the Zerg Mentality (question for the Lings-No hate)

Barbaran

so i pose a serious question, non hate filled.
i remeber being new and wanting to stay safe in a larger group before i learnt how to play.
but there was a breaking point that made me learn to solo or play smaller groups, and i wonder why more people dont spread out.

HOW in the world, do you enjoy pvp when your in such a gigantic zerg that the server lags so hard that you cant bar swap, and cant tell which skills your pushing are actually registering.
you might push poison inject, ambush, incap. but the only thing that registers is the ambush because your in a group of 50.
no wonder people spam snipe, everything is unreliable.
so why dont you zergs spread your groups over the map more so you can actually fight. your not gonna learn by playing in such large lag.
i dont get why you would enjoy spending your free time playing a game when all you can do is hit one button over and over.
seems like i waste of $60 and your time

Xvorg

Don't get me wrong, I don't like zerging but... if i was in a real battle as large as the one we see in Cyro, I'm quite sure I'll be in middle of the zerg.

It's called "the principle of the lesat effort"

Barbaran

Xvorg wrote: »

Don't get me wrong, I don't like zerging but... if i was in a real battle as large as the one we see in Cyro, I'm quite sure I'll be in middle of the zerg.

It's called "the principle of the lesat effort"

... the point is how is it fun, considering the game does not function properly in that much lag.
would it not be more fun to fight people with the game and buttons actually responding to what you are pressing.

and you are not in a real battle, why do people always try to justify video game functions or mechanics to reality.

Yakidafi

They don't enjoy it because they are bots.

doslekis

Oh it lags so bad. Zergs aren't half bad when there's no lag. Keeps the solos around IC in the middle while groups cap their way around the outer keeps.

CivilSword

What you call "Zerg" I Call "AP". Learn to Zerg surf its one of my favorite parts of this game, its like when you see that perfect wave and your like "Whoa, Look at all that AP".
I live in LAG, I was Born in Lag, one must learn to be one with the LAG.

IEatCivics

I have lots of friends who all congregate in one campaign at one time and run people over.

Wrecking_Blow_Spam

CivilSword wrote: »

What you call "Zerg" I Call "AP". Learn to Zerg surf its one of my favorite parts of this game, its like when you see that perfect wave and your like "Whoa, Look at all that AP".
I live in LAG, I was Born in Lag, one must learn to be one with the LAG.

This is good advice, Zerg surfing gets lots of AP.

Speaking of zerglings, for some newer players o don't think they dare go solo however there are certain ppl who are really high rank in cyro and all they do is Zerg all day and everyday.

For example this grand warlord I know, he's in a random 24 man pug everyday, maybe these sort of players just like this gameplay style. I noticed too even despite their high Pvp levels most zergers are not actually great in combat.

geonsocal

because of all the pretty colors...

I'm not competitively pvping all the time...zerging let's you kinda put things in neutral and pick and choose when you want the intensity to increase...

also, zergs get spread out, and, much like i imagine it was centuries ago, fighting occurs in small pockets around the battlefield...

there are periods of lag, but, for the most part if my connection speed is cool - I'm rocking and rolling...occasionally things will get frozen around outposts and keep flags, but, out of the way too many hours I play - that's relatively infrequent...

oh yeah, pro lag tip - spam heals - a lot...

kaithuzar

IMO 2 things.
Firstly, ZOS allows it.
Secondly, people want to talk & play with a bunch of other people/friends/acquaintances/etc... & laugh/joke/have a good time without really focusing on the competitive aspect. They don't really think it's their fault & blame ZOS's servers/coding. Which might be true but they obviously aren't helping matters much either. But I'm honestly on the fence because they did pay for the game so anything ZOS allows should be within the servers abilities.

Narvuntien

I think they just want to win... like the method isn't where they get thier enjoyment... it is achieving things that they enjoy.
They just followed the flow but the flow took three keeps therefore they were successful does that make sense?

They are playing an MMO... achieving things no matter how pointless or tiny it is the goal of these games. I mean why do people grind to 630cp and never play quests or anything? The means doesn't bother then only the goal.

IEatCivics

Well, there are different populations and mindsets when it comes to "Zerglings". There are those who are solo and surf a zerg. There are those who form 24 man random groups. There are those who run 24 mans with their guild.

I run large groups with my guild and it's mostly to have fun with people I enjoy chatting with on game and on Kik when we're not on and to figure out new ways to wipe the meta zerg group comps. We specifically have certain builds to compliment each other to make each other more effective so if we only have 10-12, we're not worried about running into a 40 man of the random pug zergling groups and successfully wipe them. We're a group of people who love thinktanking different builds, synergies and being outnumbered and winning. We run in Vivec xbox yellow and a 24 man is not even a zerg on that server since groups run 40 on red/blue. That's the mentality or organized groups/"zergs". It's for the joy of community and success.

Here's an example of the guild I'm part of running together working together to take down huge zergs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYdZBB90rhk

Brrrofski

Because solo or in a small group they'll die over and over and over.

Bad players who need to zerg to have any success.

Catch one alone in the wild and it's so funny how much they panic. Like those ones who just keep running on their horse rather than get off and fight you. Almost feel pity on them.

Biro123

Most people just want instant combat, so just rush to the nearest crossed swords.

They may be solo, travelling alone, but when they all get there, it can pretty quickly turn into a zerg.

SodanTok

Because fighting in small group while there is zerg running around even on the other end of the map means you are playing in small group while having the same lag experience as those in zerg. Being close to some zerg does not suddenly increase lag, server lags as whole.
Protection of zerg is what makes lag gameplay bearable.

Timeraider

Youre stating it as if everyone has lag in a zerg

Biro123

SodanTok wrote: »

Because fighting in small group while there is zerg running around even on the other end of the map means you are playing in small group while having the same lag experience as those in zerg. Being close to some zerg does not suddenly increase lag, server lags as whole.
Protection of zerg is what makes lag gameplay bearable.

I'm not sure you're right in that.

You're right that the server lags as a whole, but I notice it also lags much more when in the vicinity of a zerg.

I've even noticed (since last patch), my sound cuts out when certain ball-groups come close (which is quite a nice warning, tbf)

Sylosi

Brrrofski wrote: »

Bad players who need to zerg to have any success.

I hate to break it to you, but good players don't play ESO (other than a few who play it on the side to their real PvP game), in the grand scheme of skilled, competitive PvP, I am afraid ESO & Cyrodil are a complete joke.

The very fact that people even go on about "bad zerg players" is laughable, the response of a good player to Cyrodil would be "This is stupid, low skilled nonsense, that fails to provide skilled PvP (or even PvP) in any meaningful sense, I'm off to play something with proper PvP", if something similar to that is not the response, then well, let's put it this way, everyone in Cyrdoil is just a varying degree of bad, at least some of them aren't delusional about that though.

IEatCivics

Sylosi wrote: »

Brrrofski wrote: »

Bad players who need to zerg to have any success.

I hate to break it to you, but good players don't play ESO (other than a few who play it on the side to their real PvP game), in the grand scheme of skilled, competitive PvP, I am afraid ESO & Cyrodil are a complete joke.

The very fact that people even go on about "bad zerg players" is laughable, the response of a good player to Cyrodil would be "This is stupid, low skilled nonsense, that fails to provide skilled PvP (or even PvP) in any meaningful sense, I'm off to play something with proper PvP", if something similar to that is not the response, then well, let's put it this way, everyone in Cyrdoil is just a varying degree of bad, at least some of them aren't delusional about that though.

LF statistical data on this or it's just projection.

Sylosi

IEatCivics wrote: »

Sylosi wrote: »

Brrrofski wrote: »

Bad players who need to zerg to have any success.

I hate to break it to you, but good players don't play ESO (other than a few who play it on the side to their real PvP game), in the grand scheme of skilled, competitive PvP, I am afraid ESO & Cyrodil are a complete joke.

The very fact that people even go on about "bad zerg players" is laughable, the response of a good player to Cyrodil would be "This is stupid, low skilled nonsense, that fails to provide skilled PvP (or even PvP) in any meaningful sense, I'm off to play something with proper PvP", if something similar to that is not the response, then well, let's put it this way, everyone in Cyrdoil is just a varying degree of bad, at least some of them aren't delusional about that though.

LF statistical data on this or it's just projection.

I see the truth hurts.

Sandman929

I don't consider 12-16 person groups zergs, but everyone seems to have a different definition there. 12-16 is the new "small scale" as far as Xbox Cyrodiil is concerned because what you run into most is half a faction all running in one direction and if you want to be effective in a game you play the game as it is, not how you wish it were.
I also like playing the map, and playing the map effectively requires a good group setup with sufficient healing, utility and damage.
A 4-6 person group can be fun, particularly in IC, but it's not effective at playing the map.

CyrusArya

Sandman929 wrote: »

I don't consider 12-16 person groups zergs, but everyone seems to have a different definition there. 12-16 is the new "small scale" as far as Xbox Cyrodiil is concerned because what you run into most is half a faction all running in one direction and if you want to be effective in a game you play the game as it is, not how you wish it were.
I also like playing the map, and playing the map effectively requires a good group setup with sufficient healing, utility and damage.
A 4-6 person group can be fun, particularly in IC, but it's not effective at playing the map.

Thats the thing. The objective of a 4-6 man group is not to play the map, its to win interesting and challenging fights that shouldn't be possible with those odds. Its about perfectly executing the game's combat system in overwhelming situations, not taking keeps.

I don't doubt or deny that larger groups can be fun or challenging or whatever. But to say a 12-16 man is 'small scale' demonstrates complete ignorance of what small scale is. When a group goes beyond a certain size, the dynamics of play shift considerably. In a 4 person group, each player has to be self reliant and capable of both staying alive and getting kills independently. As the group gets larger, there is less and less of an emphasis on individual performance and the relevance of each player is leveraged more and more into group utility. The difference in how the game plays and what is required to succeed in small scale vs large scale is a night and day difference.

Sandman929

CyrusArya wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

I don't consider 12-16 person groups zergs, but everyone seems to have a different definition there. 12-16 is the new "small scale" as far as Xbox Cyrodiil is concerned because what you run into most is half a faction all running in one direction and if you want to be effective in a game you play the game as it is, not how you wish it were.
I also like playing the map, and playing the map effectively requires a good group setup with sufficient healing, utility and damage.
A 4-6 person group can be fun, particularly in IC, but it's not effective at playing the map.

Thats the thing. The objective of a 4-6 man group is not to play the map, its to win interesting and challenging fights that shouldn't be possible with those odds. Its about perfectly executing the game's combat system in overwhelming situations, not taking keeps.

I don't doubt or deny that larger groups can be fun or challenging or whatever. But to say a 12-16 man is 'small scale' demonstrates complete ignorance of what small scale is. When a group goes beyond a certain size, the dynamics of play shift considerably. In a 4 person group, each player has to be self reliant and capable of both staying alive and getting kills independently. As the group gets larger, there is less and less of an emphasis on individual performance and the relevance of each player is leveraged more and more into group utility. The difference in how the game plays and what is required to succeed in small scale vs large scale is a night and day difference.

I said it's the new small scale. Because 4-6 isn't effective against a zerg but 12-16 can be. Small scale is about winning outnumbered fights and 12-16 Vs 40 is outnumbered.

But you're right, 4-6 isn't about playing the map. I like playing the map. If I wanted to just fight without objective, I'd play a fighter.

DHale

Small group play is one person telling the other three and the one calling shots to focus one player down. Smoosh. Not any different than 16 players running over four players. The best players in the game will be with thier friends and will chase me across the map from Alessia to Sej. A group of 16 usually won't bother.

CyrusArya

Sandman929 wrote: »

I said it's the new small scale. Because 4-6 isn't effective against a zerg but 12-16 can be. Small scale is about winning outnumbered fights and 12-16 Vs 40 is outnumbered.

But you're right, 4-6 isn't about playing the map. I like playing the map. If I wanted to just fight without objective, I'd play a fighter.

But it's not though, you missed the point of my post. A good small scale group and a good large scale group will both be fighting and winning outnumbered. The critical difference is how that fight plays out on the ground and at an individual basis. Think single target vs AoE. Self sufficiency vs dedicated roles with group dependency.

I am not necessarily saying one is better or more skillful than the other. What I'm saying is they are vastly different in dynamics. Think about it this way. At the extreme end of small scale is solo PvP. In a 1vX situation, the solo party has to mitigate 100% of the incoming damage, while having to deal 100% of the party's damage, while simultaneously having to provide 100% of the party's healing and support. You add just one person to the mix, and these values are cut in half (assuming equal focus). So on and so forth. As the group grows, the individual responsibility in winning the fight diminishes. After a certain point, an individual character can revert back to dealing total damage because the healing concerns are being taken care of wholly by someone else. That's the difference in the scales of PvP.

Sandman929

CyrusArya wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

I said it's the new small scale. Because 4-6 isn't effective against a zerg but 12-16 can be. Small scale is about winning outnumbered fights and 12-16 Vs 40 is outnumbered.

But you're right, 4-6 isn't about playing the map. I like playing the map. If I wanted to just fight without objective, I'd play a fighter.

But it's not though, you missed the point of my post. A good small scale group and a good large scale group will both be fighting and winning outnumbered. The critical difference is how that fight plays out on the ground and at an individual basis. Think single target vs AoE. Self sufficiency vs dedicated roles with group dependency.

I am not necessarily saying one is better or more skillful than the other. What I'm saying is they are vastly different in dynamics. Think about it this way. At the extreme end of small scale is solo PvP. In a 1vX situation, the solo party has to mitigate 100% of the incoming damage, while having to deal 100% of the party's damage, while simultaneously having to provide 100% of the party's healing and support. You add just one person to the mix, and these values are cut in half (assuming equal focus). So on and so forth. As the group grows, the individual responsibility in winning the fight diminishes. After a certain point, an individual character can revert back to dealing total damage because the healing concerns are being taken care of wholly by someone else. That's the difference in the scales of PvP.

Really no point in going further. Fine, it's not small scale.

Takes-No-Prisoner

Barbaran wrote: »

so i pose a serious question, non hate filled.
i remeber being new and wanting to stay safe in a larger group before i learnt how to play.
but there was a breaking point that made me learn to solo or play smaller groups, and i wonder why more people dont spread out.

HOW in the world, do you enjoy pvp when your in such a gigantic zerg that the server lags so hard that you cant bar swap, and cant tell which skills your pushing are actually registering.
you might push poison inject, ambush, incap. but the only thing that registers is the ambush because your in a group of 50.
no wonder people spam snipe, everything is unreliable.
so why dont you zergs spread your groups over the map more so you can actually fight. your not gonna learn by playing in such large lag.
i dont get why you would enjoy spending your free time playing a game when all you can do is hit one button over and over.
seems like i waste of $60 and your time

There are people out there that don't get on and PvP as much as we do. They don't come to the realization this post presents and venture out into the wilds with only their swords on their backs.

HiImRex

Sylosi wrote: »

Brrrofski wrote: »

Bad players who need to zerg to have any success.

I hate to break it to you, but good players don't play ESO (other than a few who play it on the side to their real PvP game), in the grand scheme of skilled, competitive PvP, I am afraid ESO & Cyrodil are a complete joke.

The very fact that people even go on about "bad zerg players" is laughable, the response of a good player to Cyrodil would be "This is stupid, low skilled nonsense, that fails to provide skilled PvP (or even PvP) in any meaningful sense, I'm off to play something with proper PvP", if something similar to that is not the response, then well, let's put it this way, everyone in Cyrdoil is just a varying degree of bad, at least some of them aren't delusional about that though.

Top 1% ranked na overwatch player I play this game quite a bit. There's just something about open world pvp that arena games can't capture.

IEatCivics

Sylosi wrote: »

IEatCivics wrote: »

Sylosi wrote: »

Brrrofski wrote: »

Bad players who need to zerg to have any success.

I hate to break it to you, but good players don't play ESO (other than a few who play it on the side to their real PvP game), in the grand scheme of skilled, competitive PvP, I am afraid ESO & Cyrodil are a complete joke.

The very fact that people even go on about "bad zerg players" is laughable, the response of a good player to Cyrodil would be "This is stupid, low skilled nonsense, that fails to provide skilled PvP (or even PvP) in any meaningful sense, I'm off to play something with proper PvP", if something similar to that is not the response, then well, let's put it this way, everyone in Cyrdoil is just a varying degree of bad, at least some of them aren't delusional about that though.

LF statistical data on this or it's just projection.

I see the truth hurts.

I see statements with no empirical evidence. Just call it an opinion, not presented as if backed up by any measurable data.

Lokey0024

try fighting 2 people who know what their doing. Unless they follow you to the LoS dodgeroll/mistspam objective and play the wait 4 ult game with you, you will die 9/10 times.

LarsS

I find it strange that people complain about zergs. Cyro was designed for large scale battles, still it allows for many playing styles. I cant see that it is possible say that players prefering a specific styles is better than others. What one can say is that good player playing small scale (1-4) or guild ball group require different types of skills and different types of coodination. Both styles need lots of training to perfect.. Then of course you have the majority of players who just seek protection in numbers many of these are also less experienced, so thats is natural.