Shor PC/NA "Official" Discussion

NBrookus

Rickter wrote: »

Which leads me to this question: If you all were in my shoes, how would you handle this issue? That's a legitimate invitation for constructive opinions. I respect most everyone's opinions in this thread and I promise to take it to heart. I think ive long windedly painted a precise picture of what Requiem is, you should go by that.

Maybe it's time to start grooming another raid lead, either by letting them take a small squad out for diversionary activities or let them lead the main group while you take the squad.

This gives you the benefit of a flexible force that can hit multiple targets, and then, when needed, combine to face the larger groups.

Rickter

Stridig wrote: »

Excuse my ignorance, but what exactly is the problem in Shor? I have read much discussion about keeping things small scale but that's really all I have seen. In my brief experience with Shor, things are indeed small scale.

Right so, this isnt exactly true. and this sentiment of "Shor isnt small scale anymore" is born from those that were here on Shor since it went live where it was a near barren waste land and basically requiem v bcc v dw and whoever else for EP/AD/DC. So from that perspective, Shor has essentially exploded. What youve seen at Chalman the last couple nights, or anywhere really is pretty large scale.

So the issues with Shor right now are: EP has a very large and commanding presence. Its forcing other groups (even my own) to group larger as well. this isnt necessarily a bad thing but when small scalers try to harass these increased sized groups, they get clobbered in retaliation and it makes for bad pvp.

Then you have Requiem, which has a solid 8-10 players that i wouldnt say were min maxed, but have cultivated for a long time resulting in a coordinated and veteran squad spearheaded by ME the Lord Paramount of the Vanguard of Justice. Then pepper us with PUGs or new pvp recruits and we become a less than desirable group to fight against.

NBrookus wrote: »

Maybe it's time to start grooming another raid lead, either by letting them take a small squad out for diversionary activities or let them lead the main group while you take the squad.

This gives you the benefit of a flexible force that can hit multiple targets, and then, when needed, combine to face the larger groups.

Hey thanks Brookus, this was in fact exactly what was proposed last night internally. My reservations is that this "hitsquad" gets too exclusive. Because i've literally seen that happen with Regiment last year.

DeadlyRecluse

Rickter wrote: »

Which leads me to this question: If you all were in my shoes, how would you handle this issue? That's a legitimate invitation for constructive opinions.

I've been in that situation before, about 1.5 years ago. We were regularly getting up to 12 in group, occasionally more.

There is no good way to "split" groups. People will read too much into it, you'll get frustrated by a wipe and regroup, you'll end up stacking for objectives that matter anyway.

It's a little different in a hot camp where you are playing the map for score aggressively and you are sending small teams forward to flag things, but that level of map-strategy isn't really called for in Shor atm--with the amount of action Shor gets, if you split your group into, say, two 8man teams, you'll just relegate one to PvDooring something and one will find resistance. Same if you get too careful about not stacking--half the time, you just end up PvDooring out of a desire not to stack with other groups (on maps with only 1 or 2 active fights at any given time).

The only thing I've done is moved campaigns to where there was enough meat for the group to fight on even terms, but there are obviously compelling reasons not to do that, as the only campaign to move to is Vivec.

Another option is to ruthlessly cull guild size based on apparently random characteristics.

Rickter

chikenrockgod wrote: »

I for one thank everybody for that meaty 25.9k D tick at chalamo, solid 1.5-2 hours of action there

you got that tick due to my poor call. and yeah, 1.5 hours of nonstop two sided fighting, even the best succumb to fatigue and make bad calls. Just know we were in the thick of it, with the best of them, the entire time. That d-tick was well earned and congrats to EP for defending your emperor.

Rickter

DeadlyRecluse wrote: »

Rickter wrote: »

Which leads me to this question: If you all were in my shoes, how would you handle this issue? That's a legitimate invitation for constructive opinions.

I've been in that situation before, about 1.5 years ago. We were regularly getting up to 12 in group, occasionally more.

There is no good way to "split" groups. People will read too much into it, you'll get frustrated by a wipe and regroup, you'll end up stacking for objectives that matter anyway.

It's a little different in a hot camp where you are playing the map for score aggressively and you are sending small teams forward to flag things, but that level of map-strategy isn't really called for in Shor atm--with the amount of action Shor gets, if you split your group into, say, two 8man teams, you'll just relegate one to PvDooring something and one will find resistance. Same if you get too careful about not stacking--half the time, you just end up PvDooring out of a desire not to stack with other groups (on maps with only 1 or 2 active fights at any given time).

The only thing I've done is moved campaigns to where there was enough meat for the group to fight on even terms, but there are obviously compelling reasons not to do that, as the only campaign to move to is Vivec.

Another option is to ruthlessly cull guild size based on apparently random characteristics.

hey thanks for that response. Very insightful (in the not so sarcastic way of insightfuls lul). And i appreciate that biblical reference. not sure if youre religious or not but appreciated nonetheless.

NBrookus

Rickter wrote: »

NBrookus wrote: »

Maybe it's time to start grooming another raid lead, either by letting them take a small squad out for diversionary activities or let them lead the main group while you take the squad.

This gives you the benefit of a flexible force that can hit multiple targets, and then, when needed, combine to face the larger groups.

Hey thanks Brookus, this was in fact exactly what was proposed last night internally. My reservations is that this "hitsquad" gets too exclusive. Because i've literally seen that happen with Regiment last year.

It's certainly possible you might incubate some small scalers.

But I'm sure you could come up with a rotation that keeps the dynamic shifting. If your squad is always the same 5 people then they may start to feel less like Requiem and more like their own thing.

Rickter

NBrookus wrote: »

If your squad is always the same 5 people then they may start to feel less like Requiem and more like their own thing.

exactly

casparian

DeadlyRecluse wrote: »

Rickter wrote: »

Which leads me to this question: If you all were in my shoes, how would you handle this issue? That's a legitimate invitation for constructive opinions.

I've been in that situation before, about 1.5 years ago. We were regularly getting up to 12 in group, occasionally more.

There is no good way to "split" groups. People will read too much into it, you'll get frustrated by a wipe and regroup, you'll end up stacking for objectives that matter anyway.

It's a little different in a hot camp where you are playing the map for score aggressively and you are sending small teams forward to flag things, but that level of map-strategy isn't really called for in Shor atm--with the amount of action Shor gets, if you split your group into, say, two 8man teams, you'll just relegate one to PvDooring something and one will find resistance. Same if you get too careful about not stacking--half the time, you just end up PvDooring out of a desire not to stack with other groups (on maps with only 1 or 2 active fights at any given time).

The only thing I've done is moved campaigns to where there was enough meat for the group to fight on even terms, but there are obviously compelling reasons not to do that, as the only campaign to move to is Vivec.

Another option is to ruthlessly cull guild size based on apparently random characteristics.

This scriptural reference is inspired. My sides!

@Rickter the Lord knoweth his plans for thee. Submit to His will and He shall reward you. Look upon thy guild not as the world seeth guilds, but as the Lord commandeth. For where two or three are gathered together in His name, there He also shall be, and He shall smite thy enemies on thy behalf.

Kaeriz

NBrookus wrote: »

BCC is mostly on break at the moment, but we do pick up people from time to time, and are actively looking keeping an eye open for recruits. But that's about expanding the roster so people can find others to pvp with, NOT expanding the group size.

Frankly it's hard getting a small scale group to function well as a single unit; any weaknesses will get your group killed. We don't accomplish that anywhere near as well as Animosity or Adamant, and one of the ways they get there is because it's the same few always working together.

Just adding more raw numbers won't help a small scale group play more effectively, and takes them out of the playstyle they want.

Really this. I only started really playing sometime last year, but I remember being in awe of adamant (or whatever they were called then) from the jump watching from the hills around Arrius mine. They simply function so well as a tight, coordinated, adhesive group. They do what they do not just on individual excellence, but from how familiar and coordinated they are with each other. The idea of just adding numbers misunderstands not only the preferred playstyle but also what makes the good small mans/gals so good.

Rickter

alright, I got some good feedback here. thank you guys. means a lot. I hope you all have a Happy Thanksgiving. I'm going to be traveling extensively the next two days so will have to catch up on Monday.

I'll take all this into consideration. I want to hear from my guild what they want, I have my own obvious reservations and in fact fears, and I'm not the only one. ultimately, I want whats best for Requiem. and I want to do right by Shor's community. I think i have a gameplan. thanks again guys.

xaraan

Stridig wrote: »

Excuse my ignorance, but what exactly is the problem in Shor? I have read much discussion about keeping things small scale but that's really all I have seen. In my brief experience with Shor, things are indeed small scale.

I think it's more concern with it getting too "vivecy" than anything currently going on. Although there are a few incidents here and there, nothing as bad yet. Just like to see it stay healthy.

Glory

Rickter wrote: »

I have a lot of respect for Adamant. I even used you guys as an example of a 6-8 man that absolutely handles twice your numbers and when you lose, you never complain.

Which leads me to this question: If you all were in my shoes, how would you handle this issue? That's a legitimate invitation for constructive opinions. I respect most everyone's opinions in this thread and I promise to take it to heart. I think ive long windedly painted a precise picture of what Requiem is, you should go by that.

Oh we complain a lot, mostly about how one of us messed up or how Mer is a bully and refuses to carry me even harder.

If you're looking for thoughts about what to do, I'd just say you guys do you. When we see that we're too large a group for a certain situation sometimes we'll have some sit out and watch (2v2 instead of 4v2), sometimes we'll swap campaigns (wouldn't work for you), sometimes we split up to smaller groups (8 -> 4 and 4). If you guys like each other's company and you're not absolutely steamrolling the competition then there's nothing awful about it (within reason of course!).

Alternatively, I've found that heavy drinking both softens the rough edges of ESO and provides an easier fight for your opponent. If you're running too large a group for your taste you could encourage that

xaraan

Rickter wrote: »

@xaraan i appreciate that man, and I wasnt referring to Adamant. I would have been really specific but im sure someone will report me for naming and shaming. anyways, he doesnt post in the thread, lets put it that way.

I have a lot of respect for Adamant. I even used you guys as an example of a 6-8 man that absolutely handles twice your numbers and when you lose, you never complain.

so yeah. Look, just know that even Requiem is aware of their sizes and we want to do something about it. I have reservations rooted in the split we experienced back in November. i worked hard at rebuilding over the last year. maybe i was over zealous.

Which leads me to this question: If you all were in my shoes, how would you handle this issue? That's a legitimate invitation for constructive opinions. I respect most everyone's opinions in this thread and I promise to take it to heart. I think ive long windedly painted a precise picture of what Requiem is, you should go by that.

All I can say is this: We've pulled entire raids in Vivec at times to fight us on a resource and because they spent so much time trying to get us with an obnoxious amount of people, AD or the other faction was free to take a lot of stuff while they were occupied. Sure they get us eventually, but guess what, we are back either immediately b/c of a camp or a minute later b/c we just ride back so it accomplished little in map strategy and they wasted a lot of time for little tactical reward (or even AP if we want to just talk points).

So in the end, using a lot of players to fight a few only works when the pops are out of balance. Let's say both our sides had 30 total players in the campaign, you brought 20 to fight our 5, that leaves 25 AD to take your stuff elsewhere and 10 DC to defend. So if you worry about us at one resource or one keep, you could be losing several keeps behind you. Granted, this didn't happen the other day b/c AD never had enough people for that to be a problem. But even so, there is a third faction, so if there wasn't a second large blue group on to deal with reds sometimes, what would you have done if your 20 guys was messing with us and having to deal with red and had even less blues to help? You'd be on pure defense more so than you probably already feel when you have two factions push back at once.

So I think its worth working toward the goal I've seen mentioned of having multiple raid leads able to lead smaller sections so you have the ability to be in two places at once when necessary if Shore actually grows and the we are all fighting even populations. If you are the only group on aside from a few random pugs here or there and we hit Ash with five dudes and red is hitting Chal, you probably feel like right now, the safest thing is to pick one and defend that, but eventually if you work toward having two solid groups, you could send 10-12 to one and that many to the other and possibly defend both unless one had a full zerg there or something drastic. And then both groups would be able to push back/defend at both sides at once.

But that's end-goal stuff. For now, you do what you gotta do and sometimes it will work better than others depending on how the three populations are and who is pushing on who.

xaraan

Rickter wrote: »

Stridig wrote: »

Excuse my ignorance, but what exactly is the problem in Shor? I have read much discussion about keeping things small scale but that's really all I have seen. In my brief experience with Shor, things are indeed small scale.

Right so, this isnt exactly true. and this sentiment of "Shor isnt small scale anymore" is born from those that were here on Shor since it went live where it was a near barren waste land and basically requiem v bcc v dw and whoever else for EP/AD/DC. So from that perspective, Shor has essentially exploded. What youve seen at Chalman the last couple nights, or anywhere really is pretty large scale.

So the issues with Shor right now are: EP has a very large and commanding presence. Its forcing other groups (even my own) to group larger as well. this isnt necessarily a bad thing but when small scalers try to harass these increased sized groups, they get clobbered in retaliation and it makes for bad pvp.

Then you have Requiem, which has a solid 8-10 players that i wouldnt say were min maxed, but have cultivated for a long time resulting in a coordinated and veteran squad spearheaded by ME the Lord Paramount of the Vanguard of Justice. Then pepper us with PUGs or new pvp recruits and we become a less than desirable group to fight against.

NBrookus wrote: »

Maybe it's time to start grooming another raid lead, either by letting them take a small squad out for diversionary activities or let them lead the main group while you take the squad.

This gives you the benefit of a flexible force that can hit multiple targets, and then, when needed, combine to face the larger groups.

Hey thanks Brookus, this was in fact exactly what was proposed last night internally. My reservations is that this "hitsquad" gets too exclusive. Because i've literally seen that happen with Regiment last year.

Yeah, at this point, if one faction decides to stay out of balance and zergy, the others can't do much. You have to stay in your bigger group. But overall alliance decisions can matter. And I'm going to say "you" here in my example, but I'm talking more DC (or whatever random leader) in this example than just you personally:

If say EP is always dominant (in numbers and points and land), then frankly, it's a bad decision to take yellow scrolls or home keeps and push them further from fighting reds. Why would you want to hold our scrolls and encourage AD to get it back from your keeps, especially if they were already in a red keep? (not saying you did, just saying things I've seen in past on various campaigns). Or say, why take Roe/Alessia and cut AD off from having a front with EP and make us worry about fighting blues at those keeps trying to get them back instead of pushing on red. Sometimes there is an Emp push sure, but all to often stuff like that doesn't happen for any reason that makes tactical sense.

Granted, all sides have pugs or groups that don't listen and do whatever. We've also watched AD push toward like BRK for example, get smashed and decide to fight blue b/c it's easier b/c there are less of them and leave red holding emp and freeing them up even more to push blue from top, push back on AD while they push blue, etc. They are bad decisions, but we can't control everyone on our factions.

Does that mean we would never fight each other? I hope not, as I've said, I'm there more for fun fights than leaderboards, getting emp, etc. And even if you are, once red is de-throned, maybe some of those guys that were defending take a break b/c they've been at it for hours and we have to worry more about each other. That's just the way a three way fight is.

We hate being in a huge group ourselves, but if we had like 12 people (well, mojican would probably not let it happen, he already gets grumpy when the group frame goes from four to five lol, but let's say it did...) we'd relish being needed to split into two groups of 6 and fight two places at once. You have the ability if you are getting a larger group together like that to have it both ways, you can stay big when needed if AD or EP is zerging something or split up when needed when everyone is comfortable with doing so and you felt like you could have two solid teams to be in two places at once and deal with smaller fights without dedicating too many resources to one small fight.

W0lf_z13

@Glory if your ever up to it, id love to duel you sometime mDK/mDK, currently im working on a non group setup version to hopefully keep the higher damage but also have more resistances. And hopefully if ur up for it ill learn a thing or 2

Rickter

Yeah i agree with you there @xaraan and trust me i have been trying to push red all week. There was one time i described trying to fight red and ad took the whole western side of the map up to ales.

Idk, we just do the best we can. Going to not think about eso while i decimate dat turkey yo!

xaraan

Examples in shor right now apply more to the other faction at the moment, they can't do anything without a zerg. They are currently mega zerging like six dudes left trying to get emp, and no blues on doing anything. This is the crap that means no more playing, its not fun for anyone, (if it is for them its the saddest thing ever). If I needed this many players to fight this few people, i'd quit playing. But if its like this, where the fights are not fun, there is no win/lose, just gettig rolled over, then why bother?

PenguinInACan

xaraan wrote: »

Examples in shor right now apply more to the other faction at the moment, they can't do anything without a zerg. They are currently mega zerging like six dudes left trying to get emp, and no blues on doing anything. This is the crap that means no more playing, its not fun for anyone, (if it is for them its the saddest thing ever). If I needed this many players to fight this few people, i'd quit playing.

The bigger problem with what just happened is I see this when I'm solo and think "man, that would be fun to fight with a 10-12 man group" and then I bring a 10-12 man group when EP is at 3 bars and get zero fights and people complain about my "ball group" and cry vivec bleeding over.

And to top it all off the zerg that just emped wont be there to fight equal numbers or any other similarly sized organized group. If you bring enough pop to prevent what just happened you are "killing the server" because its always one color and everyone just wants to PvDoor and zerg the last emp keep.

Servers need larger organized groups. If you try only to small scale, the larger guilds will take advantage and roll it over for emp, because really...what are you going to do to stop it?

technohic

I went in for a bit and I don't know why. I wasn't really feeling it. Went stamplar for a little while to solo roam and decided I really suck at stamplar after running into a guy from Animosity. Sometimes its hard telling when you either have the numbers and roll over someone or they have the numbers and roll over you. Loaded my magplar in for a bit and feels a bit better but it's still the same thing. Roll over or get rolled over.

I might have to start getting into some duels to try to actually get better.

Raknosh

technohic wrote: »

I might have to start getting into some duels to try to actually get better.

IMO, the best way to get better at this game is to duel people better than you and ask em advices if you get rekt

Rickter

If anyone is interested in an organizaed and dedicated duel community, @NightbladeMechanics has revived Legend. Additionally, GvG opportunities are available via @Irylia

Glory

W0lf_z13 wrote: »

@Glory if your ever up to it, id love to duel you sometime mDK/mDK, currently im working on a non group setup version to hopefully keep the higher damage but also have more resistances. And hopefully if ur up for it ill learn a thing or 2

I'd love to duel or chat about build setups! I am gone the last day or two for the holidays but you can friend me in game - @Glorious if you'd like to set something up!

I love theorycrafting DK stuff (to a fault as my friends would likely say!).

Lord_Hev

.

Glory wrote: »

W0lf_z13 wrote: »

@Glory if your ever up to it, id love to duel you sometime mDK/mDK, currently im working on a non group setup version to hopefully keep the higher damage but also have more resistances. And hopefully if ur up for it ill learn a thing or 2

I'd love to duel or chat about build setups! I am gone the last day or two for the holidays but you can friend me in game - @Glorious if you'd like to set something up!

I love theorycrafting DK stuff (to a fault as my friends would likely say!).

Never hear that from me. DK is back, too back some would say.

W0lf_z13

Glory wrote: »

W0lf_z13 wrote: »

@Glory if your ever up to it, id love to duel you sometime mDK/mDK, currently im working on a non group setup version to hopefully keep the higher damage but also have more resistances. And hopefully if ur up for it ill learn a thing or 2

I'd love to duel or chat about build setups! I am gone the last day or two for the holidays but you can friend me in game - @Glorious if you'd like to set something up!

I love theorycrafting DK stuff (to a fault as my friends would likely say!).

cool!, sent a fr

W0lf_z13

Lord_Hev wrote: »

.

Glory wrote: »

W0lf_z13 wrote: »

@Glory if your ever up to it, id love to duel you sometime mDK/mDK, currently im working on a non group setup version to hopefully keep the higher damage but also have more resistances. And hopefully if ur up for it ill learn a thing or 2

I'd love to duel or chat about build setups! I am gone the last day or two for the holidays but you can friend me in game - @Glorious if you'd like to set something up!

I love theorycrafting DK stuff (to a fault as my friends would likely say!).

Never hear that from me. DK is back, too back some would say.

lol yeah, been playing mDK for the last year and I'm loving how it currently performs

Adenoma

@W0lf_z13 , running 5x varen's, 5x desert rose on a magDK with lightning destro back bar is the strongest build in CP, imo. Pick either blood spawn or Skoria for a helm.

Stridig

Adenoma wrote: »

@W0lf_z13 , running 5x varen's, 5x desert rose on a magDK with lightning destro back bar is the strongest build in CP, imo. Pick either blood spawn or Skoria for a helm.

That's what I run. Good survivability but only medium damage. At least for me.

Durham

I have been on Shore for a week .. I have enjoyed the fights the last two nights ... We have been outnumbered and lack healing 80% of the time ... So I have been dying much more then I did in the past plus Im pretty rusty atm....In the morning some of us go to Vevic in 15 minutes I recieved 5 hate tells... Were zerged down almost every fight ... And Im reminded about the lag eveytime I venture there.. Vevic is even worse then it was back in the summer.. I can see how the attitudes of many of the people drive away so many people from PVP....

Hopefully we can get our 2 healers running more so we can go up against some of these 12 mans in open field..

RIckter we have not fought Req. yet with our full group setup we have only had it up and running for about 2 hours the last 2 nights with 6 players. We actually have ran into you guys up at Chalman with 3 we were holding the mine .... hopefully after the holidays we can run6- 8 people with our healing back up the levels it was during the summer so we can have some good fights ... Our Guilds prime time is 7pm to 9pm est... After 9pm things drop off quickly for us

Grimlok_S

I think someone broke Cyrodiil.

While held to our home keeps DC toons had the alliance emperor health buff, as well as Enemy Keeps IV yesterday. All while an EP was reigning emp. Buffs stayed after they were dethroned and and AD crowned.

Spoke briefly with some AD and EP while their faction was reigning, they didn't seem to be getting the emp health buff.

I've always thought the faction being beaten to their gates should be buffed rather than the already dominant force but don't think this is intended.

Edit: to clarify it showed up in the character stat sheet but not the alliance war buff tab.

Vapirko

Grimlok_S wrote: »

I think someone broke Cyrodiil.

While held to our home keeps DC toons had the alliance emperor health buff, as well as Enemy Keeps IV yesterday. All while an EP was reigning emp. Buffs stayed after they were dethroned and and AD crowned.

Spoke briefly with some AD and EP while their faction was reigning, they didn't seem to be getting the emp health buff.

I've always thought the faction being beaten to their gates should be buffed rather than the already dominant force but don't think this is intended.

Edit: to clarify it showed up in the character stat sheet but not the alliance war buff tab.

I noticed this also. Didn’t stop EP from zerging hard to scrolls.