group is trying to accomplish.

I completely disagree with this. How can 2v1 be counted as a zerg but 40 players taking a keep not be a zerg???

There is no way anything less than 10 can be counted as a zerg.

You're thinking too rigidly, Tone. You may not like largescale PvP, but since the game was made for it and some people do enjoy it, you have to step back from your preferences when making a judgment like this. If that keep is defended by 60 players, then the 40 assaulting it is surely not a zerg. And I would argue that if both Sypher and Fengrush -- or any two experienced PvPers -- came upon a lone Volunteer fresh to PvP and jumped on him with everything they've got, then they zerged him.

I actually enjoy large scale PvP. Hell I lead the dc zerg for a very long time. Myself, and a few other zerg lords ( @CN_Daniel), lead DC to its first competitive campaign victory in many months back in May with the power of our almighty zergs. I would sometimes have 30 players at my command. I agree that a lot of people just throw the term "zerg" around every time they die, but if you get beat 1v4 you didn't get zerged. In my opinion the term zerg should never be applied to a group less than ten, regardless of the situation.

I was running around solo today and got trampled by Aenlir and his group. They were probably running six people in their group. Did I get roflstommped? Yes. Was I mad that I got gap closed to death? Damn right. But calling that group a zerg is an insult to that group.

HoloYoitsu

5-6

Derra wrote: »

I ultimately think allowing 24 players into one grp is one of esos primary design failures in terms of pvp right beside of our beloved aoe caps.

That's nice and all, but the 24 group cap doesn't stop 80ish people from stacking inside a single keep to defend it or conversely attacking - like the triple raid yellow hoard that's been so fond of dumping its load all over Nickel over the last month. Are you suggesting that of the max group size was 12 we wouldn't see this level of raid stacking? Why wouldn't we? What about the giant pug hoards of people who aren't even grouped with each other to begin with?

Honestly, this stacking is more a product of AOE caps and the design of Cyrodiil objectives.

smacx250

7-8

Well, with TG groups greater than 6 will cap the AP gain, so the only advantage at that point is size. So I'll call that the "zerg" threshold, just 'cuz!

But for live I'd say > 24, for the same reason (but voted the TG number).

KenaPKK

BigTone wrote: »

KenaPKK wrote: »

BigTone wrote: »

KenaPKK wrote: »

None of the above. The word "zerg" is used relatively, so its definition must be relative as well.

A zerg is any group larger than is necessary to achieve its objective. If two people kill a new PvPer, they zerged him. If 24 or 40 or more people swarm a well-defended keep and barely take it, they are not a zerg. Your perspective of the "zerg" must change relative to what the group is trying to accomplish.

I completely disagree with this. How can 2v1 be counted as a zerg but 40 players taking a keep not be a zerg???

There is no way anything less than 10 can be counted as a zerg.

You're thinking too rigidly, Tone. You may not like largescale PvP, but since the game was made for it and some people do enjoy it, you have to step back from your preferences when making a judgment like this. If that keep is defended by 60 players, then the 40 assaulting it is surely not a zerg. And I would argue that if both Sypher and Fengrush -- or any two experienced PvPers -- came upon a lone Volunteer fresh to PvP and jumped on him with everything they've got, then they zerged him.

I actually enjoy large scale PvP. Hell I lead the dc zerg for a very long time. Myself, and a few other zerg lords ( @CN_Daniel), lead DC to its first competitive campaign victory in many months back in May with the power of our almighty zergs. I would sometimes have 30 players at my command. I agree that a lot of people just throw the term "zerg" around every time they die, but if you get beat 1v4 you didn't get zerged. In my opinion the term zerg should never be applied to a group less than ten, regardless of the situation.

I was running around solo today and got trampled by Aenlir and his group. They were probably running six people in their group. Did I get roflstommped? Yes. Was I mad that I got gap closed to death? Damn right. But calling that group a zerg is an insult to that group.

They still all jumped on you while you were alone, giving you zero chance to fight back. I have respect for their group too, but sorry, they zerged you. We all do it from time to time, but zerging is still zerging. In my mind, 6 guys jumping on one guy -- perhaps spamming gap closers like you mentioned -- is zerging them down regardless of who is involved.

HoloYoitsu

5-6

KenaPKK wrote: »

BigTone wrote: »

KenaPKK wrote: »

BigTone wrote: »

KenaPKK wrote: »

None of the above. The word "zerg" is used relatively, so its definition must be relative as well.

A zerg is any group larger than is necessary to achieve its objective. If two people kill a new PvPer, they zerged him. If 24 or 40 or more people swarm a well-defended keep and barely take it, they are not a zerg. Your perspective of the "zerg" must change relative to what the group is trying to accomplish.

I completely disagree with this. How can 2v1 be counted as a zerg but 40 players taking a keep not be a zerg???

There is no way anything less than 10 can be counted as a zerg.

You're thinking too rigidly, Tone. You may not like largescale PvP, but since the game was made for it and some people do enjoy it, you have to step back from your preferences when making a judgment like this. If that keep is defended by 60 players, then the 40 assaulting it is surely not a zerg. And I would argue that if both Sypher and Fengrush -- or any two experienced PvPers -- came upon a lone Volunteer fresh to PvP and jumped on him with everything they've got, then they zerged him.

I actually enjoy large scale PvP. Hell I lead the dc zerg for a very long time. Myself, and a few other zerg lords ( @CN_Daniel), lead DC to its first competitive campaign victory in many months back in May with the power of our almighty zergs. I would sometimes have 30 players at my command. I agree that a lot of people just throw the term "zerg" around every time they die, but if you get beat 1v4 you didn't get zerged. In my opinion the term zerg should never be applied to a group less than ten, regardless of the situation.

I was running around solo today and got trampled by Aenlir and his group. They were probably running six people in their group. Did I get roflstommped? Yes. Was I mad that I got gap closed to death? Damn right. But calling that group a zerg is an insult to that group.

They still all jumped on you while you were alone, giving you zero chance to fight back. I have respect for their group too, but sorry, they zerged you. We all do it from time to time, but zerging is still zerging. In my mind, 6 guys jumping on one guy -- perhaps spamming gap closers like you mentioned -- is zerging them down regardless of who is involved.

But what if you're doing it to Krotha?

Ghost-Shot

1-2

Solo or gtfo zerglings.

bosmern_ESO

24+

There have been times where its been my friend and I ganking and I got rage tells saying we were zerging. zergs are all opinion based, my opinion is-

1: solo
2-6: Small group
7-16: medium group
17-24: large group
24+: Zerg

ThePonzzz

24+

Anything over a full raid is a zerg for me, definition aside.

Junipus

A zerg is the number of people required to kill you, plus one.

KenaPKK

dap_robertb16_ESO wrote: »

A zerg is the number of people required to kill you, plus one.

Yay, someone gets it. lol

Leandor

Zerging has nothing to do with numbers, it's the playstyle involved. Ball groups are zergs, no matter how many players partake.

Ball groups are groups clustering on a "leader" while abusing the two principle faults of ESO, strength of AoE attacks and smart healing.

Karamis_Vimardon

“Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute. That's relativity.” - Albert Einstein

Reality is an illusion. Perspective is everything.

Forestd16b14_ESO

24+

Technically it's 25 and above but when say 4 people are trying to fight off 16 or 18 people doing zerg tactics you can hopefully understand when they say zerg.

Ahzek

1-2

If you run around with more than me (i solo 90% of the time) you are a filthy scrubcakenoobzergling that needs a prootch to make your descisions.

acw37162

1 or more depending on what you need it to mean.

MountainHound

@FENGRUSH is a zerg.

Yusuf

1 vs 4 is a zerg
2 vs 8 is a zerg
3 vs 16 and so on