[SUGGESTION] Apply a Healing, Damage and Movement Speed Debuff to Large Groups

tist

Actually zergs need a new buff.

ASSAULT TREE PASSIVE
Trample:When grouped with 20 or more players your horse now
has trample. Instantly kill any enemy you ride through.

Satiar

Eh it's fine, we cool.

NovaShadow

Cap groups at 12
Bring back soft caps
Remove AOE caps

HoloYoitsu

Hektik_V wrote: »

Will this debuff apply to the "1vX'ers" that are conveniently placed beside the group or just the group itself?

I don't care, as long as we name the debuff: Brandon Spirit.

HoloYoitsu

NovaShadow wrote: »

Cap groups at 12
Bring back soft caps
Remove AOE caps

Here are some pictorial references to make things easier for ZOS to understand.

KenaPKK

Hektik_V wrote: »

Will this debuff apply to the "1vX'ers" that are conveniently placed beside the group or just the group itself?

*cough* Krotha syndrome *cough*

Force-Siphon wrote: »

Okay I'm going to explain this to you guys so you can understand. ill first clarify by saying that I'm referring to people who run multiple raids and was making a half joke to my good friend reddington. No one mentioned you guys in this thread until you decided to go after me for doing this which clearly it was because you are triggered just like every time someone mentions zergers on the forums it instantly becomes about your guild which I actually have respect for despite always getting defensive and sometimes mean spirited (or former guild I guess? Contrary to popular belief not all of us follow what happens with your guild).

I personally don't know or care if one of you are solo or in a group of 50 because IM NOT TALKING ABOUT YOU. and yes from what I've seen Zheg does post a lot about big groups things, I'm not bashing it again it's what I see and immedietly you all become defensive. I haven't come on the forums and bashed your guild, I haven't been in zone chat bashing your guild, what I think I keep to myself or with my friends.

Quit getting defensive every time someone talks about zergers, if you aren't doing it why do you need to go after people? Just saying. I'm going to leave it at that because to be honest it's your problem.

The truth.

VadimAleks

+500 to topic starter.
if the server can not handle the transfer of large amounts of data to all clients when there is a zerg - need to make zerg unprofitable. As stated in old book "only four can attack one, six if they Are masters". So zerg MUST have debuff. Not 12 ppl ofc, i suggest 24 ppl - 0% debuff to attributes and AP gain, 48 - 50%, 72+ - 90%. Thus there will be more tactical and less zerg
This is logical and does not disturb the balance.
I am willing to lose the crowd, but did not agree to die in lag due to server problems.

FENGRUSH

HoloYoitsu wrote: »

Force-Siphon wrote: »

Zheg you are the number 1 person to defend big groups on the forums we get it, you dont want your play style nerfed. We all go through it

Callig Zheg out for 'big group playstyle'? When he is someone who solo & small manned exclusively since launch and still does extensively?

I dont even know who Zheg is - and Ive fought pretty much all 'small man/solo' groups. This is as bad as when Crown said he "spends 95% of his time 1vXing."

Cant argue with Siphon's point on people talking about zergs and you always have the same guy showing up from said 20+ group running guild. Comments often made about you guys 'only have 12-18 on most days now' or something. Honestly, Zheg is just as desperate to prove hes accomplishing great things with few people as the people he seeks to insult. But at the end of the day, hes a huge unknown to most good players past and present. Once you voted in the barrier changes thread to have barriers remain hitting 24 people you pretty much lost all credibility as to what balance is with large vs small groups. Yea, should totally have 20k barriers hitting 24 people. I love cutting through 480,000 uncrittable damage from a single guys ult that can be replaced by one of the next 24 people.

Satiar

FENGRUSH wrote: »

HoloYoitsu wrote: »

Force-Siphon wrote: »

Zheg you are the number 1 person to defend big groups on the forums we get it, you dont want your play style nerfed. We all go through it

Callig Zheg out for 'big group playstyle'? When he is someone who solo & small manned exclusively since launch and still does extensively?

I dont even know who Zheg is - and Ive fought pretty much all 'small man/solo' groups. This is as bad as when Crown said he "spends 95% of his time 1vXing."

Cant argue with Siphon's point on people talking about zergs and you always have the same guy showing up from said 20+ group running guild. Comments often made about you guys 'only have 12-18 on most days now' or something. Honestly, Zheg is just as desperate to prove hes accomplishing great things with few people as the people he seeks to insult. But at the end of the day, hes a huge unknown to most good players past and present. Once you voted in the barrier changes thread to have barriers remain hitting 24 people you pretty much lost all credibility as to what balance is with large vs small groups. Yea, should totally have 20k barriers hitting 24 people. I love cutting through 480,000 uncrittable damage from a single guys ult that can be replaced by one of the next 24 people.

Barrier was an odd fish. While I think it's obvious it was an extremely strong ulti, I'll stand by the points I made in that thread. Damage has continued to scale up and up and up with no real counter, and it's traditional counters (like purge, Rapids, barriers) have been brutalized or removed. I know you didn't like barriers for good reasons Fengrush, but group v group fights were vastly better with them than without. Without barrier there was no more counter play to a bomb, which sucks from a lead perspective because when fights literally come down to "who gets the first big hits in" the strategy element of leading got really dumbed down. Timed Nova/banner/veil + barrier 1-2 rotations went away in favor of dumping 24 meteors/bats. As always, the good groups adapted and continued to do the same things and obtain their wins, but it was simply less fun and over too quick.

And y'all can laugh at barriers being OP but you try facing a 24-man Nexus group with a Meth emp Proxy-Broken Dawnbreaker combo without it . They provided legitimate counter play in a meta where a half decent player could melt a 30k barrier in under one second.

And say what you will for Zheg, Mostly Harmless was a beast small man and were quite well known back when. They didn't make a ton of footage, but those of us who did small man back in the Bloodthorn/Wabba days knew them well. It's one reason I was overjoyed to have them come aboard VE when we went DC, nothing better then getting your rivals on your team to make you stronger.

Zheg

FENGRUSH wrote: »

HoloYoitsu wrote: »

Force-Siphon wrote: »

Zheg you are the number 1 person to defend big groups on the forums we get it, you dont want your play style nerfed. We all go through it

Callig Zheg out for 'big group playstyle'? When he is someone who solo & small manned exclusively since launch and still does extensively?

I dont even know who Zheg is - and Ive fought pretty much all 'small man/solo' groups. This is as bad as when Crown said he "spends 95% of his time 1vXing."

Cant argue with Siphon's point on people talking about zergs and you always have the same guy showing up from said 20+ group running guild. Comments often made about you guys 'only have 12-18 on most days now' or something. Honestly, Zheg is just as desperate to prove hes accomplishing great things with few people as the people he seeks to insult. But at the end of the day, hes a huge unknown to most good players past and present. Once you voted in the barrier changes thread to have barriers remain hitting 24 people you pretty much lost all credibility as to what balance is with large vs small groups. Yea, should totally have 20k barriers hitting 24 people. I love cutting through 480,000 uncrittable damage from a single guys ult that can be replaced by one of the next 24 people.

Again, maybe if you played on the competitive campaigns fengrush... but then again you'd have to leave your comfort zone and actually fight against the majority of the better groups still running. Also, up until a month ago I was on blue and you were on blue. Of course we wouldn't have fought, except for all of the times I embarrassed you via forum pvp.

On barrier, the reason smart people were against the change is because damage was too high, was going even higher, and there were no replacements to mitigation. You still complain to this day about damage being too low and healing too high - you're grossly out of touch and continue to demonstrate a lack of insight and a floundering grasp of balance. You want to run into a group of 60+ and one-man rambo them down, then complain if they live through it with heals and/or 'zerg' you down. I'm grounded enough to realize that would be disastrous for the game and balance, so we'll frequently disagree. Myself and every other person using barrier in that meta despised the reliance on the skill and said so vocally, but were sober enough to realize the entirety of mitigation in the game revolved around that and was not being replaced by anything to counteract the ever-present damage creep and already sky-high aoe dmg. Sure enough, after a few weeks most of the playerbase came around to realizing what a stupid thing the VD, low mitigation, permaroot meta truly was. It's trendy to parrot bad ideas and call people zerglings without actually looking at their points, less so to admit they were right.

fastolfv_ESO

so if VE is done why are you guys still trying to tell people on the forums how the game should work? move on already zheg nobody cares what your group could supposedly accomplish

Zheg

fastolfv_ESO wrote: »

so if VE is done why are you guys still trying to tell people on the forums how the game should work? move on already zheg nobody cares what your group could supposedly accomplish

you need significant practice at trolling.

Ghost-Shot

Zheg wrote: »

fastolfv_ESO wrote: »

so if VE is done why are you guys still trying to tell people on the forums how the game should work? move on already zheg nobody cares what your group could supposedly accomplish

you need significant practice at trolling.

@HoloYoitsu show him the way senpai

Satiar

fastolfv_ESO wrote: »

so if VE is done why are you guys still trying to tell people on the forums how the game should work? move on already zheg nobody cares what your group could supposedly accomplish

I always find it fascinating, how drastic the difference between how people talk about us when we're on their faction vs how they talk about us when we're on the other faction.

Ah those sweet summer days of Beast and Zavus coming into our threads with the warm fuzzies.

Solariken

As much as I love the idea OP, I don't think it's a good solution.

In IC, they should start by making 12 the maximum group size and reducing XP/TV/AP gains additionally for each person in the group over 4.

In Cyrodiil they can still cap the group size at 12.

God_flakes

Zheg wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

HoloYoitsu wrote: »

Force-Siphon wrote: »

Zheg you are the number 1 person to defend big groups on the forums we get it, you dont want your play style nerfed. We all go through it

Callig Zheg out for 'big group playstyle'? When he is someone who solo & small manned exclusively since launch and still does extensively?

I dont even know who Zheg is - and Ive fought pretty much all 'small man/solo' groups. This is as bad as when Crown said he "spends 95% of his time 1vXing."

Cant argue with Siphon's point on people talking about zergs and you always have the same guy showing up from said 20+ group running guild. Comments often made about you guys 'only have 12-18 on most days now' or something. Honestly, Zheg is just as desperate to prove hes accomplishing great things with few people as the people he seeks to insult. But at the end of the day, hes a huge unknown to most good players past and present. Once you voted in the barrier changes thread to have barriers remain hitting 24 people you pretty much lost all credibility as to what balance is with large vs small groups. Yea, should totally have 20k barriers hitting 24 people. I love cutting through 480,000 uncrittable damage from a single guys ult that can be replaced by one of the next 24 people.

Again, maybe if you played on the competitive campaigns fengrush... but then again you'd have to leave your comfort zone and actually fight against the majority of the better groups still running. Also, up until a month ago I was on blue and you were on blue. Of course we wouldn't have fought, except for all of the times I embarrassed you via forum pvp.

On barrier, the reason smart people were against the change is because damage was too high, was going even higher, and there were no replacements to mitigation. You still complain to this day about damage being too low and healing too high - you're grossly out of touch and continue to demonstrate a lack of insight and a floundering grasp of balance. You want to run into a group of 60+ and one-man rambo them down, then complain if they live through it with heals and/or 'zerg' you down. I'm grounded enough to realize that would be disastrous for the game and balance, so we'll frequently disagree. Myself and every other person using barrier in that meta despised the reliance on the skill and said so vocally, but were sober enough to realize the entirety of mitigation in the game revolved around that and was not being replaced by anything to counteract the ever-present damage creep and already sky-high aoe dmg. Sure enough, after a few weeks most of the playerbase came around to realizing what a stupid thing the VD, low mitigation, permaroot meta truly was. It's trendy to parrot bad ideas and call people zerglings without actually looking at their points, less so to admit they were right.

Why do you keep bringing up the "you don't play the competitive campaigns" thing against Fengrush as if this is some sort of insult? Your entire guild up and "retired" altogether, and you're going to slam him for continuing to play the game, but merely on the server he has chosen-which is more conducive to the small man he prefers? Smh. Talk about troll fail.

God_flakes

Satiar wrote: »

fastolfv_ESO wrote: »

so if VE is done why are you guys still trying to tell people on the forums how the game should work? move on already zheg nobody cares what your group could supposedly accomplish

I always find it fascinating, how drastic the difference between how people talk about us when we're on their faction vs how they talk about us when we're on the other factio.

This goes both ways.

Satiar

God_flakes wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

fastolfv_ESO wrote: »

so if VE is done why are you guys still trying to tell people on the forums how the game should work? move on already zheg nobody cares what your group could supposedly accomplish

I always find it fascinating, how drastic the difference between how people talk about us when we're on their faction vs how they talk about us when we're on the other factio.

This goes both ways.

Mmmm not really. I've kept good ties with anyone and everyone willing to. I will still vouch for guilds on opposing factions, long after they've changed from calling us great players and good fights to "zerging no skill baddies". Going back to the old "VE Rerolls DC" thread is kinda sad for me, so many people in there who I considered friends and allies who now can't bring themselves to say Good Fight if their lives depended on it.

Zheg

God_flakes wrote: »

Zheg wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

HoloYoitsu wrote: »

Force-Siphon wrote: »

Zheg you are the number 1 person to defend big groups on the forums we get it, you dont want your play style nerfed. We all go through it

Callig Zheg out for 'big group playstyle'? When he is someone who solo & small manned exclusively since launch and still does extensively?

I dont even know who Zheg is - and Ive fought pretty much all 'small man/solo' groups. This is as bad as when Crown said he "spends 95% of his time 1vXing."

Cant argue with Siphon's point on people talking about zergs and you always have the same guy showing up from said 20+ group running guild. Comments often made about you guys 'only have 12-18 on most days now' or something. Honestly, Zheg is just as desperate to prove hes accomplishing great things with few people as the people he seeks to insult. But at the end of the day, hes a huge unknown to most good players past and present. Once you voted in the barrier changes thread to have barriers remain hitting 24 people you pretty much lost all credibility as to what balance is with large vs small groups. Yea, should totally have 20k barriers hitting 24 people. I love cutting through 480,000 uncrittable damage from a single guys ult that can be replaced by one of the next 24 people.

Again, maybe if you played on the competitive campaigns fengrush... but then again you'd have to leave your comfort zone and actually fight against the majority of the better groups still running. Also, up until a month ago I was on blue and you were on blue. Of course we wouldn't have fought, except for all of the times I embarrassed you via forum pvp.

On barrier, the reason smart people were against the change is because damage was too high, was going even higher, and there were no replacements to mitigation. You still complain to this day about damage being too low and healing too high - you're grossly out of touch and continue to demonstrate a lack of insight and a floundering grasp of balance. You want to run into a group of 60+ and one-man rambo them down, then complain if they live through it with heals and/or 'zerg' you down. I'm grounded enough to realize that would be disastrous for the game and balance, so we'll frequently disagree. Myself and every other person using barrier in that meta despised the reliance on the skill and said so vocally, but were sober enough to realize the entirety of mitigation in the game revolved around that and was not being replaced by anything to counteract the ever-present damage creep and already sky-high aoe dmg. Sure enough, after a few weeks most of the playerbase came around to realizing what a stupid thing the VD, low mitigation, permaroot meta truly was. It's trendy to parrot bad ideas and call people zerglings without actually looking at their points, less so to admit they were right.

Why do you keep bringing up the "you don't play the competitive campaigns" thing against Fengrush as if this is some sort of insult? Your entire guild up and "retired" altogether, and you're going to slam him for continuing to play the game, but merely on the server he has chosen-which is more conducive to the small man he prefers? Smh. Talk about troll fail.

Most of the guild still plays the game...

The reason I keep pressing fengrush on it is because he likes to offer sage wisdom on how wrong people are about the meta and act like it's demeaning to run groups larger than his own to fight the 60+ PM raids (which you and I both know very well), the same ones he'd struggle with in a meta where numbers mean so much. You don't get to avoid just about every competitive campaign for two years to fight pugs and then act like people need to L2P because they're actually fighting good groups of players (or groups of players stacking numbers and embracing the meta). If he wants his opinion to have weight in discussions of group v group fights, he should actually participate in them first.

NBrookus

gibous wrote: »

My idea for a "battle formation" debuff might look something like this:

• Group of 1-8: No debuff
• 9-12: 5% penalty to healing and damage
• 13-16: 10% penalty to healing, damage, and 3% penalty to movement speed
• 17-20: 15% penalty to healing, damage, and 6% penalty to movement speed
• 21-24: 20% penalty to healing, damage, and 9% penalty to movement speed

This sounds like a lot of server calculations -- and doesn't prevent 3 theoretical 8 man groups from being 24 players in Teamspeak to avoid the nerf.

Perhaps a simpler and less server-taxing solution is un-nerfing Major Expedition back to 40% for players not in a group or in a group smaller than something like 4. Granted, you could still get 24 guys in TS together, but the smaller the groups the harder it will be to coordinate as a single blob. Unfortunately it would inevitably buff pick-up mobs and gankers, neither of which need one.

On the other hand, it would directly buff small coordinated play and tactical options like scouting, finding and destroying forward camps or making flanking maneuvers. Small groups could strike deep into enemy territory more easily. It'd give players a better chance of getting out of the way of a zerg instead of getting steamrolled. And larger groups would not be penalized, because they would have the option of dividing part of their forces into a more mobile subgroup with a specific tasks -- albeit requiring greater communication and strategy.

gibous

Solariken wrote: »

As much as I love the idea OP, I don't think it's a good solution.
In IC, they should start by making 12 the maximum group size and reducing XP/TV/AP gains additionally for each person in the group over 4.
In Cyrodiil they can still cap the group size at 12.

Thanks for a civilized, on-topic reply. I may not have proposed the perfect solution, but I think there is a balance problem when it comes to the efficiency of groups of different sizes. My main point is that there should be distinct advantages and disadvantages of different group sizes. Perhaps at the most basic level this comes back to the AOE cap issue, where a 4 or 6 man group takes full damage from a 12 man, but the 12 man is protected by the cap.

gibous

NBrookus wrote: »

gibous wrote: »

My idea for a "battle formation" debuff might look something like this:

• Group of 1-8: No debuff
• 9-12: 5% penalty to healing and damage
• 13-16: 10% penalty to healing, damage, and 3% penalty to movement speed
• 17-20: 15% penalty to healing, damage, and 6% penalty to movement speed
• 21-24: 20% penalty to healing, damage, and 9% penalty to movement speed

This sounds like a lot of server calculations -- and doesn't prevent 3 theoretical 8 man groups from being 24 players in Teamspeak to avoid the nerf.

Perhaps a simpler and less server-taxing solution is un-nerfing Major Expedition back to 40% for players not in a group or in a group smaller than something like 4. Granted, you could still get 24 guys in TS together, but the smaller the groups the harder it will be to coordinate as a single blob. Unfortunately it would inevitably buff pick-up mobs and gankers, neither of which need one.

On the other hand, it would directly buff small coordinated play and tactical options like scouting, finding and destroying forward camps or making flanking maneuvers. Small groups could strike deep into enemy territory more easily. It'd give players a better chance of getting out of the way of a zerg instead of getting steamrolled. And larger groups would not be penalized, because they would have the option of dividing part of their forces into a more mobile subgroup with a specific tasks -- albeit requiring greater communication and strategy.

This is what I'm talking about - smaller groups should be more mobile than larger groups, at the very least. I mentioned it in my original post. It's such a basic dynamic of battle I can't believe it's not somehow factored into a game focused around having battles. Make Retreating Maneuvers work like Proxy Det - scaling with the number of targets affected. In this case, it would be less effective as it hits more people.

Zheg

gibous wrote: »

NBrookus wrote: »

gibous wrote: »

My idea for a "battle formation" debuff might look something like this:

• Group of 1-8: No debuff
• 9-12: 5% penalty to healing and damage
• 13-16: 10% penalty to healing, damage, and 3% penalty to movement speed
• 17-20: 15% penalty to healing, damage, and 6% penalty to movement speed
• 21-24: 20% penalty to healing, damage, and 9% penalty to movement speed

This sounds like a lot of server calculations -- and doesn't prevent 3 theoretical 8 man groups from being 24 players in Teamspeak to avoid the nerf.

Perhaps a simpler and less server-taxing solution is un-nerfing Major Expedition back to 40% for players not in a group or in a group smaller than something like 4. Granted, you could still get 24 guys in TS together, but the smaller the groups the harder it will be to coordinate as a single blob. Unfortunately it would inevitably buff pick-up mobs and gankers, neither of which need one.

On the other hand, it would directly buff small coordinated play and tactical options like scouting, finding and destroying forward camps or making flanking maneuvers. Small groups could strike deep into enemy territory more easily. It'd give players a better chance of getting out of the way of a zerg instead of getting steamrolled. And larger groups would not be penalized, because they would have the option of dividing part of their forces into a more mobile subgroup with a specific tasks -- albeit requiring greater communication and strategy.

This is what I'm talking about - smaller groups should be more mobile than larger groups, at the very least. I mentioned it in my original post. It's such a basic dynamic of battle I can't believe it's not somehow factored into a game focused around having battles. Make Retreating Maneuvers work like Proxy Det - scaling with the number of targets affected. In this case, it would be less effective as it hits more people.

You can pretty easily break 5k stam regen and spam rapids just about every single second. It doesn't matter if it's diminished for a large group, either the skill works or it doesn't - you cannot parse out making it better for a smaller group vs a larger group.

God_flakes

Satiar wrote: »

God_flakes wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

fastolfv_ESO wrote: »

so if VE is done why are you guys still trying to tell people on the forums how the game should work? move on already zheg nobody cares what your group could supposedly accomplish

I always find it fascinating, how drastic the difference between how people talk about us when we're on their faction vs how they talk about us when we're on the other factio.

This goes both ways.

Mmmm not really. I've kept good ties with anyone and everyone willing to. I will still vouch for guilds on opposing factions, long after they've changed from calling us great players and good fights to "zerging no skill baddies". Going back to the old "VE Rerolls DC" thread is kinda sad for me, so many people in there who I considered friends and allies who now can't bring themselves to say Good Fight if their lives depended on it.

Oooooh Steve, I think we have established the who's and why's your group has "burned bridges". Some things just can't be unsaid and undone. And former alliances become strained when things are taken to such atrocious elevations and true characters are revealed. Your group seems to have developed these issues with multiple people, players and guilds from all three factions (as this and other threads indicate) and yet here you sit still playing Mr. Innocent.

God_flakes

Zheg wrote: »

God_flakes wrote: »

Zheg wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

HoloYoitsu wrote: »

Force-Siphon wrote: »

Zheg you are the number 1 person to defend big groups on the forums we get it, you dont want your play style nerfed. We all go through it

Callig Zheg out for 'big group playstyle'? When he is someone who solo & small manned exclusively since launch and still does extensively?

I dont even know who Zheg is - and Ive fought pretty much all 'small man/solo' groups. This is as bad as when Crown said he "spends 95% of his time 1vXing."

Cant argue with Siphon's point on people talking about zergs and you always have the same guy showing up from said 20+ group running guild. Comments often made about you guys 'only have 12-18 on most days now' or something. Honestly, Zheg is just as desperate to prove hes accomplishing great things with few people as the people he seeks to insult. But at the end of the day, hes a huge unknown to most good players past and present. Once you voted in the barrier changes thread to have barriers remain hitting 24 people you pretty much lost all credibility as to what balance is with large vs small groups. Yea, should totally have 20k barriers hitting 24 people. I love cutting through 480,000 uncrittable damage from a single guys ult that can be replaced by one of the next 24 people.

Again, maybe if you played on the competitive campaigns fengrush... but then again you'd have to leave your comfort zone and actually fight against the majority of the better groups still running. Also, up until a month ago I was on blue and you were on blue. Of course we wouldn't have fought, except for all of the times I embarrassed you via forum pvp.

On barrier, the reason smart people were against the change is because damage was too high, was going even higher, and there were no replacements to mitigation. You still complain to this day about damage being too low and healing too high - you're grossly out of touch and continue to demonstrate a lack of insight and a floundering grasp of balance. You want to run into a group of 60+ and one-man rambo them down, then complain if they live through it with heals and/or 'zerg' you down. I'm grounded enough to realize that would be disastrous for the game and balance, so we'll frequently disagree. Myself and every other person using barrier in that meta despised the reliance on the skill and said so vocally, but were sober enough to realize the entirety of mitigation in the game revolved around that and was not being replaced by anything to counteract the ever-present damage creep and already sky-high aoe dmg. Sure enough, after a few weeks most of the playerbase came around to realizing what a stupid thing the VD, low mitigation, permaroot meta truly was. It's trendy to parrot bad ideas and call people zerglings without actually looking at their points, less so to admit they were right.

Why do you keep bringing up the "you don't play the competitive campaigns" thing against Fengrush as if this is some sort of insult? Your entire guild up and "retired" altogether, and you're going to slam him for continuing to play the game, but merely on the server he has chosen-which is more conducive to the small man he prefers? Smh. Talk about troll fail.

Most of the guild still plays the game...

The reason I keep pressing fengrush on it is because he likes to offer sage wisdom on how wrong people are about the meta and act like it's demeaning to run groups larger than his own to fight the 60+ PM raids (which you and I both know very well), the same ones he'd struggle with in a meta where numbers mean so much. You don't get to avoid just about every competitive campaign for two years to fight pugs and then act like people need to L2P because they're actually fighting good groups of players (or groups of players stacking numbers and embracing the meta). If he wants his opinion to have weight in discussions of group v group fights, he should actually participate in them first.

Yes, I do know very well how many PM runs. I also know how hilariously bad they are. For crying out loud I said as much the other day, lol'd about farming them on TF for hours the other night and one of YOUR guild members told me I don't farm anyone.

I do know the numbers game. I've commanded zergs and I've ran small man and can tell you which is more fun and rewarding and less stressful. One thing you won't see me do on this forum is demean people for playing small man or running a Zerg. Running a Zerg is soul sucking misery. I understand why all the Great War generals in history were alcoholics. And for those of us who choose to do it for whatever reason...I salute you. I don't get offended when people in DC zone call me a Zerg queen or when enemies I have alliances with message me and ask me to "take my Zerg" to so and so keep.

Point is, Fengrush chooses to be small man and do his thing. I haven't really led a Zerg since June 2015. I've run with them and beside them and I run where the crossed swords are to help my faction. I also remember trying my best to be helpful to VE and often vehemently defending all of you in teamspeak against the DC naysayers. Look where it got me.

As far as the meta goes-I agree the devs pushing us to run in large groups is despicable. It should be rewarding to do BOTH. And given that argument-doesn't it seem Fengrush has the raw end of the deal in this meta with his small man? I only wish I could do what his small man can do-either on TF or on Haderus.

Satiar

God_flakes wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

God_flakes wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

fastolfv_ESO wrote: »

so if VE is done why are you guys still trying to tell people on the forums how the game should work? move on already zheg nobody cares what your group could supposedly accomplish

I always find it fascinating, how drastic the difference between how people talk about us when we're on their faction vs how they talk about us when we're on the other factio.

This goes both ways.

Mmmm not really. I've kept good ties with anyone and everyone willing to. I will still vouch for guilds on opposing factions, long after they've changed from calling us great players and good fights to "zerging no skill baddies". Going back to the old "VE Rerolls DC" thread is kinda sad for me, so many people in there who I considered friends and allies who now can't bring themselves to say Good Fight if their lives depended on it.

Oooooh Steve, I think we have established the who's and why's your group has "burned bridges". Some things just can't be unsaid and undone. And former alliances become strained when things are taken to such atrocious elevations and true characters are revealed. Your group seems to have developed these issues with multiple people, players and guilds from all three factions (as this and other threads indicate) and yet here you sit still playing Mr. Innocent.

Whatever makes you happy. I dont recall being the one to start that slap fight.

It's also hard to buy your "vehement defense" of me and mine when reading through your post history. You have your moments but you can't ever seem to decide if you want to butter us up or take potshots. At least now all is clear.

fastolfv_ESO

fail attempt to troll steve, ive gotten a good fight from every guild on TF but yours. Every time you guys stacked and died to a single negate i got a minimum of 3 hate tells from your guild ranging from your guilds toxic to flat out your cheating. Pvp yesterday might have been as zergy from AD as usual but atleast every guild we hit was willing to say something positive win or lose, you guys failed to learn from everyone elses example and went straight to we cant lose were the best thing ever! everyones cheating!

Zheg

God_flakes wrote: »

Zheg wrote: »

God_flakes wrote: »

Zheg wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

HoloYoitsu wrote: »

Force-Siphon wrote: »

Zheg you are the number 1 person to defend big groups on the forums we get it, you dont want your play style nerfed. We all go through it

Callig Zheg out for 'big group playstyle'? When he is someone who solo & small manned exclusively since launch and still does extensively?

I dont even know who Zheg is - and Ive fought pretty much all 'small man/solo' groups. This is as bad as when Crown said he "spends 95% of his time 1vXing."

Cant argue with Siphon's point on people talking about zergs and you always have the same guy showing up from said 20+ group running guild. Comments often made about you guys 'only have 12-18 on most days now' or something. Honestly, Zheg is just as desperate to prove hes accomplishing great things with few people as the people he seeks to insult. But at the end of the day, hes a huge unknown to most good players past and present. Once you voted in the barrier changes thread to have barriers remain hitting 24 people you pretty much lost all credibility as to what balance is with large vs small groups. Yea, should totally have 20k barriers hitting 24 people. I love cutting through 480,000 uncrittable damage from a single guys ult that can be replaced by one of the next 24 people.

Again, maybe if you played on the competitive campaigns fengrush... but then again you'd have to leave your comfort zone and actually fight against the majority of the better groups still running. Also, up until a month ago I was on blue and you were on blue. Of course we wouldn't have fought, except for all of the times I embarrassed you via forum pvp.

On barrier, the reason smart people were against the change is because damage was too high, was going even higher, and there were no replacements to mitigation. You still complain to this day about damage being too low and healing too high - you're grossly out of touch and continue to demonstrate a lack of insight and a floundering grasp of balance. You want to run into a group of 60+ and one-man rambo them down, then complain if they live through it with heals and/or 'zerg' you down. I'm grounded enough to realize that would be disastrous for the game and balance, so we'll frequently disagree. Myself and every other person using barrier in that meta despised the reliance on the skill and said so vocally, but were sober enough to realize the entirety of mitigation in the game revolved around that and was not being replaced by anything to counteract the ever-present damage creep and already sky-high aoe dmg. Sure enough, after a few weeks most of the playerbase came around to realizing what a stupid thing the VD, low mitigation, permaroot meta truly was. It's trendy to parrot bad ideas and call people zerglings without actually looking at their points, less so to admit they were right.

Why do you keep bringing up the "you don't play the competitive campaigns" thing against Fengrush as if this is some sort of insult? Your entire guild up and "retired" altogether, and you're going to slam him for continuing to play the game, but merely on the server he has chosen-which is more conducive to the small man he prefers? Smh. Talk about troll fail.

Most of the guild still plays the game...

The reason I keep pressing fengrush on it is because he likes to offer sage wisdom on how wrong people are about the meta and act like it's demeaning to run groups larger than his own to fight the 60+ PM raids (which you and I both know very well), the same ones he'd struggle with in a meta where numbers mean so much. You don't get to avoid just about every competitive campaign for two years to fight pugs and then act like people need to L2P because they're actually fighting good groups of players (or groups of players stacking numbers and embracing the meta). If he wants his opinion to have weight in discussions of group v group fights, he should actually participate in them first.

Yes, I do know very well how many PM runs. I also know how hilariously bad they are. For crying out loud I said as much the other day, lol'd about farming them on TF for hours the other night and one of YOUR guild members told me I don't farm anyone.

I do know the numbers game. I've commanded zergs and I've ran small man and can tell you which is more fun and rewarding and less stressful. One thing you won't see me do on this forum is demean people for playing small man or running a Zerg. Running a Zerg is soul sucking misery. I understand why all the Great War generals in history were alcoholics. And for those of us who choose to do it for whatever reason...I salute you. I don't get offended when people in DC zone call me a Zerg queen or when enemies I have alliances with message me and ask me to "take my Zerg" to so and so keep.

Point is, Fengrush chooses to be small man and do his thing. I haven't really led a Zerg since June 2015. I've run with them and beside them and I run where the crossed swords are to help my faction. I also remember trying my best to be helpful to VE and often vehemently defending all of you in teamspeak against the DC naysayers. Look where it got me.

As far as the meta goes-I agree the devs pushing us to run in large groups is despicable. It should be rewarding to do BOTH. And given that argument-doesn't it seem Fengrush has the raw end of the deal in this meta with his small man? I only wish I could do what his small man can do-either on TF or on Haderus.

Except fengrush hears a description of what the meta looks like in TF, sees players complain/ask for fixes, goes "nuh uh, you're just zergling baddies that's not what the meta is like". Again, you don't get to actively avoid fighting the competitive groups for years and then act like you know more than the people that actually fight against the groups that comprise the meta.

Zheg

fastolfv_ESO wrote: »

fail attempt to troll steve, ive gotten a good fight from every guild on TF but yours. Every time you guys stacked and died to a single negate i got a minimum of 3 hate tells from your guild ranging from your guilds toxic to flat out your cheating. Pvp yesterday might have been as zergy from AD as usual but atleast every guild we hit was willing to say something positive win or lose, you guys failed to learn from everyone elses example and went straight to we cant lose were the best thing ever! everyones cheating!

Utter BS. You're not even good at trolling, so please come back after you've gotten some experience under your belt.

Satiar

fastolfv_ESO wrote: »

fail attempt to troll steve, ive gotten a good fight from every guild on TF but yours. Every time you guys stacked and died to a single negate i got a minimum of 3 hate tells from your guild ranging from your guilds toxic to flat out your cheating. Pvp yesterday might have been as zergy from AD as usual but atleast every guild we hit was willing to say something positive win or lose, you guys failed to learn from everyone elses example and went straight to we cant lose were the best thing ever! everyones cheating!

Ok mate.

Like I told you before, you can cling to 1-2 decent nights if you want to, but that means you'll never learn from the rest of the month where you got regularly rolled by half your numbers. I lost some fights I didn't want to lose and adapted. You won a few fights and clung to those long after your opponents figured the bombard/negate nonsense out and went back to business as usual. And I absolutely sent you some GFs, I was astonished at how good that negate combo was.

PS: standing in meteor dots means you get two separate instances of meteor on your death recap. You can stop accusations of cheating now, thou hast been educated.