PC/NA Vivec

Agrippa_Invisus

Kilandros wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Anazasi wrote: »

I heard last night that the DC VE guild disbanded. Is there any truth to this rumor? Can someone provide details?

Yes, we will no longer be actively raiding in ESO aside from our farewell raid next week and a few occasional drunk reunions.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler @ZOS_GinaBruno there goes another longstanding PvP guild on PC NA. Are the Devs at all concerned about the health of PvP right now? Or is PvP just not profitable enough to be of much concern.

To be very, very frank --

How many players do you think actively play in PVP?

Sure, everyone touches it a bit to get their Warhorns and Vigors, but each month how many participate in total?

If you come in at the end of a month with a new toon and repair a wall to get about last place in the rankings (to see numbers) you get on average around 4K to 4.5K on PC / NA Vivec. Assuming similar numbers for the other two factions gives you 13.5K players for PVP each month for the main campaign.

Let's give Sotha and the 7 days another 5K players in total. Or even round it up to 20K

Double that for Europe.

40K players in PVP each month. Many of those are not in the system long, either. We don't know how much of a percentage of that is dedicated. We do know there are about 450 total players with another 100-150 in queue at peak each night for Vivec. Half that for the other servers combined. Double that for Europe.

1800 players out of 40K participating at any one time. That's awful.

With 40K participants, every single server should be full. Instead we have a concurrency of about 4.5% of the PVP community. Terrible.

And the PVP community makes up what percentage of the ESO community? Being incredibly gracious and giving us the full 40K, we get an even more telling and more worrying number.

ESO's community size is about 8.5 million players (rivalling WoW, actually). This is per Zeni's numbers (source: http://massivelyop.com/2017/02/13/elder-scrolls-online-now-boasts-8-5m-players/) that they publish. I'm sure many of those accounts are inactive F2P ones, but many, many aren't.

40K of 8.5million is 0.47% of the playerbase.

That is why PVP doesn't get the time of day.

We really are tiny. The PVP community of ESO has collapsed.

If anyone doesn't think it has, they're fooling themselves..

The current concurrency at prime time wouldn't fill WABBAJACK alone, let alone several of the old PVP servers at once like they used to. Remember, at launch we could fill Wabba and BT and Auriel's Bow and Dawnbreaker.

ESO is a PVE game.

PVErs rule this game. PVPers are a niche and tiny community.

Satiar

Anazasi wrote: »

seems to me the complaints are about zerging mostly here. ZOS really has no control over the players behavior; its the players. Yeah we all talk about policing ourselves, but in reality it simply takes more self control then previously or presently shown. VE as a guild i think was doing well until the last couple of months when it seemed they just recruited everyone. We all saw the numbers grow fast and in my opinion way to fast. Controlled growth is something you have to work towards every day. DK is still only 59 members active, even with the daily zone recruiting spam over the last month. It takes more than just sending a guild invite. Look at Dracarys, they are the best guild group running vivec (in my humble opinion) they never run more 20 and they fight outnumbered every night and win most of the time. Bigger isn't always better it just means you have larger headaches. I'm sorry to see VE go and wish all their members good fortune where ever they may end up.

The consequence of running a guild for years is player turnover. Our philosophy has always been to recruit anyone willing to learn, regardless of how inexperienced they are. This has allowed us to last where pretty much every single top-end guild has withered and died. If you don't train to replace core you die or cease to become relevant, period. It's not easy and the training period is rough for leads and regulars (you've got to be willing to die in places you wouldn't normally accept dying), but it sustains your guild over the long term.

I wish I could have seen this particular training cycle through but we finally hit critical mass of lead and core burnout (thanks ZoS). Game is legit in the worst spot I've ever seen it in terms of population, guilds and competitive play. I know VE leaving won't really improve that but eh. When all you hope for is that maybe Drac will get 15+ online so you can have a good fight you know you're scraping the bottom of the "enjoyable content" barrel.

antihero727

After the clockwork city patch next will be "One Cyrodiil" since the battle royal style of game is getting poplar and profitable. Drop off of a dragons back and gather random gear till there's only one left to sit on the ruby throne.

Agrippa_Invisus

Satiar wrote: »

Anazasi wrote: »

seems to me the complaints are about zerging mostly here. ZOS really has no control over the players behavior; its the players. Yeah we all talk about policing ourselves, but in reality it simply takes more self control then previously or presently shown. VE as a guild i think was doing well until the last couple of months when it seemed they just recruited everyone. We all saw the numbers grow fast and in my opinion way to fast. Controlled growth is something you have to work towards every day. DK is still only 59 members active, even with the daily zone recruiting spam over the last month. It takes more than just sending a guild invite. Look at Dracarys, they are the best guild group running vivec (in my humble opinion) they never run more 20 and they fight outnumbered every night and win most of the time. Bigger isn't always better it just means you have larger headaches. I'm sorry to see VE go and wish all their members good fortune where ever they may end up.

The consequence of running a guild for years is player turnover. Our philosophy has always been to recruit anyone willing to learn, regardless of how inexperienced they are. This has allowed us to last where pretty much every single top-end guild has withered and died. If you don't train to replace core you die or cease to become relevant, period. It's not easy and the training period is rough for leads and regulars (you've got to be willing to die in places you wouldn't normally accept dying), but it sustains your guild over the long term.

I wish I could have seen this particular training cycle through but we finally hit critical mass of lead and core burnout (thanks ZoS). Game is legit in the worst spot I've ever seen it in terms of population, guilds and competitive play. I know VE leaving won't really improve that but eh. When all you hope for is that maybe Drac will get 15+ online so you can have a good fight you know you're scraping the bottom of the "enjoyable content" barrel.

Having fun and good fights shouldn't be predicated on whether specific guilds are online or off.

If you can't have fun if IVS or Drac or others aren't running and you're just spinning your wheels, what's the point?

casparian

Anazasi wrote: »

seems to me the complaints are about zerging mostly here. ZOS really has no control over the players behavior; its the players. Yeah we all talk about policing ourselves, but in reality it simply takes more self control then previously or presently shown. VE as a guild i think was doing well until the last couple of months when it seemed they just recruited everyone. We all saw the numbers grow fast and in my opinion way to fast. Controlled growth is something you have to work towards every day. DK is still only 59 members active, even with the daily zone recruiting spam over the last month. It takes more than just sending a guild invite. Look at Dracarys, they are the best guild group running vivec (in my humble opinion) they never run more 20 and they fight outnumbered every night and win most of the time. Bigger isn't always better it just means you have larger headaches. I'm sorry to see VE go and wish all their members good fortune where ever they may end up.

Control? No. But ZOS does have the power to incentivize. Cyrodiil as it currently exists, in the context of the current class and skill balance, heavily incentivizes the kind of zerg-centered play that drives people away from Cyrodiil. While ZOS can't make players' decisions for them, ZOS does have the power to make certain decisions less rewarding and others more than they currently are.

Renan

hope was gone when Iskra was banned again

olivesforge

rkunz wrote: »

hope was gone when Iskra was banned again

Who will inspire a stack of ADs to sit around in Alessia and whine for 6 hours now? Woe upon us all!

antihero727 wrote: »

After the clockwork city patch next will be "One Cyrodiil" since the battle royal style of game is getting poplar and profitable. Drop off of a dragons back and gather random gear till there's only one left to sit on the ruby throne.

Great. When 40 people all land on Chalman's roof and there's only 1 sword up there, the fist fighting will be marvelous to behold. In Powerpoint. Because the FPS will be 2.

Rohamad_Ali

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

Kilandros wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Anazasi wrote: »

I heard last night that the DC VE guild disbanded. Is there any truth to this rumor? Can someone provide details?

Yes, we will no longer be actively raiding in ESO aside from our farewell raid next week and a few occasional drunk reunions.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler @ZOS_GinaBruno there goes another longstanding PvP guild on PC NA. Are the Devs at all concerned about the health of PvP right now? Or is PvP just not profitable enough to be of much concern.

To be very, very frank --

How many players do you think actively play in PVP?

Sure, everyone touches it a bit to get their Warhorns and Vigors, but each month how many participate in total?

If you come in at the end of a month with a new toon and repair a wall to get about last place in the rankings (to see numbers) you get on average around 4K to 4.5K on PC / NA Vivec. Assuming similar numbers for the other two factions gives you 13.5K players for PVP each month for the main campaign.

Let's give Sotha and the 7 days another 5K players in total. Or even round it up to 20K

Double that for Europe.

40K players in PVP each month. Many of those are not in the system long, either. We don't know how much of a percentage of that is dedicated. We do know there are about 450 total players with another 100-150 in queue at peak each night for Vivec. Half that for the other servers combined. Double that for Europe.

1800 players out of 40K participating at any one time. That's awful.

With 40K participants, every single server should be full. Instead we have a concurrency of about .045% of the PVP community. Terrible.

And the PVP community makes up what percentage of the ESO community? Being incredibly gracious and giving us the full 40K, we get an even more telling and more worrying number.

ESO's community size is about 8.5 million players (rivalling WoW, actually). This is per Zeni's numbers (source: http://massivelyop.com/2017/02/13/elder-scrolls-online-now-boasts-8-5m-players/) that they publish. I'm sure many of those accounts are inactive F2P ones, but many, many aren't.

40K of 8.5million is 0.0047% of the playerbase.

That is why PVP doesn't get the time of day.

We really are tiny. The PVP community of ESO has collapsed.

If anyone doesn't think it has, they're fooling themselves..

The current concurrency at prime time wouldn't fill WABBAJACK alone, let alone several of the old PVP servers at once like they used to. Remember, at launch we could fill Wabba and BT and Auriel's Bow and Dawnbreaker.

ESO is a PVE game.

PVErs rule this game. PVPers are a niche and tiny community.

It wasn't always this way . There are tons of PVP games doing better then ESOs PVP right now . Neglect and leaving the PVP community an afterthought dragged it down to this . Isolationists on YouTube give more updates on how things are going then anyone at ZoS when it comes to PVP . When you ignore something long enough it will go away .

IxSTALKERxI

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

To be very, very frank --

How many players do you think actively play in PVP?

Sure, everyone touches it a bit to get their Warhorns and Vigors, but each month how many participate in total?

If you come in at the end of a month with a new toon and repair a wall to get about last place in the rankings (to see numbers) you get on average around 4K to 4.5K on PC / NA Vivec. Assuming similar numbers for the other two factions gives you 13.5K players for PVP each month for the main campaign.

Let's give Sotha and the 7 days another 5K players in total. Or even round it up to 20K

Double that for Europe.

40K players in PVP each month. Many of those are not in the system long, either. We don't know how much of a percentage of that is dedicated. We do know there are about 450 total players with another 100-150 in queue at peak each night for Vivec. Half that for the other servers combined. Double that for Europe.

1800 players out of 40K participating at any one time. That's awful.

With 40K participants, every single server should be full. Instead we have a concurrency of about .045% of the PVP community. Terrible.

And the PVP community makes up what percentage of the ESO community? Being incredibly gracious and giving us the full 40K, we get an even more telling and more worrying number.

ESO's community size is about 8.5 million players (rivalling WoW, actually). This is per Zeni's numbers (source: http://massivelyop.com/2017/02/13/elder-scrolls-online-now-boasts-8-5m-players/) that they publish. I'm sure many of those accounts are inactive F2P ones, but many, many aren't.

40K of 8.5million is 0.0047% of the playerbase.

That is why PVP doesn't get the time of day.

We really are tiny. The PVP community of ESO has collapsed.

If anyone doesn't think it has, they're fooling themselves..

The current concurrency at prime time wouldn't fill WABBAJACK alone, let alone several of the old PVP servers at once like they used to. Remember, at launch we could fill Wabba and BT and Auriel's Bow and Dawnbreaker.

ESO is a PVE game.

PVErs rule this game. PVPers are a niche and tiny community.

That 8.5 million number is probably just how many copies have been sold. There would be no where near that many active players in ESO. If there was there would be a lot more than 20 or so players in places like Rawlka, there'd be hundreds of people trading / dueling / standing on the rock. etc.

zyk

IxSTALKERxI wrote: »

That 8.5 million number is probably just how many copies have been sold. There would be no where near that many active players in ESO. If there was there would be a lot more than 20 or so players in places like Rawlka, there'd be hundreds of people trading / dueling / standing on the rock. etc.

I agree that 8.5M isn't reflective of active players, but I think ESO is popular among single player gamers. You see these players when levelling alts. They have epic fights in delves with close calls and lots of roll dodging. I find they dislike playing around (hard)core gamers because we break their immersion. They probably don't participate in the player economy very much and utilize the Crown Store instead.

I call these players ultra-casuals. They don't play ESO every day or even every week. ESO is like an episodic single player game to them. IMO, this has been the target audience for ESO for the past couple of years. When ZOS talks about raising the floor and lowering the ceiling, it is to make the game more inclusive in an effort to get them into other activities like dungeons, raiding, and PVP.

Unfortunately, the tools given to them to make the game easier are best used by experienced players, so balance has become even worse as a result and the reason we have troll tanks, OP weapon ults, perma-blocking, reduced counterplay and why proc sets were a thing for so long.

Of course, this is just a theory I've come up with to explain the direction the game has taken the past couple of years. I have no idea how accurate it may be.

Anazasi

Lets all be a little more careful about making this a thread on whats wrong with pvp in ESO. Remember this is about Vivec after all. Also I want to point out from a long term perspective, The current events are really no different than what we have all seen over the years. Populations flux up and down, guilds come and go. New content is released, consumed, and then complained about. Nothing really has changed aside from the missing complaints about proc sets that everyone read a couple of months ago.

What we need to actually be asking is whats going to happen to the DC on vivec? Some i hear are moving to EP (probably not the best thing). What are the others going to do? What DC group is going to step up and take on the leadership role for the faction?

Agrippa_Invisus

IxSTALKERxI wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

To be very, very frank --

How many players do you think actively play in PVP?

Sure, everyone touches it a bit to get their Warhorns and Vigors, but each month how many participate in total?

If you come in at the end of a month with a new toon and repair a wall to get about last place in the rankings (to see numbers) you get on average around 4K to 4.5K on PC / NA Vivec. Assuming similar numbers for the other two factions gives you 13.5K players for PVP each month for the main campaign.

Let's give Sotha and the 7 days another 5K players in total. Or even round it up to 20K

Double that for Europe.

40K players in PVP each month. Many of those are not in the system long, either. We don't know how much of a percentage of that is dedicated. We do know there are about 450 total players with another 100-150 in queue at peak each night for Vivec. Half that for the other servers combined. Double that for Europe.

1800 players out of 40K participating at any one time. That's awful.

With 40K participants, every single server should be full. Instead we have a concurrency of about .045% of the PVP community. Terrible.

And the PVP community makes up what percentage of the ESO community? Being incredibly gracious and giving us the full 40K, we get an even more telling and more worrying number.

ESO's community size is about 8.5 million players (rivalling WoW, actually). This is per Zeni's numbers (source: http://massivelyop.com/2017/02/13/elder-scrolls-online-now-boasts-8-5m-players/) that they publish. I'm sure many of those accounts are inactive F2P ones, but many, many aren't.

40K of 8.5million is 0.0047% of the playerbase.

That is why PVP doesn't get the time of day.

We really are tiny. The PVP community of ESO has collapsed.

If anyone doesn't think it has, they're fooling themselves..

The current concurrency at prime time wouldn't fill WABBAJACK alone, let alone several of the old PVP servers at once like they used to. Remember, at launch we could fill Wabba and BT and Auriel's Bow and Dawnbreaker.

ESO is a PVE game.

PVErs rule this game. PVPers are a niche and tiny community.

That 8.5 million number is probably just how many copies have been sold. There would be no where near that many active players in ESO. If there was there would be a lot more than 20 or so players in places like Rawlka, there'd be hundreds of people trading / dueling / standing on the rock. etc.

I have no doubt of this, actually.

If there's only 1,000,000 semi- to fully- active ESO players the 40K pvp community number is still only 4% of the population.

I'm just trying to stress that no matter how many you assign as the actual playerbase of ESO, the pvp community is just miniscule.

NBrookus

casparian wrote: »

Anazasi wrote: »

seems to me the complaints are about zerging mostly here. ZOS really has no control over the players behavior; its the players. Yeah we all talk about policing ourselves, but in reality it simply takes more self control then previously or presently shown. VE as a guild i think was doing well until the last couple of months when it seemed they just recruited everyone. We all saw the numbers grow fast and in my opinion way to fast. Controlled growth is something you have to work towards every day. DK is still only 59 members active, even with the daily zone recruiting spam over the last month. It takes more than just sending a guild invite. Look at Dracarys, they are the best guild group running vivec (in my humble opinion) they never run more 20 and they fight outnumbered every night and win most of the time. Bigger isn't always better it just means you have larger headaches. I'm sorry to see VE go and wish all their members good fortune where ever they may end up.

Control? No. But ZOS does have the power to incentivize. Cyrodiil as it currently exists, in the context of the current class and skill balance, heavily incentivizes the kind of zerg-centered play that drives people away from Cyrodiil. While ZOS can't make players' decisions for them, ZOS does have the power to make certain decisions less rewarding and others more than they currently are.

The problem is not just the emphasis on zerg-centered play. Large groups should be happy under those circumstances. Clearly VE is not. Pact Militia was not either... remember the PM zergs?

The problem is the emphasis on low-skilled zerg play. Whether your preference is for small, mid or large-scale play, winning solely because you brought more people or more negates and destro ults is dull and repetitive. You don't have to be a highly competitive hard core gamer to want skillful play and tactics to be rewarding and meaningful. If PvE guilds could just zerg trials and get leaderboard spots that way, think the trial guilds would stick around either?

NBrookus

P.S. And while we are at it, this thread and numerous other threads lately have been full of constructive feedback, suggestions and insights from PvP'ers... but not a single /lurk or dev comment @ZOS_BrianWheeler ?

Agrippa_Invisus

NBrookus wrote: »

P.S. And while we are at it, this thread and numerous other threads lately have been full of constructive feedback, suggestions and insights from PvP'ers... but not a single /lurk or dev comment @ZOS_BrianWheeler ?

After my feedback thread concerning revamping the rewards went to nearly 150 replies and nothing but dev silence, I realize the only people watching this forum are the mods in case we get uppity.

Kartalin

NBrookus wrote: »

The problem is the emphasis on low-skilled zerg play. Whether your preference is for small, mid or large-scale play, winning solely because you brought more people or more negates and destro ults is dull and repetitive. You don't have to be a highly competitive hard core gamer to want skillful play and tactics to be rewarding and meaningful. If PvE guilds could just zerg trials and get leaderboard spots that way, think the trial guilds would stick around either?

Agreed

What's more is the mindless masses that form these low skill zergs really have no concept of what skilled play is and may actually feel like they are being skillful in their successes. A smaller more organized group wipes them? Must have been hacking/CE/animation canceling/insert fotm-bogeyman here.
.

Vilestride

I gotta say with the loss of VE through retirement and TKG through reroll DC is in a worse shape than AD guild wise right now. @zyk would you still disagree with this competitive parity as you say?

Agrippa_Invisus

Vilestride wrote: »

I gotta say with the loss of VE through retirement and TKG through reroll DC is in a worse shape than AD guild wise right now. @zyk would you still disagree with this competitive parity as you say?

This is both true and untrue.

Pound for pound, I don't think any of the DC guilds (this is post VE and TKG) currently are able to stand up to Dracarys or other very high quality guilds.

OTOH, if you care about the campaign map, those same DC guilds are very, very, very focused on winning campaigns and will continue to do well there as they seem to have at least some coordination amongst them and are willing to forgo good fights to go slam down empty keeps until they get wiped.

Add to that when they do encounter elite guilds, I have no doubt that the DC guilds that currently are running have zero compunction against just stacking and flooding said elite guild with bodies.

I think what I'm trying to say is that DC will likely have a deceptive strength for a while longer. They'll show up well on the campaign score with their overnight crew and focus on campaign results, but they'll be hollow within.

That is not a good position to be in for the long term.

casparian

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

Vilestride wrote: »

I gotta say with the loss of VE through retirement and TKG through reroll DC is in a worse shape than AD guild wise right now. @zyk would you still disagree with this competitive parity as you say?

This is both true and untrue.

Pound for pound, I don't think any of the DC guilds (this is post VE and TKG) currently are able to stand up to Dracarys or other very high quality guilds.

OTOH, if you care about the campaign map, those same DC guilds are very, very, very focused on winning campaigns and will continue to do well there as they seem to have at least some coordination amongst them and are willing to forgo good fights to go slam down empty keeps until they get wiped.

Add to that when they do encounter elite guilds, I have no doubt that the DC guilds that currently are running have zero compunction against just stacking and flooding said elite guild with bodies.

I think what I'm trying to say is that DC will likely have a deceptive strength for a while longer. They'll show up well on the campaign score with their overnight crew and focus on campaign results, but they'll be hollow within.

That is not a good position to be in for the long term.

zyk

Vilestride wrote: »

I gotta say with the loss of VE through retirement and TKG through reroll DC is in a worse shape than AD guild wise right now. @zyk would you still disagree with this competitive parity as you say?

I've stressed from the start it was more than about large groups. It's also about solo players, small groups and lane surfers -- which might account for a majority of players. Try playing an AD character and fight the EP small groups and randoms that come south and you'll see what I mean.

I have a cross-faction guildmate who shamelessly plays where the grass is greener (EP) because if this player had to play for AD right now, they would quit the game instead.

But perhaps the challenges I hear about EP having @ Chalman have something to do with where its good players choose to go.

Losing VE is a big loss for DC and the game. I think EP may profit the most as it has more comparable guilds to absorb those players and VE's core, of course, has an EP background. From an AD perspective, this is will probably be a lateral change. How it works out in practice is anyone's guess. IMO, DC is still in good shape.

In the case of TKG, they play in a completely different interval that DC was *dominating* uncontested. I haven't played so late recently, so I'm not sure what it's like this week.

NBrookus

.

Kartalin wrote: »

NBrookus wrote: »

The problem is the emphasis on low-skilled zerg play. Whether your preference is for small, mid or large-scale play, winning solely because you brought more people or more negates and destro ults is dull and repetitive. You don't have to be a highly competitive hard core gamer to want skillful play and tactics to be rewarding and meaningful. If PvE guilds could just zerg trials and get leaderboard spots that way, think the trial guilds would stick around either?

Agreed

What's more is the mindless masses that form these low skill zergs really have no concept of what skilled play is and may actually feel like they are being skillful in their successes. A smaller more organized group wipes them? Must have been hacking/CE/animation canceling/insert fotm-bogeyman here.
.

To play devil's advocate: when small and mid sized groups become insular and stop recruiting new blood, the players who make up those low skill zergs have no ladder to move on to something else. It's certainly not an easy task to make that step without mentorship.

Agrippa_Invisus

zyk wrote: »

Vilestride wrote: »

I gotta say with the loss of VE through retirement and TKG through reroll DC is in a worse shape than AD guild wise right now. @zyk would you still disagree with this competitive parity as you say?

But perhaps the challenges I hear about EP having @ Chalman have something to do with where its good players choose to go.

There are a WHOLE lotta factors that go into making Chalman a pain in the rear to retake for EP.

It's closer to Bleakers than Arrius. DC reinforcements get there FAST.

It gets camped to the point that I've seen DC let their gates get open before unstacking out of it.

The eastern approach to it sucks. There's a reason we siege the north so much.

And more on top of it, but those are the primary ones.

The reason EP fights so hard to keep it typically is because we don't want to deal with retaking it. BRK and Drake are almost always easier fights. So we hold Chal and then go retake once Chal cools off if getting double teamed.

zyk

Last night, for example, while most of AD was pushing DC, a decent EP guild spent the night @ Alessia farm and bridge farming randoms to the point where DC was only Alessia away from emp and these dudes were still on the bridge. It's not an uncommon scenario. I'm sure their TS was like "omgz numberzzz!!" but they weren't really challenged at all.

Vilestride

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

Vilestride wrote: »

I gotta say with the loss of VE through retirement and TKG through reroll DC is in a worse shape than AD guild wise right now. @zyk would you still disagree with this competitive parity as you say?

This is both true and untrue.

Pound for pound, I don't think any of the DC guilds (this is post VE and TKG) currently are able to stand up to Dracarys or other very high quality guilds.

OTOH, if you care about the campaign map, those same DC guilds are very, very, very focused on winning campaigns and will continue to do well there as they seem to have at least some coordination amongst them and are willing to forgo good fights to go slam down empty keeps until they get wiped.

Add to that when they do encounter elite guilds, I have no doubt that the DC guilds that currently are running have zero compunction against just stacking and flooding said elite guild with bodies.

I think what I'm trying to say is that DC will likely have a deceptive strength for a while longer. They'll show up well on the campaign score with their overnight crew and focus on campaign results, but they'll be hollow within.

That is not a good position to be in for the long term.

Fair points. I agree this probably will be true. Campaign wise DC definitely has this in in the bag and even moving forward their focus on campaign will get results. Though this is largely due to oceanic DC being uncontested which might change with TKG playing oceanic for AD

Agrippa_Invisus

Vilestride wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

Vilestride wrote: »

I gotta say with the loss of VE through retirement and TKG through reroll DC is in a worse shape than AD guild wise right now. @zyk would you still disagree with this competitive parity as you say?

This is both true and untrue.

Pound for pound, I don't think any of the DC guilds (this is post VE and TKG) currently are able to stand up to Dracarys or other very high quality guilds.

OTOH, if you care about the campaign map, those same DC guilds are very, very, very focused on winning campaigns and will continue to do well there as they seem to have at least some coordination amongst them and are willing to forgo good fights to go slam down empty keeps until they get wiped.

Add to that when they do encounter elite guilds, I have no doubt that the DC guilds that currently are running have zero compunction against just stacking and flooding said elite guild with bodies.

I think what I'm trying to say is that DC will likely have a deceptive strength for a while longer. They'll show up well on the campaign score with their overnight crew and focus on campaign results, but they'll be hollow within.

That is not a good position to be in for the long term.

Fair points. I agree this probably will be true. Campaign wise DC definitely has this in in the bag and even moving forward their focus on campaign will get results. Though this is largely due to oceanic DC being uncontested which might change with TKG playing oceanic for AD

Well, since the swap I haven't seen the steady upward creep of the gap between 1st and 2nd like I did the couple weeks prior.

I like that.

The campaigns in the last few months, the ones that are decided in the last day -- the last hours -- are the most fun and make the campaign score actually matter.

Having it already a lock for DC this early on is... boring. And it's hard to motivate people to do anything other than farm.

phairdon

Las time in Cyrodiil, admittedly earlier this year, AD were dominating. Won 3 campaigns in a row. EP went from winning to being overrun by both AD & DC and finishing last. So yes, as other stated, this happens to all three alliances.

Anazasi

Lets talk about the 3 to 7 pm EST time slot where AD has less than 20 players actually on the map and the DC Japanese guild with its 30+ players, runs the map all the way to BB every day. This is a tough time slot to play.

diskiukas

Anazasi wrote: »

Lets talk about the 3 to 7 pm EST time slot where AD has less than 20 players actually on the map and the DC Japanese guild with its 30+ players, runs the map all the way to BB every day. This is a tough time slot to play.

Lets talk about you and 30 of your group chasing 1 NB from Ash to almost Glade.

Ghostbane

Anazasi wrote: »

Lets talk about the 3 to 7 pm EST time slot where AD has less than 20 players actually on the map and the DC Japanese guild with its 30+ players, runs the map all the way to BB every day. This is a tough time slot to play.

That's 4am - 8am in Japan. Dedication right there.

Vilestride

diskiukas wrote: »

Anazasi wrote: »

Lets talk about the 3 to 7 pm EST time slot where AD has less than 20 players actually on the map and the DC Japanese guild with its 30+ players, runs the map all the way to BB every day. This is a tough time slot to play.

Lets talk about you and 30 of your group chasing 1 NB from Ash to almost Glade.

A solo nightblade somewhere other than alessia bridge? I don't believe you.