How to STOP zerging

DivineFirstYOLO

Hello,

one idea on how to prevent people from zerging/stacking one alliance on one spot - what if players would get a debuff if they stay near each other?

First thought:

Let's say players of the same alliance have an invisible circle around them with a 10m radius.
If player's circle overlap you get a debuff depending on how many circles overlap.

Second thought:

Let's say 1-6 players are one unit - they don't get any negative effects, no debuff if their circles overlap.
Now let's say there is one more player - a 7th player near that group and all their circles overlap - now all of them would get
a HP debuff for example, all of them would have 1% less max health.

Let's say there is player #8 around there too - well, all of them would have 2% less max health.

9th player - 3% less max health and so on ...


The debuff should be exponential so that bigger groups suffer more - the more circles overlap, the less HP players would have.

Chosen figures are just examples, ZOS would have to adjust them, also health debuff is just one option - you could take other debuffs like dealing less damage, less healing, etc.


What do all fellow non zerglings think about this idea? Would that work and would it be a good idea? How could we change the idea to make it more suitable?
Give some constructive criticism please - it's about time we stop 80 men zergs.
If the majority doesn't like the idea at all, I will delete this post so ZOS doesn't see it

Biro123

Please no.

I like (and I mean really like) that, unlike most other mmo's I've played, you can benefit your allies by being nearby. You can heal outside your group, buff outside your group, you don't need to be in a group... and nearby players welcome your assistance.

I would hate it to become a game where allies are telling you to sod off because your mere presence is debuffing them.. It would become a game of cliques - where if you have your small group of friends, you're fine.. if you don't, after being driven away by your allies for so long, - you'll be leaving to play another game.

No ta.

NightbladeMechanics

Remove aoe caps, and place more meaningful PvP objectives all around the map. We need to remove rewards for stacking and create positive incentives for spreading, not negative incentives for stacking.

Vaoh

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

Remove aoe caps, and place more meaningful PvP objectives all around the map. We need to remove rewards for stacking and create positive incentives for spreading, not negative incentives for stacking.

^
Also buff Zerg killing abilities such as Magicka Detonation. Increase the damage buff per enemy hit and reduce the cast time.

It’s AoE Caps that will always force stacking to be the superior way to play. Stacking is naturally not the best idea since you are susceptible to bombers and lots of AoE attacks hitting lots of players in your group, but it definitely becomes the #1 “strat” when you gain near invulnerability via AoE Caps for doing it.

DivineFirstYOLO

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

Remove aoe caps, and place more meaningful PvP objectives all around the map. We need to remove rewards for stacking and create positive incentives for spreading, not negative incentives for stacking.

Removing AOE caps would be a good start, but so many people have been asking for that in the past and nothing has changed, so i guess it's not desirable by ZOS to remove the caps - that's why i didn't mention it.

What could positive incentives for spreading be? In other threads people mentioned to raise/decrease offensive and defensive ticks depending on amount of players involved - but i doubt that will be enough to make people spread.

Magdalina

Invert AoE caps? It always baffled me why ZOS set them that way in the first place. I mean it doesn't make sense, why is it that when 10 people are attacking 1 the 1 gets full damage but the 10 only get part of it? What kind of logic is it that protects the 10 from the 1 but not the 1 from the 10?

lao

DivineFirstYOLO wrote: »

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

Remove aoe caps, and place more meaningful PvP objectives all around the map. We need to remove rewards for stacking and create positive incentives for spreading, not negative incentives for stacking.

Removing AOE caps would be a good start, but so many people have been asking for that in the past and nothing has changed, so i guess it's not desirable by ZOS to remove the caps - that's why i didn't mention it.

What could positive incentives for spreading be? In other threads people mentioned to raise/decrease offensive and defensive ticks depending on amount of players involved - but i doubt that will be enough to make people spread.

i like your original idea. what exactly the debuff should be is debatable. f.e. if you have 16 ppl chasing you as a solo i dont think the fact that they all have 10% less hp will change the outcome in any way. so it needs to be a debuff that hurts much more than that. however the general concept isnt bad at all.

if you wanna truely split ppl up and actually use the entire map for pvp instead of maybe 5% of it you need to get rid of the entire concept of objective based pvp. a prime example how it should be done is DAoC. keeps exist there too and they have a purpose (softening up relic keep defenses) the equivalent to relics exists in eso in terms of scrolls. all it takes is a change to make them more powerful and in return more desirable and also ALOT harder to take. and ofc make keeps harder to take and easier to defend so you actually need a sizeable force to have any chance of success. outside of relic raids keeps should not give you any advantage so there is no incentive to take them randomly. like in DAoC there was simply no way you could take relics from a defended relic keep without taking the majority of normal keeps before to reduce the amount and the power of the relic guards. in DAoC every normal keep you owned was represented by a named relic guard that will tear your *** apart if too many of them were present.

in a system like that keeps still fullfill a purpose and relic raids are actual mass pvp events that take alot of planning and organization and usually the majority of the server will join them cos relics give a substantial and desirable advantage. its by no means a perfect system as DAoC has proven as when one faction becomes very dominant the advantage can shift in their favor even more. to counter that DAoC had a mechanic that if you own all the relics you will have no named relic guards in either of your 2 relic keeps leaving them effectively very vulnerable for a quick raid since you dont have to take normal keeps prior to the raid. all of this could be easily done with scrolls in eso. the point is that every day pvp would shift to actual pvp instead of hitting guards/walls and ping ponging meaningless keeps all day. you would be forced to roam cyrodiil to find pvp and your every day business would revolve alot more around small scale pvp with less lag cos the population is split all over the map instead of beeing tunneled into the closest frontline hotspot. a system like that creates room for all playstyles. ppl can still run their zergs if they wish so but due to not all of the population beeing pulled into the same location it also creates room for solo and small scale players and groups to do real pvp. games like warhammer and GW2 have proven very well that when every day pvp is all focussed on objectives it turns open world into a brainless zerging *** fest that is only enjoyable to the lowest tier of players while everyone else suffers from it.

Asmael

Removing AoE caps instead of adding extra modifiers (be it buffs or debuffs) would increase performance quite a bit.

I don't like the idea of dynamic ulti gen, you should have what you bring to a fight, not something convoluted that may or may not benefit the underpowered side as you'd expect it to do (such as a kiting scenario where the chasers are spread out technically).

Second thing is proper incentives to go outside the emp circle. You can put all the debuffs in the world, people won't go elsewhere, why? Because there is nothing else to do in Cyrodiil. If there were quests to do every time a keep gets captured to unlock its maximum level requiring (such as "we need money to finance the people, go out there and get the treasure from some [random delve / bandit camp / we]"). Of course, to add in proper rewards, such as boxes containing random motifs, some alchemy mats and some potions / food for instance.

What if keeps didn't even have an outer wall until enough people actually help bringing the necessary resources? Or what if resources were even further away from keeps?

It's not like there isn't any possibility. The only thing we don't need is more flags that you only need to go to once and be done with it - which was what captureable towns are basically.

There are hundreds of possibilities and ways to frequently push people to go outside the emp circle, not those I just mentioned.

DDuke

You know, it'd be quite easy for ZOS to really discourage stacking/zerging with skill design.

There is currently only one skill that scales based on how many other players are nearby: Magicka Detonation.


What we need is more skills like Detonation, ones available to stamina builds too (side note: maybe this would also reduce the amount of gap closer->rev slice spamming Xv1 builds as well?).

For instance, I think ZOS missed a great opportunity with the Wardens' Growing Swarm morph - they should've made that morph keep spreading infinitely until players split up.


Bottom line is: one anti-zerg ability in the game isn't nearly enough.

Kevin_of_Devinshire

Answer: the ultimate sword of power. Amplifies single AoE by 10,000,000 against each target in groups bigger than 20?

Also, everyone gets one free in the crown store. But outside of cyro and against less than 20 toons in a 40 meter radius, it is no more powerful than the broom.

Lastly, it acts like the Arch of the Covenant and spreads to other toons that are within 40 meters of the last toon.

Drummerx04

DDuke wrote: »

You know, it'd be quite easy for ZOS to really discourage stacking/zerging with skill design.

There is currently only one skill that scales based on how many other players are nearby: Magicka Detonation.


What we need is more skills like Detonation, ones available to stamina builds too (side note: maybe this would also reduce the amount of gap closer->rev slice spamming Xv1 builds as well?).

For instance, I think ZOS missed a great opportunity with the Wardens' Growing Swarm morph - they should've made that morph keep spreading infinitely until players split up.


Bottom line is: one anti-zerg ability in the game isn't nearly enough.

They need to avoid buffing proxy det. All that skill realistically does is buff ball groups abilities to smash into players and apply damage.

The targeted skill could probably use a buff the form of a cast time reduction. If people could reliably chuck Inevitable Dets into a ball group, they might actually need to spread a little making single target much easier.

lao

Asmael wrote: »

Removing AoE caps instead of adding extra modifiers (be it buffs or debuffs) would increase performance quite a bit.

I don't like the idea of dynamic ulti gen, you should have what you bring to a fight, not something convoluted that may or may not benefit the underpowered side as you'd expect it to do (such as a kiting scenario where the chasers are spread out technically).

Second thing is proper incentives to go outside the emp circle. You can put all the debuffs in the world, people won't go elsewhere, why? Because there is nothing else to do in Cyrodiil. If there were quests to do every time a keep gets captured to unlock its maximum level requiring (such as "we need money to finance the people, go out there and get the treasure from some [random delve / bandit camp / we]"). Of course, to add in proper rewards, such as boxes containing random motifs, some alchemy mats and some potions / food for instance.

What if keeps didn't even have an outer wall until enough people actually help bringing the necessary resources? Or what if resources were even further away from keeps?

It's not like there isn't any possibility. The only thing we don't need is more flags that you only need to go to once and be done with it - which was what captureable towns are basically.

There are hundreds of possibilities and ways to frequently push people to go outside the emp circle, not those I just mentioned.

you dont need to add pve to pvp. infact that would be quite awful. all you need to do is remove the already existing roleplay aspects and turn cyrodiil into a competitive small scale open world zone. when those objectives are gone most of the zergs will be gone too cos lets be honest these ppl are like bots. if they dont have a red marker (so to say) on the map they dont know what to do and just wander around headless or go back to pve where they belong. whats left is actual pvpers that play to have sick fights between each other and dont care for PvDoor. all the ppl who would normally play pvp but cba with the nobrain state cyrodiil is currently in would return aswell. the playerbase for that is there and it would have infinity higher quality than what we currently have.

Malkorga

Player collision. To go through a player would require stamina.

Biro123

lao wrote: »

Asmael wrote: »

Removing AoE caps instead of adding extra modifiers (be it buffs or debuffs) would increase performance quite a bit.

I don't like the idea of dynamic ulti gen, you should have what you bring to a fight, not something convoluted that may or may not benefit the underpowered side as you'd expect it to do (such as a kiting scenario where the chasers are spread out technically).

Second thing is proper incentives to go outside the emp circle. You can put all the debuffs in the world, people won't go elsewhere, why? Because there is nothing else to do in Cyrodiil. If there were quests to do every time a keep gets captured to unlock its maximum level requiring (such as "we need money to finance the people, go out there and get the treasure from some [random delve / bandit camp / we]"). Of course, to add in proper rewards, such as boxes containing random motifs, some alchemy mats and some potions / food for instance.

What if keeps didn't even have an outer wall until enough people actually help bringing the necessary resources? Or what if resources were even further away from keeps?

It's not like there isn't any possibility. The only thing we don't need is more flags that you only need to go to once and be done with it - which was what captureable towns are basically.

There are hundreds of possibilities and ways to frequently push people to go outside the emp circle, not those I just mentioned.

you dont need to add pve to pvp. infact that would be quite awful. all you need to do is remove the already existing roleplay aspects and turn cyrodiil into a competitive small scale open world zone. when those objectives are gone most of the zergs will be gone too cos lets be honest these ppl are like bots. if they dont have a red marker (so to say) on the map they dont know what to do and just wander around headless or go back to pve where they belong. whats left is actual pvpers that play to have sick fights between each other and dont care for PvDoor. all the ppl who would normally play pvp but cba with the nobrain state cyrodiil is currently in would return aswell. the playerbase for that is there and it would have infinity higher quality than what we currently have.

Welcome to the ghost-town...

Prince_of_all_Pugs

How to eliminate Zerging: Remove Cyrodiil.

Rohamad_Ali

Send out 5 groups of 8 with 5 siege each and simultaneously pop all their back castles and cut their resources off at the ones they camp . That would require personal responsibility and team work though .

Rainraven

Man, all the zergling hate. One of the best things about PVP is people can spontaneously band together and actually be useful to one another. We don't even have to all speak the same language, nobody has to commit for more than one fight if they have other things to do, and unless you are a moron or VERY new and nothing makes sense yet, at least you won't be a liability to your faction.

There may be other effects we don't love, but that's not something to change or punish. Counterplay? Hell yes, blow them up. But gimp them just for standing next to each other? Nah.

Rohamad_Ali

Rainraven wrote: »

Man, all the zergling hate. One of the best things about PVP is people can spontaneously band together and actually be useful to one another. We don't even have to all speak the same language, nobody has to commit for more than one fight if they have other things to do, and unless you are a moron or VERY new and nothing makes sense yet, at least you won't be a liability to your faction.

There may be other effects we don't love, but that's not something to change or punish. Counterplay? Hell yes, blow them up. But gimp them just for standing next to each other? Nah.

This is good and I am agreeing . We have ways to combat zergs . Coordinating small teams on objectives away from the Zerg . Never fight fire with fire . Fight fire with water . Change tactics and the Zerg will be pinched into compliance .

KingExecration

Maybe the fact a 70 man running around flipping keeps and resources getting a free 6k ap and a free 1500 ap is a good reason they ball up. It's pretty much idiot proof handing out ap like free samples. In a way adjusting that would be a start in busting zergs because of how many things you can buy with ap now. That and AOE caps. If I meteor a group of 20 and only 6 takes the full blow what's the reward I get for using my ultimate at a really good time? Not very much since aoe caps allowed the other 14 players to get a fraction of my damage. Just my 2 cents.

Deep_01

Either remove AoE caps, which is more logical, or a reverse way, when more than 4 players hit a single player, the 5th player and beyond does 90% less dmg or something?

What about having certain siege engines only ignoring AoE caps? Cyro doesn't turn to AoE fest and those special sieges can be secretly fired and timed with a bomber, all wearing VD?

NightbladeMechanics

DivineFirstYOLO wrote: »

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

Remove aoe caps, and place more meaningful PvP objectives all around the map. We need to remove rewards for stacking and create positive incentives for spreading, not negative incentives for stacking.

Removing AOE caps would be a good start, but so many people have been asking for that in the past and nothing has changed, so i guess it's not desirable by ZOS to remove the caps - that's why i didn't mention it.

What could positive incentives for spreading be? In other threads people mentioned to raise/decrease offensive and defensive ticks depending on amount of players involved - but i doubt that will be enough to make people spread.

ZOS has actually nerfed aoe caps a few times over the last year or so.

The-Baconator

Vaoh wrote: »

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

Remove aoe caps, and place more meaningful PvP objectives all around the map. We need to remove rewards for stacking and create positive incentives for spreading, not negative incentives for stacking.

^
Also buff Zerg killing abilities such as Magicka Detonation. Increase the damage buff per enemy hit and reduce the cast time.

It’s AoE Caps that will always force stacking to be the superior way to play. Stacking is naturally not the best idea since you are susceptible to bombers and lots of AoE attacks hitting lots of players in your group, but it definitely becomes the #1 “strat” when you gain near invulnerability via AoE Caps for doing it.

You could completely remove AoE caps and the viability of ball groups or "stacking" more generally wouldn't change at all. Ball groups stack first and foremost because the best AoE heals, damage and support abilities all function as PBAoEs. The game literally has next to no viable options to participate in a fight where AoE is preferable and not stack with your allies. Consequently, you stack up if you need to use AoE. Also I can't remeber the last time I looked at a 40-60 man zerg chasing me while I was in a 2-12 man group and thought "thank gawd they're all spread out, they won't benefit from AoE Caps!" I actually prefer that the zerg chasing me all standing in the same character model because then you can actually bomb the whole zerg at once, it's 10x easier to kill a group\horde or whatever you're fighting when your AoE hits as many of them as possible.

As for incentives for not stacking, perhaps rewarding a 40 man group for PvDooring an empty keep or zerging down a keep with 4 people in it with more AP than they used to make in an hour actually PvPing wasn't the best way to actually encourage people to look for decent semi-competitive fights at contested objectives.

Rainraven

The-Baconator wrote: »

Vaoh wrote: »

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

Remove aoe caps, and place more meaningful PvP objectives all around the map. We need to remove rewards for stacking and create positive incentives for spreading, not negative incentives for stacking.

^
Also buff Zerg killing abilities such as Magicka Detonation. Increase the damage buff per enemy hit and reduce the cast time.

It’s AoE Caps that will always force stacking to be the superior way to play. Stacking is naturally not the best idea since you are susceptible to bombers and lots of AoE attacks hitting lots of players in your group, but it definitely becomes the #1 “strat” when you gain near invulnerability via AoE Caps for doing it.

As for incentives for not stacking, perhaps rewarding a 40 man group for PvDooring an empty keep or zerging down a keep with 4 people in it with more AP than they used to make in an hour actually PvPing wasn't the best way to actually encourage people to look for decent semi-competitive fights at contested objectives.

Perverse incentives. Cyrodiil is stuffed with 'em.

zyk

This is Wrobel-thinking, akin to great ideas like Proxy Det, Vicious Death, Shieldbreaker, Cliff Racer, etc... Bandaids on top of bandaids on top of bandaids. Solutions like these only result in the convoluted mess Cyrodiil is today.

To solve the problem of 'zerging' and stacks, one must first ask why they happen. IMO, the two main reasons are the scoring system and competitive parity.

As a progression based game, players are understandably cognizant of points. Points not only establish one's rankings in the leaderboards, but also provide income, increase AR and unlock abilities. It's also a measure of success. So naturally, players are inclined to perform activities that generate the most points.

Players also condense for competitive reasons. Especially ungrouped players who are at a natural disadvantage against grouped and organized players. Increasing volume is a natural solution to many problems in life. Even sports. The best way to counter an elite athlete like Lebron James is to double team him. It's not just 'bad' players who do this. It's not uncommon to see small groups of experienced players with optimal builds surf each other or larger groups. Players do it because it gives them a greater opportunity for success. This also ties into points.

These are problems that have to be solved at a game design level, not at a combat design level. If teams choose to put all of their eggs in one basket and zerg down a keep with 60 players, then there should be a cost to them elsewhere that discourages that. Like when you double team a Lebron James or Sidney Crosby, it leaves someone else open. It's kind of insane that AvA is fundamentally a strategy game that no one is incentivized to play strategically.

There should be areas where new, inexperienced, casual and unlearned players can go where they can face a similar level of competition without feeling the need to stack to be competitive. Likewise, there should be areas where the most competitive players are drawn to face other competitive players for the best rewards.

Finally, the changes to oticks need to be reversed. Rewarding an unlimited number of players with a large, flat reward for taking an undefended objective has ruined objective play and completely goes against the grain of PVP. The scoring system needs to encourage good fights, not 40v5 fights.

Unfortunately, ZOS has impediments that prevent good PVP design. Just look at the obvious problems with their most recent PVP mode, Battlegrounds. Its design is severely lacking in so many ways. One only needs to look at successful PVP games to see OBVIOUS shortcomings compared to its peers. How did this happen? I tend to think ZOS designers can't be this daft, so there must be factors behind the scenes we can't discern.

Xsorus

You can't stop zerging in a game

Now you can stop zerg balling

but they aren't doing that either

dotme

Winning a ground war takes an army, sometimes pushing an objective as one. Did the allies "Zerg" Normandy on D-Day? Or was it just smart strategy to put so many resources into one objective?

I don't understand why group play is such a problem for some people in an MMO. I've yet to find a large group of players that couldn't be defeated by an equally large (or sometimes smaller) opposing group. Cyrodiil battle victories often boil down to numbers, strategy and leadership (which is why sometimes small well-lead groups can smash larger ones in a fight).

All part of the fun IMHO and what makes ESO PvP such a unique experience.

As for taking back keeps, that also can be strategic to pull enemies back from the front lines and make them focus on keeping their transit paths open. Sometimes, head-on isn't the right move.

Derra

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

Remove aoe caps, and place more meaningful PvP objectives all around the map. We need to remove rewards for stacking and create positive incentives for spreading, not negative incentives for stacking.

I don´t think only positive reinforcement works in this case.
You have to bait people with a massive carrot to get them out of their comfort zone (which is what zerging is).
The biggest reward for stacking currently is not dying - which is kinda hard to remove from people

Imo you have to make zerging a little less attractive (as in make it punishing and increase the risk of dying mainly) while providing incentive do something by yourself aswell.

But to provide incentive to do something on your own they first need to enable people to do so again.
#bringbackbowspeedandstreak

Earthewen

Rohamad_Ali wrote: »

Rainraven wrote: »

Man, all the zergling hate. One of the best things about PVP is people can spontaneously band together and actually be useful to one another. We don't even have to all speak the same language, nobody has to commit for more than one fight if they have other things to do, and unless you are a moron or VERY new and nothing makes sense yet, at least you won't be a liability to your faction.

There may be other effects we don't love, but that's not something to change or punish. Counterplay? Hell yes, blow them up. But gimp them just for standing next to each other? Nah.

This is good and I am agreeing . We have ways to combat zergs . Coordinating small teams on objectives away from the Zerg . Never fight fire with fire . Fight fire with water . Change tactics and the Zerg will be pinched into compliance .

I like this idea, Rohamad. There is one element about the zergs that no one is talking about and that is human nature which drives everything people do. If you have a game that allows all of these players to be in one place, it won't matter what size of group ZOS allows. They will still be all in one place because that is the mob mentality. The only way to stop the zergs is to not allow so many players of each faction into Cryodiil in the first place. More servers with small population caps. You won't be able to trust players to think for themselves about this. They WILL band together no matter what. It's human nature.

AND if we were all truly honest, those small man groups of eight or so are still all in the same place a lot of the time. They may not always be in a formal group together but they are STILL in a group because they are all doing the same thing at the same place.

Jules

I completely agree that something needs to be done. I really enjoy your ideas at first glance. However, I'm weary to agree to things like this bc I think it would be a lot of calculations for these potato servers to handle, and it sounds like a challenging thing to initiate and get through all the development team. Alternatively, AOE caps are already present. Invert them. Profit.

Goshua

first lets all agree what a zerg is aye, because no one has defined it without disagreement. If running in a raid is suddenly a zerg, as it seen by anyone not in a raid, it's obvious why these gankers and small group 1 v x's are in such firm favour.

Irylia

Make resources on Home keeps give more scoring points.
Have additional towns that are capturable and provide scoring points.

Introduce alternative quests (mission boards) that send smaller groups to unused portions of the map to complete. Waiting period of 5 minutes before starting so that enemy factions have a chance to check the other (counter mission board)
i.e Dc accepts said quest ep and ad teams of similar size can now go to their counter quest board and accept. All 3 factions send a small group of 6 to said location in order to retrieve secret war plans. Whichever faction retrieved and returns the material earns their faction a small prize.
-Minor ap buff
-keep walls stronger
-guards go to tier 6 (new) or get additional guards
-siege is 20% cheaper in the siege merchant store

Alternatively you can debuff your enemies
-siege has a 20% increase
-keeps are weaker
-less guards

These buffs last a short period

Multiple quests will be available and continue to cycle with generated locations every time using the outer parts of cyrodiil
Thus breaking up the clogs on allessia bridge or gate.

IMO outposts should be removed and a larger deserted city should take their place (cheydinhal type build with buildings like temple/noble district in ic)
With walls and moats but anyone can freely enter and traverse them. Provide a few flags so that once captured for your faction the adjacent enemy keep is slightly debuffed, helping your factions push.

You cannot rez in these abandoned towns and this should stagger the amount of player who can rez and be back in the fight instantly.
Potentially spreading them out.

Make scrolls worth more scoring points so that a potential steal has more value and people will be more likely to attack and steal one and then cause fights along the outer cyro environment as they bring them back to their own home.

Factionless groups of 6-8 who can spawn at numerous locations around the map and are simply “raiders” who wreak havoc on the alliance factions. Black chevron and fight under their own guild tabard or simply black chevron if the group is random or with friends out of a guild.
Factionless fight all alliances and other factionless players but must be in a group of x minimum to be factionless.

Up for debate if they can capture keeps