The Current Destro Pain Train Meta Needs To Die

Anazasi

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

Anazasi wrote: »

****Caution wall of text incoming*****

Well this is turning into a nice philosophical debate on changing meta. It's rather interesting to see this happening now as if there is some hidden time clock that says if the meta doesn't change by x days, developers will have to nerf the meta in order to save the population from itself. However, everyone needs to remember, you can't say lets versify; toss in several classes doing dps and then slap a meta label on it. I had a very interesting night last night and while the "New Meta" was very strong there's nothing new about it. So you toss in the regular splatter of rapid sorcs and purge sorcs, toss in a few stam warden healers and then round up a bunch of stam dps and call it the "New Meta" just because you're tired of the old "meta"? The old meta really being about support roles and what classes fill them for optimal performance, not the fact that it was 1 particular over performing ability or DPS class. I can make that call because all the "new meta" is doing is changing DPS roles and still has all the elements of the old destro meta mixed in. So groups are going to swing back to stam groups which makes the entire meta trail just one big circle jerk: who's providing the towels cause I can make a pretty big mess. I think everyone aside from IZY is totally overthinking this "hype". The community does not need another meta like the steel tornado days; and you recall how fast that was nerfed especially after the long period of the Impulse and then the shorter period of proxi balls. What it needs are more organized groups with better play mechanics. Actual fixes to broken abilities, lag fixes, and of course population balances. I should point out that Meta groups when used at map objectives only serve to create lag, genuinely make for bad player experiences, and cause unnecessary stress on both players and server. The average player does not care about meta's. They care about objective play and having fun. The so called meta groups like Dracarys, strategically place themselves in locations in order to draw in the other groups which is often in more remote places limiting the lag and attention they draw (a very good thing for the entire health of a server and campaign). While others like Invictus, who have no regard for campaign health tend to surf along with other causal raids feeding off the zergs. This type of change, a meta shift is going to cause more players to leave either the game entirely or the campaign. Why you ask? The skill level gap between these players who naturally gravitate towards each other and the casual gamer who just likes to play is already too wide (indicator of incoming nerfs). It is easier, to reroll to another faction so you can be on the winning side than to learn how to be a better player thus a population imbalance exists. It's not about "play as you like" or even about cross faction play. It's about human nature and the culture of winning.

So how does any of this meta change actually help the obvious issues the community faces on a daily basis?

*you can argue about everything I have said here. You can complain about all the abilities you want. But the fact is all the issues the community faces is not 1 or 2 "new things" it's a culmination of it all. I believe IZY used the term power creep or health creep at one point and that perhaps is the real issue we should be looking at.

I was interested in your opinions until you decided to insult my guild again. You may have issues with some of our members, but quit insulting my guild every chance you get. You don't see most of our members on here talking down to anyone. You say we don't care about campaign health, but that's not true at all. You will see us defending keeps and going out in the middle of nowhere to draw aggro from our side of the map often enough. While I can't control what groups do on off nights, our raid nights (which are limited, mind you, people have lives) are focused on finding good fights while defending our map. If you have issues with that, I still don't know what to tell you.

As for the point here, don't think anyone is asking for an extreme swing in the meta, I personally stated that I just feel like this particular meta has no diversity in it, and that is why people come to the forums discussing things like destro ult. We've seen this countless of times. I feel that limiting diversity has and will still be a cause of loss of interest to many players. I'm not saying ZoS needs to follow the pattern that they always have, I'm saying the opposite of that. I don't just speak from a PvP perspective either. It happens across the board to every aspect of end-game content in ESO. There will always be a "meta", but we could have a meta with more options in it. That, I know for a fact, would attract more players.

And, yes, we have experienced quite a "power creep" after the Morrowind nerfs. This should be looked at. But it is also something that needs to be carefully looked at because there's more than just PvP that this would affect. ZoS has stated that they will not balance PvE and PvP separately. This is why I don't think anything extreme should be changed, would just like to see some more thought and effort put into making more than just a few ults and skills overbearingly strong.

I can pull footage of your guild members tea-bagging constantly. You say you can't control your members when you don't lead well maybe they should remove the tabards and their childish tea bagging behavior won't reflect on your guild. You want to be civil and have legitimate conversations fine, I enjoy that more than anything, but until your ingame behavior reflects your sentiment on the forums there's actually not much diplomacy left to work with. I have seen and heard what you all think of me and I'm ok with most of it because i understand we all have opinions based on perceptions. But until you work out your guild's behavior, what incentive do i have to even care about trying to work with you on a problem that we all face. The ball is in your court make an effort to fix the perception.

zyk

CyrusArya wrote: »

Lol no. Earthgore was added to allow mediocre raids to perform like the good ones without...you know...getting good. Precise coordination of layered heals and ultimates? Nah just slot this monster set and you’re good fam.

It’s the same philosophy as the old heavy armor and proc sets, but in a group context. Dumbing the game down to allow ppl to artificially perform at a higher level. Earthgore mindlessly carries players. Just like the old heavy armor and proc sets did. And it will meet the same fate eventually. We can only hope.

IMO, this is the reason we have the Destro, Resto and 1HS ults. Perhaps it can be argued all weapon ults were designed to raise the floor. I believe most combat and itemization changes since 2.3 have had this goal and it has ruined PVP.

I think an overlooked and compelling aspect of the Destro meta is that it's easy. I think this makes it hard for many guilds to break from because so many PVP players are either casual, play sporadically or play in spurts.

My PVP guild experiments heavily and we've found success outside of the Destro meta, but group comp and training become issues because most of our members are casual. Our 3.0 setup, IMO, was superior to the Destro meta, but we couldn't maintain the group comp required to run it. We recently ran with mdk dps using leaps and it was a lot of fun because it required so much more thought than the typical Destro carpet bomb.

I wish ZOS would stop trying to make PVP and AvA enjoyable to people who fundamentally do not enjoy PVP. Cyrodiil is now overflowing with players such as this who are willing and able to zerg empty keeps as if they're dolmens or world bosses. Meanwhile, players who enjoy PVP are becoming more and more disgusted with each update.

Anazasi

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

The-Baconator wrote: »

I would rather see ZOS actually make changes to things like nova, standard, veil, etc to make them more appealing, by adding in things like "Extreme" tier buffs that exist outside the major\minor system and bring some uniqueness back to the classes.

This. Just bring some strength back to classes and ults. Bring some diversity back. Oh, and trash Earthgore, who thought that was a good idea ffs.

Exactly. That's what I wanted to see and was the ultimate goal of making this thread.

I want to see Novas and Banners and Veils and Magma Armors and Remembrances and Destro and Pooh Bear and Storm Atros and Negates and all the other flavors of the rainbow be at least somewhat viable in PVP. There was a time they used to be, and that time is long past.

A big part of that is Earthgore. Earthgore was key to further calcifying an already sedentary meta.

Addendum:

@Anazasi

Taran - You make it really hard to engage in constructive conversation with you when you're repeatedly insulting my guild.

That we're here, talking about this, is proof enough we give a hoot about what's going on in game and want a healthy environment that solos, small men, mid size, and full size groups can enjoy. That makes the game better for everyone.

OK, lets look at one issue here and not have a degraded discussion. I believe that ZOS put earthgore in as a way to help balance the overall state of pvp. I see it as a healers set not for a dps class i think the stats on it clearly support that conclusion. I also want to state for the purpose of this debate that i am taking the position that the majority of the players in PVP are casual players. I also want to remind you that as a raid leader who runs a very diverse group with 4 healers and support players who are like I said casual players. How is this monster set a problem. My group often fights outnumbered, my group often fights some of the best groups on the map, i.e., Dracarys and Invictus. You are advocating that this set causes issues and by your own association part of a more skilled pvp groups on EP. The way this comes off to the casual player is you just want to be able to wipe out groups faster and Earth Gore gets in your way. This is the perception of the arguments that have been put forward. I should also add that many of the anti-earthgore sentiments are probably from players like yourself or the 1vX type of player that has an execute situation negated by the set.

Present a position with supporting insight that can convince me and everyone else that this set is bad. I simply don't see it. I would even go as far to say groups such as yourself are using it as part of their group comp.

Did ZOS make a mistake with this set? No they looked at data you and I do not have access to and determined this was necessary. How can you advocate for its removal, change, or nerf?

Don't get me wrong Agrippa you all are good players. You all have had some really good fights and have all played the meta. I'm not against you on any of this change I just want everyone to actually think through this from all possible perspectives. Change is good but change can be detrimental if not done correctly. You also have to always keep in mind the majority of players are casual players. They get on and play for entertainment and don't take any of this too seriously. The players that actually do care about this game and this community have all witnessed sweeping nerfs that had no thought put into them. We have to be careful not for just our individual desires but for the entire community. And as far as the insults, hey stop t-bagging me and I will be happy to show you the respect you and your guild deserves.

Joy_Division

Anazasi wrote: »

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

Anazasi wrote: »

****Caution wall of text incoming*****

Well this is turning into a nice philosophical debate on changing meta. It's rather interesting to see this happening now as if there is some hidden time clock that says if the meta doesn't change by x days, developers will have to nerf the meta in order to save the population from itself. However, everyone needs to remember, you can't say lets versify; toss in several classes doing dps and then slap a meta label on it. I had a very interesting night last night and while the "New Meta" was very strong there's nothing new about it. So you toss in the regular splatter of rapid sorcs and purge sorcs, toss in a few stam warden healers and then round up a bunch of stam dps and call it the "New Meta" just because you're tired of the old "meta"? The old meta really being about support roles and what classes fill them for optimal performance, not the fact that it was 1 particular over performing ability or DPS class. I can make that call because all the "new meta" is doing is changing DPS roles and still has all the elements of the old destro meta mixed in. So groups are going to swing back to stam groups which makes the entire meta trail just one big circle jerk: who's providing the towels cause I can make a pretty big mess. I think everyone aside from IZY is totally overthinking this "hype". The community does not need another meta like the steel tornado days; and you recall how fast that was nerfed especially after the long period of the Impulse and then the shorter period of proxi balls. What it needs are more organized groups with better play mechanics. Actual fixes to broken abilities, lag fixes, and of course population balances. I should point out that Meta groups when used at map objectives only serve to create lag, genuinely make for bad player experiences, and cause unnecessary stress on both players and server. The average player does not care about meta's. They care about objective play and having fun. The so called meta groups like Dracarys, strategically place themselves in locations in order to draw in the other groups which is often in more remote places limiting the lag and attention they draw (a very good thing for the entire health of a server and campaign). While others like Invictus, who have no regard for campaign health tend to surf along with other causal raids feeding off the zergs. This type of change, a meta shift is going to cause more players to leave either the game entirely or the campaign. Why you ask? The skill level gap between these players who naturally gravitate towards each other and the casual gamer who just likes to play is already too wide (indicator of incoming nerfs). It is easier, to reroll to another faction so you can be on the winning side than to learn how to be a better player thus a population imbalance exists. It's not about "play as you like" or even about cross faction play. It's about human nature and the culture of winning.

So how does any of this meta change actually help the obvious issues the community faces on a daily basis?

*you can argue about everything I have said here. You can complain about all the abilities you want. But the fact is all the issues the community faces is not 1 or 2 "new things" it's a culmination of it all. I believe IZY used the term power creep or health creep at one point and that perhaps is the real issue we should be looking at.

I was interested in your opinions until you decided to insult my guild again. You may have issues with some of our members, but quit insulting my guild every chance you get. You don't see most of our members on here talking down to anyone. You say we don't care about campaign health, but that's not true at all. You will see us defending keeps and going out in the middle of nowhere to draw aggro from our side of the map often enough. While I can't control what groups do on off nights, our raid nights (which are limited, mind you, people have lives) are focused on finding good fights while defending our map. If you have issues with that, I still don't know what to tell you.

As for the point here, don't think anyone is asking for an extreme swing in the meta, I personally stated that I just feel like this particular meta has no diversity in it, and that is why people come to the forums discussing things like destro ult. We've seen this countless of times. I feel that limiting diversity has and will still be a cause of loss of interest to many players. I'm not saying ZoS needs to follow the pattern that they always have, I'm saying the opposite of that. I don't just speak from a PvP perspective either. It happens across the board to every aspect of end-game content in ESO. There will always be a "meta", but we could have a meta with more options in it. That, I know for a fact, would attract more players.

And, yes, we have experienced quite a "power creep" after the Morrowind nerfs. This should be looked at. But it is also something that needs to be carefully looked at because there's more than just PvP that this would affect. ZoS has stated that they will not balance PvE and PvP separately. This is why I don't think anything extreme should be changed, would just like to see some more thought and effort put into making more than just a few ults and skills overbearingly strong.

I can pull footage of your guild members tea-bagging constantly. You say you can't control your members when you don't lead well maybe they should remove the tabards and their childish tea bagging behavior won't reflect on your guild. You want to be civil and have legitimate conversations fine, I enjoy that more than anything, but until your ingame behavior reflects your sentiment on the forums there's actually not much diplomacy left to work with. I have seen and heard what you all think of me and I'm ok with most of it because i understand we all have opinions based on perceptions. But until you work out your guild's behavior, what incentive do i have to even care about trying to work with you on a problem that we all face. The ball is in your court make an effort to fix the perception.

Can you please stop? You're the one who made this personal. Leave that crap in Cyrodiil and settle it at the Alessia Bridge.
We all do crap in Cyrodiil that I at least hope that some of us in retrospect kind of wish we didn't. Doesn't belong in this thread.

I so much wanted and was hoping for Wheeler, who might as well be on a missing person bulletin, to finally chime in here. But I can see why he never shows up on these forums. No conversation can ever be production and worth trying when egos, accusations, salt, blaming, etc., come in and derail what is an important topic..

I really want to hear what ZoS has to say about their vision. But if I were them I wouldn't come into these forums, which have become a pissing match between rival opposing guilds/players, so I don't blame them for staying away.

Kilandros

Anazasi wrote: »

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

Anazasi wrote: »

****Caution wall of text incoming*****

Well this is turning into a nice philosophical debate on changing meta. It's rather interesting to see this happening now as if there is some hidden time clock that says if the meta doesn't change by x days, developers will have to nerf the meta in order to save the population from itself. However, everyone needs to remember, you can't say lets versify; toss in several classes doing dps and then slap a meta label on it. I had a very interesting night last night and while the "New Meta" was very strong there's nothing new about it. So you toss in the regular splatter of rapid sorcs and purge sorcs, toss in a few stam warden healers and then round up a bunch of stam dps and call it the "New Meta" just because you're tired of the old "meta"? The old meta really being about support roles and what classes fill them for optimal performance, not the fact that it was 1 particular over performing ability or DPS class. I can make that call because all the "new meta" is doing is changing DPS roles and still has all the elements of the old destro meta mixed in. So groups are going to swing back to stam groups which makes the entire meta trail just one big circle jerk: who's providing the towels cause I can make a pretty big mess. I think everyone aside from IZY is totally overthinking this "hype". The community does not need another meta like the steel tornado days; and you recall how fast that was nerfed especially after the long period of the Impulse and then the shorter period of proxi balls. What it needs are more organized groups with better play mechanics. Actual fixes to broken abilities, lag fixes, and of course population balances. I should point out that Meta groups when used at map objectives only serve to create lag, genuinely make for bad player experiences, and cause unnecessary stress on both players and server. The average player does not care about meta's. They care about objective play and having fun. The so called meta groups like Dracarys, strategically place themselves in locations in order to draw in the other groups which is often in more remote places limiting the lag and attention they draw (a very good thing for the entire health of a server and campaign). While others like Invictus, who have no regard for campaign health tend to surf along with other causal raids feeding off the zergs. This type of change, a meta shift is going to cause more players to leave either the game entirely or the campaign. Why you ask? The skill level gap between these players who naturally gravitate towards each other and the casual gamer who just likes to play is already too wide (indicator of incoming nerfs). It is easier, to reroll to another faction so you can be on the winning side than to learn how to be a better player thus a population imbalance exists. It's not about "play as you like" or even about cross faction play. It's about human nature and the culture of winning.

So how does any of this meta change actually help the obvious issues the community faces on a daily basis?

*you can argue about everything I have said here. You can complain about all the abilities you want. But the fact is all the issues the community faces is not 1 or 2 "new things" it's a culmination of it all. I believe IZY used the term power creep or health creep at one point and that perhaps is the real issue we should be looking at.

I was interested in your opinions until you decided to insult my guild again. You may have issues with some of our members, but quit insulting my guild every chance you get. You don't see most of our members on here talking down to anyone. You say we don't care about campaign health, but that's not true at all. You will see us defending keeps and going out in the middle of nowhere to draw aggro from our side of the map often enough. While I can't control what groups do on off nights, our raid nights (which are limited, mind you, people have lives) are focused on finding good fights while defending our map. If you have issues with that, I still don't know what to tell you.

As for the point here, don't think anyone is asking for an extreme swing in the meta, I personally stated that I just feel like this particular meta has no diversity in it, and that is why people come to the forums discussing things like destro ult. We've seen this countless of times. I feel that limiting diversity has and will still be a cause of loss of interest to many players. I'm not saying ZoS needs to follow the pattern that they always have, I'm saying the opposite of that. I don't just speak from a PvP perspective either. It happens across the board to every aspect of end-game content in ESO. There will always be a "meta", but we could have a meta with more options in it. That, I know for a fact, would attract more players.

And, yes, we have experienced quite a "power creep" after the Morrowind nerfs. This should be looked at. But it is also something that needs to be carefully looked at because there's more than just PvP that this would affect. ZoS has stated that they will not balance PvE and PvP separately. This is why I don't think anything extreme should be changed, would just like to see some more thought and effort put into making more than just a few ults and skills overbearingly strong.

I can pull footage of your guild members tea-bagging constantly. You say you can't control your members when you don't lead well maybe they should remove the tabards and their childish tea bagging behavior won't reflect on your guild. You want to be civil and have legitimate conversations fine, I enjoy that more than anything, but until your ingame behavior reflects your sentiment on the forums there's actually not much diplomacy left to work with. I have seen and heard what you all think of me and I'm ok with most of it because i understand we all have opinions based on perceptions. But until you work out your guild's behavior, what incentive do i have to even care about trying to work with you on a problem that we all face. The ball is in your court make an effort to fix the perception.

Taran, I doubt anyone in our guild tbags you constantly. It may have happened once or twice before, and it may happen once or twice in the future, but Taran, if we're being honest, no one in Invictus either likes you enough to tbag or dislikes you enough to tbag.

Anazasi

Psilent wrote: »

Anazasi wrote: »

. While others like Invictus, who have no regard for campaign health tend to surf along with other causal raids feeding off the zergs.

Taran, please keep this post on topic; bringing up lies is only going to incite players and get a good thread locked. I can tell you from experience that Invictus is very much not a toxic guild at all; never has been and never will be in the future.

Anyway...

Being a player who prefers stamina over magicka; I really dislike this meta. Playing StamDK/StamSorc is a lot of fun, but this meta relegated me to a life of rapid spamming and negating. I think at one point I had two attack abilities on my bar; Blade Cloak and Hurricane. Got so bored of the meta that I have quit ESO PvP; I still login, but I just do dailies and logout.

It would be nice if other ultimates were brought up to be made useful enough that groups would need members to slot them.

Ok lets look at what you said. The meta made you do it. Is that an accurate statement? You made a choice to play the meta and didn't like it so you stopped playing in PVP. Let's exam this type of human behavior. Yes I am still on topic. we are discussing the human factor that caused you to participate in a meta even though you wanted to play some other role. This is important because if we can uncover this reason we might find a way to alter the existing behavior of the meta. I'm serious because amongst the older more casual players I suggested playing the meta and was immediately criticized by my own guild. They are definitely subscribers of play as you want to mentality. Which i will add is not a bad thing in my mind. But what drew you into the meta and made you do it?

Anazasi

Kilandros wrote: »

Anazasi wrote: »

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

Anazasi wrote: »

****Caution wall of text incoming*****

Well this is turning into a nice philosophical debate on changing meta. It's rather interesting to see this happening now as if there is some hidden time clock that says if the meta doesn't change by x days, developers will have to nerf the meta in order to save the population from itself. However, everyone needs to remember, you can't say lets versify; toss in several classes doing dps and then slap a meta label on it. I had a very interesting night last night and while the "New Meta" was very strong there's nothing new about it. So you toss in the regular splatter of rapid sorcs and purge sorcs, toss in a few stam warden healers and then round up a bunch of stam dps and call it the "New Meta" just because you're tired of the old "meta"? The old meta really being about support roles and what classes fill them for optimal performance, not the fact that it was 1 particular over performing ability or DPS class. I can make that call because all the "new meta" is doing is changing DPS roles and still has all the elements of the old destro meta mixed in. So groups are going to swing back to stam groups which makes the entire meta trail just one big circle jerk: who's providing the towels cause I can make a pretty big mess. I think everyone aside from IZY is totally overthinking this "hype". The community does not need another meta like the steel tornado days; and you recall how fast that was nerfed especially after the long period of the Impulse and then the shorter period of proxi balls. What it needs are more organized groups with better play mechanics. Actual fixes to broken abilities, lag fixes, and of course population balances. I should point out that Meta groups when used at map objectives only serve to create lag, genuinely make for bad player experiences, and cause unnecessary stress on both players and server. The average player does not care about meta's. They care about objective play and having fun. The so called meta groups like Dracarys, strategically place themselves in locations in order to draw in the other groups which is often in more remote places limiting the lag and attention they draw (a very good thing for the entire health of a server and campaign). While others like Invictus, who have no regard for campaign health tend to surf along with other causal raids feeding off the zergs. This type of change, a meta shift is going to cause more players to leave either the game entirely or the campaign. Why you ask? The skill level gap between these players who naturally gravitate towards each other and the casual gamer who just likes to play is already too wide (indicator of incoming nerfs). It is easier, to reroll to another faction so you can be on the winning side than to learn how to be a better player thus a population imbalance exists. It's not about "play as you like" or even about cross faction play. It's about human nature and the culture of winning.

So how does any of this meta change actually help the obvious issues the community faces on a daily basis?

*you can argue about everything I have said here. You can complain about all the abilities you want. But the fact is all the issues the community faces is not 1 or 2 "new things" it's a culmination of it all. I believe IZY used the term power creep or health creep at one point and that perhaps is the real issue we should be looking at.

I was interested in your opinions until you decided to insult my guild again. You may have issues with some of our members, but quit insulting my guild every chance you get. You don't see most of our members on here talking down to anyone. You say we don't care about campaign health, but that's not true at all. You will see us defending keeps and going out in the middle of nowhere to draw aggro from our side of the map often enough. While I can't control what groups do on off nights, our raid nights (which are limited, mind you, people have lives) are focused on finding good fights while defending our map. If you have issues with that, I still don't know what to tell you.

As for the point here, don't think anyone is asking for an extreme swing in the meta, I personally stated that I just feel like this particular meta has no diversity in it, and that is why people come to the forums discussing things like destro ult. We've seen this countless of times. I feel that limiting diversity has and will still be a cause of loss of interest to many players. I'm not saying ZoS needs to follow the pattern that they always have, I'm saying the opposite of that. I don't just speak from a PvP perspective either. It happens across the board to every aspect of end-game content in ESO. There will always be a "meta", but we could have a meta with more options in it. That, I know for a fact, would attract more players.

And, yes, we have experienced quite a "power creep" after the Morrowind nerfs. This should be looked at. But it is also something that needs to be carefully looked at because there's more than just PvP that this would affect. ZoS has stated that they will not balance PvE and PvP separately. This is why I don't think anything extreme should be changed, would just like to see some more thought and effort put into making more than just a few ults and skills overbearingly strong.

I can pull footage of your guild members tea-bagging constantly. You say you can't control your members when you don't lead well maybe they should remove the tabards and their childish tea bagging behavior won't reflect on your guild. You want to be civil and have legitimate conversations fine, I enjoy that more than anything, but until your ingame behavior reflects your sentiment on the forums there's actually not much diplomacy left to work with. I have seen and heard what you all think of me and I'm ok with most of it because i understand we all have opinions based on perceptions. But until you work out your guild's behavior, what incentive do i have to even care about trying to work with you on a problem that we all face. The ball is in your court make an effort to fix the perception.

Taran, I doubt anyone in our guild tbags you constantly. It may have happened once or twice before, and it may happen once or twice in the future, but Taran, if we're being honest, no one in Invictus either likes you enough to tbag or dislikes you enough to tbag.

yeah ok frodn wasn't in your group tonight he was surfing along with you. You know what just forget it, I offered an apology several posts back, something i probably shouldn't have done but did. You continue your path and I'll continue mine and we can all leave it in Cryodiil. But just remember, everyone here wants to make a better community and having players that choose to be disrespectable only hurts what is trying to be built.

Kilandros

Anazasi wrote: »

Kilandros wrote: »

Anazasi wrote: »

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

Anazasi wrote: »

****Caution wall of text incoming*****

Well this is turning into a nice philosophical debate on changing meta. It's rather interesting to see this happening now as if there is some hidden time clock that says if the meta doesn't change by x days, developers will have to nerf the meta in order to save the population from itself. However, everyone needs to remember, you can't say lets versify; toss in several classes doing dps and then slap a meta label on it. I had a very interesting night last night and while the "New Meta" was very strong there's nothing new about it. So you toss in the regular splatter of rapid sorcs and purge sorcs, toss in a few stam warden healers and then round up a bunch of stam dps and call it the "New Meta" just because you're tired of the old "meta"? The old meta really being about support roles and what classes fill them for optimal performance, not the fact that it was 1 particular over performing ability or DPS class. I can make that call because all the "new meta" is doing is changing DPS roles and still has all the elements of the old destro meta mixed in. So groups are going to swing back to stam groups which makes the entire meta trail just one big circle jerk: who's providing the towels cause I can make a pretty big mess. I think everyone aside from IZY is totally overthinking this "hype". The community does not need another meta like the steel tornado days; and you recall how fast that was nerfed especially after the long period of the Impulse and then the shorter period of proxi balls. What it needs are more organized groups with better play mechanics. Actual fixes to broken abilities, lag fixes, and of course population balances. I should point out that Meta groups when used at map objectives only serve to create lag, genuinely make for bad player experiences, and cause unnecessary stress on both players and server. The average player does not care about meta's. They care about objective play and having fun. The so called meta groups like Dracarys, strategically place themselves in locations in order to draw in the other groups which is often in more remote places limiting the lag and attention they draw (a very good thing for the entire health of a server and campaign). While others like Invictus, who have no regard for campaign health tend to surf along with other causal raids feeding off the zergs. This type of change, a meta shift is going to cause more players to leave either the game entirely or the campaign. Why you ask? The skill level gap between these players who naturally gravitate towards each other and the casual gamer who just likes to play is already too wide (indicator of incoming nerfs). It is easier, to reroll to another faction so you can be on the winning side than to learn how to be a better player thus a population imbalance exists. It's not about "play as you like" or even about cross faction play. It's about human nature and the culture of winning.

So how does any of this meta change actually help the obvious issues the community faces on a daily basis?

*you can argue about everything I have said here. You can complain about all the abilities you want. But the fact is all the issues the community faces is not 1 or 2 "new things" it's a culmination of it all. I believe IZY used the term power creep or health creep at one point and that perhaps is the real issue we should be looking at.

I was interested in your opinions until you decided to insult my guild again. You may have issues with some of our members, but quit insulting my guild every chance you get. You don't see most of our members on here talking down to anyone. You say we don't care about campaign health, but that's not true at all. You will see us defending keeps and going out in the middle of nowhere to draw aggro from our side of the map often enough. While I can't control what groups do on off nights, our raid nights (which are limited, mind you, people have lives) are focused on finding good fights while defending our map. If you have issues with that, I still don't know what to tell you.

As for the point here, don't think anyone is asking for an extreme swing in the meta, I personally stated that I just feel like this particular meta has no diversity in it, and that is why people come to the forums discussing things like destro ult. We've seen this countless of times. I feel that limiting diversity has and will still be a cause of loss of interest to many players. I'm not saying ZoS needs to follow the pattern that they always have, I'm saying the opposite of that. I don't just speak from a PvP perspective either. It happens across the board to every aspect of end-game content in ESO. There will always be a "meta", but we could have a meta with more options in it. That, I know for a fact, would attract more players.

And, yes, we have experienced quite a "power creep" after the Morrowind nerfs. This should be looked at. But it is also something that needs to be carefully looked at because there's more than just PvP that this would affect. ZoS has stated that they will not balance PvE and PvP separately. This is why I don't think anything extreme should be changed, would just like to see some more thought and effort put into making more than just a few ults and skills overbearingly strong.

I can pull footage of your guild members tea-bagging constantly. You say you can't control your members when you don't lead well maybe they should remove the tabards and their childish tea bagging behavior won't reflect on your guild. You want to be civil and have legitimate conversations fine, I enjoy that more than anything, but until your ingame behavior reflects your sentiment on the forums there's actually not much diplomacy left to work with. I have seen and heard what you all think of me and I'm ok with most of it because i understand we all have opinions based on perceptions. But until you work out your guild's behavior, what incentive do i have to even care about trying to work with you on a problem that we all face. The ball is in your court make an effort to fix the perception.

Taran, I doubt anyone in our guild tbags you constantly. It may have happened once or twice before, and it may happen once or twice in the future, but Taran, if we're being honest, no one in Invictus either likes you enough to tbag or dislikes you enough to tbag.

yeah ok frodn wasn't in your group tonight he was surfing along with you. You know what just forget it, I offered an apology several posts back, something i probably shouldn't have done but did. You continue your path and I'll continue mine and we can all leave it in Cryodiil. But just remember, everyone here wants to make a better community and having players that choose to be disrespectable only hurts what is trying to be built.

I think Frozn leads Vokundein on Wednesdays so he wasn't with us? I wasn't in group tonight so I'm not sure. We can speak to him, though.

Edit - Vort handled it already.

Xsorus

Again I repeat, stop adding mobile pbaes... they’ll be used by zergballs

Don’t add *** like earth gore into the game; I posted about it on the pts forums that it would be used by them as well.

It would not be hard to actually remove zerg balling in this game. After 3 years of it though the people running the pvp team are unwilling to remove it though. It’s why when CU comes out ESO is going to lose what little pvp population it has left.

Rainraven

Joy_Division wrote: »

Anazasi wrote: »

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

Anazasi wrote: »

****Caution wall of text incoming*****

Well this is turning into a nice philosophical debate on changing meta. It's rather interesting to see this happening now as if there is some hidden time clock that says if the meta doesn't change by x days, developers will have to nerf the meta in order to save the population from itself. However, everyone needs to remember, you can't say lets versify; toss in several classes doing dps and then slap a meta label on it. I had a very interesting night last night and while the "New Meta" was very strong there's nothing new about it. So you toss in the regular splatter of rapid sorcs and purge sorcs, toss in a few stam warden healers and then round up a bunch of stam dps and call it the "New Meta" just because you're tired of the old "meta"? The old meta really being about support roles and what classes fill them for optimal performance, not the fact that it was 1 particular over performing ability or DPS class. I can make that call because all the "new meta" is doing is changing DPS roles and still has all the elements of the old destro meta mixed in. So groups are going to swing back to stam groups which makes the entire meta trail just one big circle jerk: who's providing the towels cause I can make a pretty big mess. I think everyone aside from IZY is totally overthinking this "hype". The community does not need another meta like the steel tornado days; and you recall how fast that was nerfed especially after the long period of the Impulse and then the shorter period of proxi balls. What it needs are more organized groups with better play mechanics. Actual fixes to broken abilities, lag fixes, and of course population balances. I should point out that Meta groups when used at map objectives only serve to create lag, genuinely make for bad player experiences, and cause unnecessary stress on both players and server. The average player does not care about meta's. They care about objective play and having fun. The so called meta groups like Dracarys, strategically place themselves in locations in order to draw in the other groups which is often in more remote places limiting the lag and attention they draw (a very good thing for the entire health of a server and campaign). While others like Invictus, who have no regard for campaign health tend to surf along with other causal raids feeding off the zergs. This type of change, a meta shift is going to cause more players to leave either the game entirely or the campaign. Why you ask? The skill level gap between these players who naturally gravitate towards each other and the casual gamer who just likes to play is already too wide (indicator of incoming nerfs). It is easier, to reroll to another faction so you can be on the winning side than to learn how to be a better player thus a population imbalance exists. It's not about "play as you like" or even about cross faction play. It's about human nature and the culture of winning.

So how does any of this meta change actually help the obvious issues the community faces on a daily basis?

*you can argue about everything I have said here. You can complain about all the abilities you want. But the fact is all the issues the community faces is not 1 or 2 "new things" it's a culmination of it all. I believe IZY used the term power creep or health creep at one point and that perhaps is the real issue we should be looking at.

I was interested in your opinions until you decided to insult my guild again. You may have issues with some of our members, but quit insulting my guild every chance you get. You don't see most of our members on here talking down to anyone. You say we don't care about campaign health, but that's not true at all. You will see us defending keeps and going out in the middle of nowhere to draw aggro from our side of the map often enough. While I can't control what groups do on off nights, our raid nights (which are limited, mind you, people have lives) are focused on finding good fights while defending our map. If you have issues with that, I still don't know what to tell you.

As for the point here, don't think anyone is asking for an extreme swing in the meta, I personally stated that I just feel like this particular meta has no diversity in it, and that is why people come to the forums discussing things like destro ult. We've seen this countless of times. I feel that limiting diversity has and will still be a cause of loss of interest to many players. I'm not saying ZoS needs to follow the pattern that they always have, I'm saying the opposite of that. I don't just speak from a PvP perspective either. It happens across the board to every aspect of end-game content in ESO. There will always be a "meta", but we could have a meta with more options in it. That, I know for a fact, would attract more players.

And, yes, we have experienced quite a "power creep" after the Morrowind nerfs. This should be looked at. But it is also something that needs to be carefully looked at because there's more than just PvP that this would affect. ZoS has stated that they will not balance PvE and PvP separately. This is why I don't think anything extreme should be changed, would just like to see some more thought and effort put into making more than just a few ults and skills overbearingly strong.

I can pull footage of your guild members tea-bagging constantly. You say you can't control your members when you don't lead well maybe they should remove the tabards and their childish tea bagging behavior won't reflect on your guild. You want to be civil and have legitimate conversations fine, I enjoy that more than anything, but until your ingame behavior reflects your sentiment on the forums there's actually not much diplomacy left to work with. I have seen and heard what you all think of me and I'm ok with most of it because i understand we all have opinions based on perceptions. But until you work out your guild's behavior, what incentive do i have to even care about trying to work with you on a problem that we all face. The ball is in your court make an effort to fix the perception.

Can you please stop? You're the one who made this personal. Leave that crap in Cyrodiil and settle it at the Alessia Bridge.
We all do crap in Cyrodiil that I at least hope that some of us in retrospect kind of wish we didn't. Doesn't belong in this thread.

I so much wanted and was hoping for Wheeler, who might as well be on a missing person bulletin, to finally chime in here. But I can see why he never shows up on these forums. No conversation can ever be production and worth trying when egos, accusations, salt, blaming, etc., come in and derail what is an important topic..

I really want to hear what ZoS has to say about their vision. But if I were them I wouldn't come into these forums, which have become a pissing match between rival opposing guilds/players, so I don't blame them for staying away.

I do. I blame them. Cyrodiil is in ***-poor shape, maybe they could sack up and at least acknowledge this, whether people are being snippy with each other or not.

UnversedNumber3

Ghostbane wrote: »

Impulse Trains
Wall of Element Trains
Steel Tornado Trains
Standard Trains
Destro Trains
etc

One goes away, another rises.

Train A, traveling 70 miles per hour (mph), leaves Westford heading toward Eastford, 260 miles away. At the same time Train B, traveling 60 mph, leaves Eastford heading toward Westford. When do the two trains meet? How far from each city do they meet?

Vilestride

UnversedNumber3 wrote: »

Ghostbane wrote: »

Impulse Trains
Wall of Element Trains
Steel Tornado Trains
Standard Trains
Destro Trains
etc

One goes away, another rises.

Train A, traveling 70 miles per hour (mph), leaves Westford heading toward Eastford, 260 miles away. At the same time Train B, traveling 60 mph, leaves Eastford heading toward Westford. When do the two trains meet? How far from each city do they meet?

Trick question, Train B got stealth bombed leaving the postern door. it didn't have earthgore equipped and wiped. They will never meet. Train A proceeded to zerg down the nearest resource with 24 passengers on board.

Publius_Scipio

While all you elves and drunkards on the pact duke it out here, did any of you stop and think that we haven’t heard from the god of war himself, Brian Wheeler in a very long time now? I hope all is well with him.

Curragraigue

Vilestride wrote: »

UnversedNumber3 wrote: »

Ghostbane wrote: »

Impulse Trains
Wall of Element Trains
Steel Tornado Trains
Standard Trains
Destro Trains
etc

One goes away, another rises.

Train A, traveling 70 miles per hour (mph), leaves Westford heading toward Eastford, 260 miles away. At the same time Train B, traveling 60 mph, leaves Eastford heading toward Westford. When do the two trains meet? How far from each city do they meet?

Trick question, Train B got stealth bombed leaving the postern door. it didn't have earthgore equipped and wiped. They will never meet. Train A proceeded to zerg down the nearest resource with 24 passengers on board.

Needs MOAR

The-Baconator wrote: »

I would rather see ZOS actually make changes to things like nova, standard, veil, etc to make them more appealing, by adding in things like "Extreme" tier buffs that exist outside the major\minor system and bring some uniqueness back to the classes.

I could get on board with this idea. The problem is getting it balanced.

Tommy_The_Gun

I agree with OP - at least to some point. ZOS seems to acknowledge that the problem exists as they nerfed destro ulti in a previous patch. However - it did not solved the problem. Why ? Well, that is because a destro ulti itself is not a problem. Sure, you might say that destro ulti has very little counter-play. And that is true. You can not dodge it or block it. The only way is to simply try to stay out of its range and/or out-heal it or (in a 1 v 1 scenario) - kill the caster fast.

The real poblem is a combination of some aspects & factors. Usually destro ulti groups run cc immunity potions and Rapid Maneuver. Add some healers and cc spaming tanks to that group and - there is maybe like... 0.5% counter-play against that. Sorcs have neagate and a well cordinated negates might do the trick. But what if you are not a sorc and dont have a negate magic skill ? Running away is your only option ?!

The point is that people are lazy and will simply always use things that give the best results with least input effort. As far as I remember it was always like this. Before destro ulti there was a meteor spam. There will be always "something" that will be used that way - with the least possible amount of counter-play.

The only way to stop those groups is to simply... Idk discourage zergs in some way instead of rewarding them ? Something like decreased AP gain while grouped ? Idk... on the other hand this might couse a sudden increase of gankers in cyro.. So it is not the best solution.... and I fear that there might be simply - no good solution at all.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

I agree with OP - at least to some point. ZOS seems to acknowledge that the problem exists as they nerfed destro ulti in a previous patch. However - it did not solved the problem. Why ? Well, that is because a destro ulti itself is not a problem. Sure, you might say that destro ulti has very little counter-play. And that is true. You can not dodge it or block it. The only way is to simply try to stay out of its range and/or out-heal it or (in a 1 v 1 scenario) - kill the caster fast.

The real poblem is a combination of some aspects & factors. Usually destro ulti groups run cc immunity potions and Rapid Maneuver. Add some healers and cc spaming tanks to that group and - there is maybe like... 0.5% counter-play against that. Sorcs have neagate and a well cordinated negates might do the trick. But what if you are not a sorc and dont have a negate magic skill ? Running away is your only option ?!

The point is that people are lazy and will simply always use things that give the best results with least input effort. As far as I remember it was always like this. Before destro ulti there was a meteor spam. There will be always "something" that will be used that way - with the least possible amount of counter-play.

The only way to stop those groups is to simply... Idk discourage zergs in some way instead of rewarding them ? Something like decreased AP gain while grouped ? Idk... on the other hand this might couse a sudden increase of gankers in cyro.. So it is not the best solution.... and I fear that there might be simply - no good solution at all.

Yet again another example of the inability by a large proportion of the player base to separate organised groups in their minds from faction zergs. What do you think will happen if groups are completely removed? I can tell you that if you remove the dangers to stacking I.e coordinated groups ability to take on 3-4x their number cyro will finally become one big train from alessia to BRK and chal to aleswell.

And you will see a huge drop in the proportion of interest in pvp.

Also not in response to your comment but the sentiment that players in groups are there to only support the nbs is funny. For my eyes it's not like this at all. Especially for rapids.

Maura_Neysa

How does ANYONE know whether the Eye nerf was effective considering 90% of PvP players aren't willing to deal with the infinite load screen issue?
I'm actually enjoying Cryodiil more, because the first ones to go where the zergbergs. I am by no means one of the PvP dedicated types.

Vilestride

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Also not in response to your comment but the sentiment that players in groups are there to only support the nbs is funny. For my eyes it's not like this at all. Especially for rapids.

My heart only exists so it can pump blood to my head while I roll my face over my keyboard. Evolution mate.

Tommy_The_Gun

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

I agree with OP - at least to some point. ZOS seems to acknowledge that the problem exists as they nerfed destro ulti in a previous patch. However - it did not solved the problem. Why ? Well, that is because a destro ulti itself is not a problem. Sure, you might say that destro ulti has very little counter-play. And that is true. You can not dodge it or block it. The only way is to simply try to stay out of its range and/or out-heal it or (in a 1 v 1 scenario) - kill the caster fast.

The real poblem is a combination of some aspects & factors. Usually destro ulti groups run cc immunity potions and Rapid Maneuver. Add some healers and cc spaming tanks to that group and - there is maybe like... 0.5% counter-play against that. Sorcs have neagate and a well cordinated negates might do the trick. But what if you are not a sorc and dont have a negate magic skill ? Running away is your only option ?!

The point is that people are lazy and will simply always use things that give the best results with least input effort. As far as I remember it was always like this. Before destro ulti there was a meteor spam. There will be always "something" that will be used that way - with the least possible amount of counter-play.

The only way to stop those groups is to simply... Idk discourage zergs in some way instead of rewarding them ? Something like decreased AP gain while grouped ? Idk... on the other hand this might couse a sudden increase of gankers in cyro.. So it is not the best solution.... and I fear that there might be simply - no good solution at all.

Yet again another example of the inability by a large proportion of the player base to separate organised groups in their minds from faction zergs. What do you think will happen if groups are completely removed? I can tell you that if you remove the dangers to stacking I.e coordinated groups ability to take on 3-4x their number cyro will finally become one big train from alessia to BRK and chal to aleswell.

And you will see a huge drop in the proportion of interest in pvp.

Also not in response to your comment but the sentiment that players in groups are there to only support the nbs is funny. For my eyes it's not like this at all. Especially for rapids.

Wait a second...
Are you saying that large number of unorganised players (15-20+) are zerg but somehow a large number of organised (grouped players following crown) are not a zerg ?!

Anyway I did not said anything about removing groups. I just pointed out that as far as I know there is simply no drawback in using a group. And as you have metioned well organised groups have ability to take down 3-4x of their numbers...

Ghostbane

UnversedNumber3 wrote: »

Ghostbane wrote: »

Impulse Trains
Wall of Element Trains
Steel Tornado Trains
Standard Trains
Destro Trains
etc

One goes away, another rises.

Train A, traveling 70 miles per hour (mph), leaves Westford heading toward Eastford, 260 miles away. At the same time Train B, traveling 60 mph, leaves Eastford heading toward Westford. When do the two trains meet? How far from each city do they meet?

If I get a calculator for latency and write a formula to convert mph to fps, I'll get back to you Doc.

Qbiken

Jawasa wrote: »

Nerfing rapids is the worst Idea so far in here. That just force us into some kind of small scale build zerg meta with oil and fire ballistas that allready is run by most players in cyrodil. Players complain about no skill destro blobs and run solo on a small scale build inside the 40 man faction pug zerg.

Together with some changes to Earthgore, a nerf to rapid manouver is probably the best solution I´ve seen in this thread (no troll). At least add a cooldown to the snare-removal part.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

I agree with OP - at least to some point. ZOS seems to acknowledge that the problem exists as they nerfed destro ulti in a previous patch. However - it did not solved the problem. Why ? Well, that is because a destro ulti itself is not a problem. Sure, you might say that destro ulti has very little counter-play. And that is true. You can not dodge it or block it. The only way is to simply try to stay out of its range and/or out-heal it or (in a 1 v 1 scenario) - kill the caster fast.

The real poblem is a combination of some aspects & factors. Usually destro ulti groups run cc immunity potions and Rapid Maneuver. Add some healers and cc spaming tanks to that group and - there is maybe like... 0.5% counter-play against that. Sorcs have neagate and a well cordinated negates might do the trick. But what if you are not a sorc and dont have a negate magic skill ? Running away is your only option ?!

The point is that people are lazy and will simply always use things that give the best results with least input effort. As far as I remember it was always like this. Before destro ulti there was a meteor spam. There will be always "something" that will be used that way - with the least possible amount of counter-play.

The only way to stop those groups is to simply... Idk discourage zergs in some way instead of rewarding them ? Something like decreased AP gain while grouped ? Idk... on the other hand this might couse a sudden increase of gankers in cyro.. So it is not the best solution.... and I fear that there might be simply - no good solution at all.

Yet again another example of the inability by a large proportion of the player base to separate organised groups in their minds from faction zergs. What do you think will happen if groups are completely removed? I can tell you that if you remove the dangers to stacking I.e coordinated groups ability to take on 3-4x their number cyro will finally become one big train from alessia to BRK and chal to aleswell.

And you will see a huge drop in the proportion of interest in pvp.

Also not in response to your comment but the sentiment that players in groups are there to only support the nbs is funny. For my eyes it's not like this at all. Especially for rapids.

Wait a second...
Are you saying that large number of unorganised players (15-20+) are zerg but somehow a large number of organised (grouped players following crown) are not a zerg ?!

Anyway I did not said anything about removing groups. I just pointed out that as far as I know there is simply no drawback in using a group. And as you have metioned well organised groups have ability to take down 3-4x of their numbers...

I don't consider 15-20 players to be a zerg. What constitutes a zerg to me is behaviour not size. For example a faction moving from keep to keep in a line they are zerging towards that objective. An organised group going to another objective and separating from this faction push separates them from this definition imo.

Sure all groups can participate in zerging behaviour but I don't consider them by definition "A zerg" no.

Jawasa

@Qbiken horrible idea. Keep every1 permasnared so the huge 60 man zerg that is 60% ungrouped can zerg them down. It's allready had a huge nerf once. All that did was force groups to have a dedicated spammer. More changes will probably serve to remove slower classes from group play and force all groups to run just stam/mag wardens and sorcs.

Anazasi

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

I agree with OP - at least to some point. ZOS seems to acknowledge that the problem exists as they nerfed destro ulti in a previous patch. However - it did not solved the problem. Why ? Well, that is because a destro ulti itself is not a problem. Sure, you might say that destro ulti has very little counter-play. And that is true. You can not dodge it or block it. The only way is to simply try to stay out of its range and/or out-heal it or (in a 1 v 1 scenario) - kill the caster fast.

The real poblem is a combination of some aspects & factors. Usually destro ulti groups run cc immunity potions and Rapid Maneuver. Add some healers and cc spaming tanks to that group and - there is maybe like... 0.5% counter-play against that. Sorcs have neagate and a well cordinated negates might do the trick. But what if you are not a sorc and dont have a negate magic skill ? Running away is your only option ?!

The point is that people are lazy and will simply always use things that give the best results with least input effort. As far as I remember it was always like this. Before destro ulti there was a meteor spam. There will be always "something" that will be used that way - with the least possible amount of counter-play.

The only way to stop those groups is to simply... Idk discourage zergs in some way instead of rewarding them ? Something like decreased AP gain while grouped ? Idk... on the other hand this might couse a sudden increase of gankers in cyro.. So it is not the best solution.... and I fear that there might be simply - no good solution at all.

While i can appreciate this perspective I want to point out how really difficult it is to run such a group. First and probably the hardest is finding the right players willing to run support builds. This is very very difficult because with these 4 to 8 players the group mechanic won't work. Then you have to find the right type of dps players running the correct gear combinations. After you have put the group together the really hard part of finding the right leader who can make the right calls under extreme pressure and then the players who have to be able to follow and trust. The meta play as it stands right now is one of the hardest forms of group play in game. Any group that can do this successfully should automatically earn respect for the accomplishment. Aside from this though we should be focusing on why. Zerg's, unorganized players or un-comped groups naturally form zergs not by choice but as a simple consequence of populations location. This is natural and no matter how much hatred or complaining players do about it, it will never change. The meta cycles in the beginning at launch was created to combat zergs. Small organized groups found that in this game with the right gear and abilities they could kill massive amounts of other players through coordinated play, hence the creation of meta play was born. ZOS saw this as an unexpected consequence and immediately went about attacking AOE damage (AOE caps), then nerfing abilities (Impulse), then nerfing classes (Dragon Knights). All under the pretense of making better longer fights. Now 3 years later, forming coordinated well composed groups is such a challenge that group play is nothing more than zerg play except for maybe 3% or 4% percent of the overall population that play at that meta skill level. Why has ZOS not done anything to discourage the ball groups. Well probably because of 1. how difficult it is to engage in that play style. And 2. because at this point in time ZOS knows that the destro groups are needed to control the zerging. You see every time ZOS has nerfed something or broken the current ball group meta they have put in something new to replace it. The best example probably was nerf impulse give proxi or was it nerf steel tornado and gave proxi. Anyway if we look at Morrowind we can see nerf storm, give Earth Gore. The meta might be broken or even disadvantaged and it might need to be changed from the player perspective but changing the current meta will require the groups that are currently running the meta to make that effort. The casual players are purely reactionary to it. The organized groups will always face zergs, it's the nature of the game. The question will be simply how they react to them. In my opinion destro ulti's will not go away. They will not be nerfed further. Players will continue to see and use them in group play until something new and easier comes along.

technohic

Nerf earthgore, remove group purge so siege DOTs can happen, add the proxy det damage multiplier to some siege like just DOT trebs and balistas but not oils. Then if people ball up to spam PBAOEs they are prime targets for this.

Anazasi

technohic wrote: »

Nerf earthgore, remove group purge so siege DOTs can happen, add the proxy det damage multiplier to some siege like just DOT trebs and balistas but not oils. Then if people ball up to spam PBAOEs they are prime targets for this.

I like parts of this idea. However, we have all seen what increased DOT damage is like from siege when ZOS messed it up. The short week of play that happened during this nightmare was Siege Wars. Groups never really were able to engage each other Siege simply melted everyone before they could breach a wall or door. Purge is probably not something anyone wants ZOS to mess with. We have seen them in the past mess this up pretty bad including the most recent patch where Efficient Purge was stacking. Purge comes at a cost and a very high cost perhaps re-visting the cost parameters might be in order. Earth Gore is working as intended. I doubt they will do anything to that set.

vortexman11

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

I agree with OP - at least to some point. ZOS seems to acknowledge that the problem exists as they nerfed destro ulti in a previous patch. However - it did not solved the problem. Why ? Well, that is because a destro ulti itself is not a problem. Sure, you might say that destro ulti has very little counter-play. And that is true. You can not dodge it or block it. The only way is to simply try to stay out of its range and/or out-heal it or (in a 1 v 1 scenario) - kill the caster fast.

The real poblem is a combination of some aspects & factors. Usually destro ulti groups run cc immunity potions and Rapid Maneuver. Add some healers and cc spaming tanks to that group and - there is maybe like... 0.5% counter-play against that. Sorcs have neagate and a well cordinated negates might do the trick. But what if you are not a sorc and dont have a negate magic skill ? Running away is your only option ?!

The point is that people are lazy and will simply always use things that give the best results with least input effort. As far as I remember it was always like this. Before destro ulti there was a meteor spam. There will be always "something" that will be used that way - with the least possible amount of counter-play.

The only way to stop those groups is to simply... Idk discourage zergs in some way instead of rewarding them ? Something like decreased AP gain while grouped ? Idk... on the other hand this might couse a sudden increase of gankers in cyro.. So it is not the best solution.... and I fear that there might be simply - no good solution at all.

Yet again another example of the inability by a large proportion of the player base to separate organised groups in their minds from faction zergs. What do you think will happen if groups are completely removed? I can tell you that if you remove the dangers to stacking I.e coordinated groups ability to take on 3-4x their number cyro will finally become one big train from alessia to BRK and chal to aleswell.

And you will see a huge drop in the proportion of interest in pvp.

Also not in response to your comment but the sentiment that players in groups are there to only support the nbs is funny. For my eyes it's not like this at all. Especially for rapids.

Wait a second...
Are you saying that large number of unorganised players (15-20+) are zerg but somehow a large number of organised (grouped players following crown) are not a zerg ?!

Anyway I did not said anything about removing groups. I just pointed out that as far as I know there is simply no drawback in using a group. And as you have metioned well organised groups have ability to take down 3-4x of their numbers...

I don't consider 15-20 players to be a zerg. What constitutes a zerg to me is behaviour not size. For example a faction moving from keep to keep in a line they are zerging towards that objective. An organised group going to another objective and separating from this faction push separates them from this definition imo.

Sure all groups can participate in zerging behaviour but I don't consider them by definition "A zerg" no.

Iza you're arguing against the masses here. You've gotta accept that in alot of people's eyes organized groups are the problem, the devs as well as the majority of the player base don't seem to think outnumbered PvP in any form should be possible. Reading the forums I often get the sense that people would prefer to see a mindless group of 50 players light attacking their way through a field than coordinated groups going against each other from every faction.

I mean honestly people, what is the thought process behind nerfing rapids? It already drops off of a player the moment a skill is cast forcing a dedicated player into specific builds if a group wants to have it maintained at all times. I agree with the point that a group should have no advantage other than the fact that they have more players, but does this really translate into removing all of the tools necessary to survive when you're getting run down with an entire faction on your tail?

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

The point is that people are lazy and will simply always use things that give the best results with least input effort. As far as I remember it was always like this. Before destro ulti there was a meteor spam. There will be always "something" that will be used that way - with the least possible amount of counter-play.

It's unfair to call people lazy just for running what is most effective. The whole idea behind organized PvP is to push yourself and your group to the limit of their capabilities. This is seen in solo, small scale, and large scale organized PvP. Any player who wants to be competitive will eventually gravitate towards the best tools the game has given them to do so, no matter the play style. It doesn't mean we enjoy it, I'd give anything to have meteor spam over this because the only real danger of meteor is how buggy it is. But by all means I'm going to get people to slot this ultimate with the "least input effort" if we're going up against groups of 40-50 people using the exact same thing.

technohic

Anazasi wrote: »

technohic wrote: »

Nerf earthgore, remove group purge so siege DOTs can happen, add the proxy det damage multiplier to some siege like just DOT trebs and balistas but not oils. Then if people ball up to spam PBAOEs they are prime targets for this.

I like parts of this idea. However, we have all seen what increased DOT damage is like from siege when ZOS messed it up. The short week of play that happened during this nightmare was Siege Wars. Groups never really were able to engage each other Siege simply melted everyone before they could breach a wall or door. Purge is probably not something anyone wants ZOS to mess with. We have seen them in the past mess this up pretty bad including the most recent patch where Efficient Purge was stacking. Purge comes at a cost and a very high cost perhaps re-visting the cost parameters might be in order. Earth Gore is working as intended. I doubt they will do anything to that set.

Thats where I wouldn't want a direct buff to DOT damage so much as making purge at least require a synergy. Scaling up similar to proxy would then just discourage being really balled up like a current destro train does. Could be a smaller radius for its calculations even.

Nerfing heals, destro ult, and other active abilities that the single player could used just does not do anything as far as who has the advantage. It just waters it down for everyone. Earthgore though; is not as powerful alone but in large groups with a bunch of them, it suddenly becomes what Malubeth was on steroids and they nerfed Malubeth.

Only other thing I can think of is diminishing returns on AOEs that are stacked on top of each other. Make it so that AOE healing or damage of the same skill cannot stack and different skills get reduced effect, but that would kill PvE meta so it would have to be in battle spirit

This is all assuming that ZOS does not want these ball groups. Otherwise, I just try to avoid them

Anazasi

vortexman11 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

I agree with OP - at least to some point. ZOS seems to acknowledge that the problem exists as they nerfed destro ulti in a previous patch. However - it did not solved the problem. Why ? Well, that is because a destro ulti itself is not a problem. Sure, you might say that destro ulti has very little counter-play. And that is true. You can not dodge it or block it. The only way is to simply try to stay out of its range and/or out-heal it or (in a 1 v 1 scenario) - kill the caster fast.

The real poblem is a combination of some aspects & factors. Usually destro ulti groups run cc immunity potions and Rapid Maneuver. Add some healers and cc spaming tanks to that group and - there is maybe like... 0.5% counter-play against that. Sorcs have neagate and a well cordinated negates might do the trick. But what if you are not a sorc and dont have a negate magic skill ? Running away is your only option ?!

The point is that people are lazy and will simply always use things that give the best results with least input effort. As far as I remember it was always like this. Before destro ulti there was a meteor spam. There will be always "something" that will be used that way - with the least possible amount of counter-play.

The only way to stop those groups is to simply... Idk discourage zergs in some way instead of rewarding them ? Something like decreased AP gain while grouped ? Idk... on the other hand this might couse a sudden increase of gankers in cyro.. So it is not the best solution.... and I fear that there might be simply - no good solution at all.

Yet again another example of the inability by a large proportion of the player base to separate organised groups in their minds from faction zergs. What do you think will happen if groups are completely removed? I can tell you that if you remove the dangers to stacking I.e coordinated groups ability to take on 3-4x their number cyro will finally become one big train from alessia to BRK and chal to aleswell.

And you will see a huge drop in the proportion of interest in pvp.

Also not in response to your comment but the sentiment that players in groups are there to only support the nbs is funny. For my eyes it's not like this at all. Especially for rapids.

Wait a second...
Are you saying that large number of unorganised players (15-20+) are zerg but somehow a large number of organised (grouped players following crown) are not a zerg ?!

Anyway I did not said anything about removing groups. I just pointed out that as far as I know there is simply no drawback in using a group. And as you have metioned well organised groups have ability to take down 3-4x of their numbers...

I don't consider 15-20 players to be a zerg. What constitutes a zerg to me is behaviour not size. For example a faction moving from keep to keep in a line they are zerging towards that objective. An organised group going to another objective and separating from this faction push separates them from this definition imo.

Sure all groups can participate in zerging behaviour but I don't consider them by definition "A zerg" no.

Iza you're arguing against the masses here. You've gotta accept that in alot of people's eyes organized groups are the problem, the devs as well as the majority of the player base doesn't seem to think outnumbered PvP in any form should be possible. Reading the forums I often get the sense that people would prefer to see a mindless group of 50 players light attacking their way through a field than coordinated groups going against each other from every faction.

I mean honestly people, what is the thought process behind nerfing rapids? It already drops off of a player the moment a skill is cast forcing a dedicated player into specific builds if a group wants to have it maintained at all times. I agree with the point that a group should have no advantage other than the fact that they have more players, but does this really translate into removing all of the tools necessary to survive when you're getting run down with an entire faction on your tail?

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

The point is that people are lazy and will simply always use things that give the best results with least input effort. As far as I remember it was always like this. Before destro ulti there was a meteor spam. There will be always "something" that will be used that way - with the least possible amount of counter-play.

It's unfair to call people lazy just for running what is most effective. The whole idea behind organized PvP is to push yourself and your group to the limit of their capabilities. This is seen in solo, small scale, and large scale organized PvP. Any player who wants to be competitive will eventually gravitate towards the best tools the game has given them to do so, no matter the play style. It doesn't mean we enjoy it, I'd give anything to have meteor spam over this because the only real danger of meteor is how buggy it is. But by all means I'm going to get people to slot this ultimate with the "least input effort" if we're going up against groups of 40-50 people using the exact same thing.

Vortex, this is really a fair assessment of the current state of PVP. It is very difficult to organize a group. ZOS has tried to create mechanics that help but they always have fallen short when it comes to PVP. One of the biggest tools we as players have access to is teaching and while the short term effects are sometimes not evident the long term certainly pays off. It could be access or methodology of the group or the teacher which is part of the issue. As far as the term nerf goes, my reaction whenever I see this word is to chuckle a little and then duck behind the desk. It's always the first cry when players feel disadvantaged in some way. Yes I advocated changing Ulti gen for nightblades but that was based on class balance and looking at the current meta as way to increase the reaction time for the casual players. But just to look at specific abilities and say nerf this nerf that only serves to degrade group play which is actually the worst thing that anyone could do at this point overall.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

vortexman11 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

I agree with OP - at least to some point. ZOS seems to acknowledge that the problem exists as they nerfed destro ulti in a previous patch. However - it did not solved the problem. Why ? Well, that is because a destro ulti itself is not a problem. Sure, you might say that destro ulti has very little counter-play. And that is true. You can not dodge it or block it. The only way is to simply try to stay out of its range and/or out-heal it or (in a 1 v 1 scenario) - kill the caster fast.

The real poblem is a combination of some aspects & factors. Usually destro ulti groups run cc immunity potions and Rapid Maneuver. Add some healers and cc spaming tanks to that group and - there is maybe like... 0.5% counter-play against that. Sorcs have neagate and a well cordinated negates might do the trick. But what if you are not a sorc and dont have a negate magic skill ? Running away is your only option ?!

The point is that people are lazy and will simply always use things that give the best results with least input effort. As far as I remember it was always like this. Before destro ulti there was a meteor spam. There will be always "something" that will be used that way - with the least possible amount of counter-play.

The only way to stop those groups is to simply... Idk discourage zergs in some way instead of rewarding them ? Something like decreased AP gain while grouped ? Idk... on the other hand this might couse a sudden increase of gankers in cyro.. So it is not the best solution.... and I fear that there might be simply - no good solution at all.

Yet again another example of the inability by a large proportion of the player base to separate organised groups in their minds from faction zergs. What do you think will happen if groups are completely removed? I can tell you that if you remove the dangers to stacking I.e coordinated groups ability to take on 3-4x their number cyro will finally become one big train from alessia to BRK and chal to aleswell.

And you will see a huge drop in the proportion of interest in pvp.

Also not in response to your comment but the sentiment that players in groups are there to only support the nbs is funny. For my eyes it's not like this at all. Especially for rapids.

Wait a second...
Are you saying that large number of unorganised players (15-20+) are zerg but somehow a large number of organised (grouped players following crown) are not a zerg ?!

Anyway I did not said anything about removing groups. I just pointed out that as far as I know there is simply no drawback in using a group. And as you have metioned well organised groups have ability to take down 3-4x of their numbers...

I don't consider 15-20 players to be a zerg. What constitutes a zerg to me is behaviour not size. For example a faction moving from keep to keep in a line they are zerging towards that objective. An organised group going to another objective and separating from this faction push separates them from this definition imo.

Sure all groups can participate in zerging behaviour but I don't consider them by definition "A zerg" no.

Iza you're arguing against the masses here. You've gotta accept that in alot of people's eyes organized groups are the problem, the devs as well as the majority of the player base don't seem to think outnumbered PvP in any form should be possible. .

Agreed that's why PvP is in the mess it's in. If people who hated organised play hadn't been so influential at the start then I'm sure we would have far better systems and a more fun and populated game. The only thing which can be done now is to try and prevent further deterioration and hope to win over ones and twos