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.
HoloYoitsu wrote: »Intelligent points. So,
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]
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.
HoloYoitsu wrote: »Intelligent points. So,
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.
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?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.
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.
But what if you're doing it to Krotha?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.
dap_robertb16_ESO wrote: »A zerg is the number of people required to kill you, plus one.