[VIDEO] Zerg Squad EU // Clash of the Premades

Sandman929

Seems like there would be more groups on this level, with how easy it is. Oh right, it's not that they can't do it, or that it's a rare thing to have a group of good players that actually enjoy playing together without egos going wild and destroying the group, it's that they don't want to because it's boring.

AyelineESO

There's alot of guilds that try to imitate the top bomb-groups playstyle and fail miserably so I doubt they not being as good as lets say ZS and UF has something to do with it being boring/people not wanting to participate in that kind of playstyle but rather with it being not all that easy as people claim it to be. If it was all that easy, all guilds would play on the same level but thats not the case.

CyrusArya

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »

If you equate the hardest action to execute in eso to be that which the least amount of players are actually able to perform then you'll get a hierarchy like this:
Leading a group like ZS ->pvp raiding (zs style)-> dueling -> solo open world -> small scale -> pve.

I don't know in what universe being carried by group support makes the gameplay less accessible, but in reality true solo play is the hardest thing in this game because you can only rely on yourself. The more players you add, the easier it gets as you get more resources, more specialization, more mitigation by way of splitting aggro, and more killing power by way of coordination.

What youre claiming is objectively and observably wrong. In my opinion, in terms of accessibility and difficulty, the hierarchy actually looks like this:

Solo PvP->Small Scale->Leading a Zerg Guild->Dueling->raiding in a zerg guild->Xv1. (Edit: Put leading a raid above dueling since duels are so build dependent and not necessarily reflective of player ability)

The proof is in the pudding. 1vXers/small scalers perform great in raid groups so long as they are willing to comply. In contrast, the majority of large scale PvP raiders are totally underwhelming outside their raid groups when caught in bgs, duels, or small scale. Theres a reason for that. There are far fewer consistently successful solo players and small scale outfits than zerg guilds, theres a reason for that. Theres a reason solo and small scale content (youtube, twitch streams) gets exponentially more views and following than zerg content. And its definitely not because pvp raiding is so difficult and inspiring lol.

Fel

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »

If you equate the hardest action to execute in eso to be that which the least amount of players are actually able to perform then you'll get a hierarchy like this:
Leading a group like ZS ->pvp raiding (zs style)-> dueling -> solo open world -> small scale -> pve.

The problem with this is that 0.0001% of the player base have done all of these on the highest level. All other people just talk and dont actually know anything about that which they opinionate. Just like in politics.

it doesnt really makes sense to equate the hardest Action to execute to be the Action that the least amount of Players are actually able perform because a lot more People would be able to perfom leading ZS or raiding "zs style" if they wanted to do so or practiced that Long.
why does it matter in any way that someone has to have done all of these things on the highest Level, if some ppl jsut say that they would not enjoy that Kind of gameplay? . its not like that ZS grp consists only of exceptional individual Players, and since it does not matter that much how good you are as in individual in such a "big" grp, just raiding with ZS basicly means not much. and it is definitly not much harder than smallscale.
you cant really argue that the individual skill required does not fall off if the grp gets bigger. and you will never be able to convince those Players who talk bad about this Kind of gameplay because they frequently get killled by it.

MLRPZ

In my opinion, it doesn't give space to individual if you run 24 (or +) man group, what S

CyrusArya wrote: »

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »

If you equate the hardest action to execute in eso to be that which the least amount of players are actually able to perform then you'll get a hierarchy like this:
Leading a group like ZS ->pvp raiding (zs style)-> dueling -> solo open world -> small scale -> pve.

I don't know in what universe being carried by group support makes the gameplay less accessible, but in reality true solo play is the hardest thing in this game because you can only rely on yourself. The more players you add, the easier it gets as you get more resources, more specialization, more mitigation by way of splitting aggro, and more killing power by way of coordination.

What youre claiming is objectively and observably wrong. In my opinion, in terms of accessibility and difficulty, the hierarchy actually looks like this:

Solo PvP->Small Scale->Leading a Zerg Guild->Dueling->raiding in a zerg guild->Xv1. (Edit: Put leading a raid above dueling since duels are so build dependent and not necessarily reflective of player ability)

The proof is in the pudding. 1vXers/small scalers perform great in raid groups so long as they are willing to comply. In contrast, the majority of large scale PvP raiders are totally underwhelming outside their raid groups when caught in bgs, duels, or small scale. Theres a reason for that. There are far fewer consistently successful solo players and small scale outfits than zerg guilds, theres a reason for that. Theres a reason solo and small scale content (youtube, twitch streams) gets exponentially more views and following than zerg content. And its definitely not because pvp raiding is so difficult and inspiring lol.

Aelakhaii was one of the most consistent solo/small scale player on EU (Idk if he's still playing) and he was in ZS back in the days, So I'd say he knows what he's talking about.
We're not talking about Zerg group (which for me are 24 man raid) but more about bomb group (12-16). The difference lies more in what you are trying to achieve than the numbers of people in your group. Bomb groups tend to go for backline and heavily outnumbered tri faction fights, zergs just go from keep to keep with pugs following (or the other way around)
I don't know about NA, but on EU Vivec, there's 2 succesful bomb group, who are ZS and UF, the rest of the guild are mostly "playing the map" and do not care about how many they fight with.

I played everything in this game, I was never a good dueler but I was a pretty succesful small scaler and I happened to play solo sometimes back in the days. The only thing I'm doing consistenly on this game is playing in an organised group. Why ? because I enjoy it. I like the high level of dedication/focus/self awareness/ group awerness that it requires.
So, my point is, To each their own but don't spit on our playstyle because YOU find it boring. I now find boring to ride across the entire map to take a ressource with your 4 man group just to get zerged 3 mn earlier by an entire faction.

To your final point : Yes and no, solo players / small scalers can perform really great in a raid group but they also sometimes just can't fit because they have a way too personal point of view and can't dedicate themselves 100% for the group.
You can ask anyone is ZS how much they are commited to our group, the answer will be over 100% all the time, guaranteed.

Fasold666

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »

If you equate the hardest action to execute in eso to be that which the least amount of players are actually able to perform then you'll get a hierarchy like this:
Leading a group like ZS ->pvp raiding (zs style)-> dueling -> solo open world -> small scale -> pve.

That`s pretty much comparing apples and oranges. All the playstyles you mentioned require a different kind of preparation, "skills" and different situational awareness. Even if you would try to make a hierarchy (I don´t know if that makes much sense anyways because it kinda implies that one playstyle would be "better" then another) I am shocked how one could place 1vX on a 4th place.

I agree with the statement from CyrusArya of 1vX/smallscalers performing well in raids but not necessary the other way around. I would even go as far to say that this is the same with dueling. I see so many "duelers" in cyrodiil that have no idea how to fight outnumbered. In fact a good ammount of them is just zerging or "fake smallscaling" (a medium size group and especially on an empty server is no smallscale imo). The rest I actually see doing some nice smallscale and only very few of them actually do 1vX. The other way around: almost all 1vX players I know have dueled a lot in the past or still duel. Dueling nowadays is extremely gear and cp depended anyways. Used to be much more fun for example with softcaps when people would mostly use the same gear as in open world.
And comparing 1vX with smallscale: If you do 1vX regulary you notice that already 2vX or 3vX is so much more easier. And since you suggested looking at the ammount of players able to perform a kind of playstyle imo it looks like this as well: 1vX (almost non existant on PC EU) -> true smallscale -> dueling.

CyrusArya

MLRPZ wrote: »

Aelakhaii was one of the most consistent solo/small scale player on EU (Idk if he's still playing) and he was in ZS back in the days, So I'd say he knows what he's talking about.
We're not talking about Zerg group (which for me are 24 man raid) but more about bomb group (12-16). The difference lies more in what you are trying to achieve than the numbers of people in your group. Bomb groups tend to go for backline and heavily outnumbered tri faction fights, zergs just go from keep to keep with pugs following (or the other way around)
I don't know about NA, but on EU Vivec, there's 2 succesful bomb group, who are ZS and UF, the rest of the guild are mostly "playing the map" and do not care about how many they fight with.

I played everything in this game, I was never a good dueler but I was a pretty succesful small scaler and I happened to play solo sometimes back in the days. The only thing I'm doing consistenly on this game is playing in an organised group. Why ? because I enjoy it. I like the high level of dedication/focus/self awareness/ group awerness that it requires.
So, my point is, To each their own but don't spit on our playstyle because YOU find it boring. I now find boring to ride across the entire map to take a ressource with your 4 man group just to get zerged 3 mn earlier by an entire faction.

To your final point : Yes and no, solo players / small scalers can perform really great in a raid group but they also sometimes just can't fit because they have a way too personal point of view and can't dedicate themselves 100% for the group.
You can ask anyone is ZS how much they are commited to our group, the answer will be over 100% all the time, guaranteed.

I didn’t insult raid playstyle. I have respect for well oiled machines. But my point is, just because you’re the best at what you do does not make you above being a raid group. You aren’t in your own category. And that category of play is undoubtedly less challenging and requires less individual skill to see success in compared to solo or small scale, as the guy i quoted is purporting. I’m fully aware that large scale PvP requires a lot of effort and skill and coordination to pull off right, and that many exceptional players choose that playstyle. But generally speaking, I disagree with that guys hierarchy.

montiferus

CyrusArya wrote: »

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »

If you equate the hardest action to execute in eso to be that which the least amount of players are actually able to perform then you'll get a hierarchy like this:
Leading a group like ZS ->pvp raiding (zs style)-> dueling -> solo open world -> small scale -> pve.

I don't know in what universe being carried by group support makes the gameplay less accessible, but in reality true solo play is the hardest thing in this game because you can only rely on yourself. The more players you add, the easier it gets as you get more resources, more specialization, more mitigation by way of splitting aggro, and more killing power by way of coordination.

What youre claiming is objectively and observably wrong. In my opinion, in terms of accessibility and difficulty, the hierarchy actually looks like this:

Solo PvP->Small Scale->Leading a Zerg Guild->Dueling->raiding in a zerg guild->Xv1. (Edit: Put leading a raid above dueling since duels are so build dependent and not necessarily reflective of player ability)

The proof is in the pudding. 1vXers/small scalers perform great in raid groups so long as they are willing to comply. In contrast, the majority of large scale PvP raiders are totally underwhelming outside their raid groups when caught in bgs, duels, or small scale. Theres a reason for that. There are far fewer consistently successful solo players and small scale outfits than zerg guilds, theres a reason for that. Theres a reason solo and small scale content (youtube, twitch streams) gets exponentially more views and following than zerg content. And its definitely not because pvp raiding is so difficult and inspiring lol.

Could not agree more. It is pretty laughable to put anything as harder than solo play. OP is delusional.

Satiar

ESO PvP Community never changes. People were making the same arguments about groups all the back to softcap days.

"It takes no skill to pain-train/spin-to-win/hit barrier/spam impulse/spam healing springs/hit destro ult/etc etc etc etc"

montiferus

Satiar wrote: »

ESO PvP Community never changes. People were making the same arguments about groups all the back to softcap days.

"It takes no skill to pain-train/spin-to-win/hit barrier/spam impulse/spam healing springs/hit destro ult/etc etc etc etc"

That certainly isn't what I am saying. What I am saying is anyone who thinks playing solo isn't more challenging is absolutely delusional. The moment I get even one or 2 of my friends to join up with me things get significantly easier.

My issue with large groups in general is that they

A. Perpetuate the concept of playing with larger and larger numbers which effectively kills small scale PVP.
B. Induce so much lag with their presence that most areas are unplayable

I can appreciate that people want to play with their friends I really do. I just wish it didn't have such a negative impact on those that only play with a few friends or none at all when nobody is on.

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos

FakeZavos wrote: »

Hail Hail, People run in blackswords group and be like "What ZS does is so easy, I did it too" The only way you know if what ZS does is easy or not is to join ZS or UF. At this time, I cant think of any other guild close to the level of those 2.

I want to say to people it's time to drop the nonsense but what is the point... I remember in like... 2015 and onwards (or like late 2014) the only pvp raid guild in eu that has legitimate respect from duelers was BS (later ZS).

People can try to bend reality all they want but this is the situation. And it is like this for a reason.

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos

CyrusArya wrote: »

I don't know in what universe being carried by group support makes the gameplay less accessible, but in reality true solo play is the hardest thing in this game because you can only rely on yourself. The more players you add, the easier it gets as you get more resources, more specialization, more mitigation by way of splitting aggro, and more killing power by way of coordination.

What youre claiming is objectively and observably wrong. In my opinion, in terms of accessibility and difficulty, the hierarchy actually looks like this:

Solo PvP->Small Scale->Leading a Zerg Guild->Dueling->raiding in a zerg guild->Xv1. (Edit: Put leading a raid above dueling since duels are so build dependent and not necessarily reflective of player ability)

The proof is in the pudding. 1vXers/small scalers perform great in raid groups so long as they are willing to comply. In contrast, the majority of large scale PvP raiders are totally underwhelming outside their raid groups when caught in bgs, duels, or small scale. Theres a reason for that. There are far fewer consistently successful solo players and small scale outfits than zerg guilds, theres a reason for that. Theres a reason solo and small scale content (youtube, twitch streams) gets exponentially more views and following than zerg content. And its definitely not because pvp raiding is so difficult and inspiring lol.

No, you are actually incorrect. When you're soloing you dont seek a MASSIVE outnumbered situation, you seek at the most,
3-5 players. If you deny this and youre on EU then please tell me your @ name because then i can get some info on whether youre competent to judge or not.

It seems you dont realise the most because things in this reasoning. Every player increase in your group brings forth a higher enemy number. A two player group doesnt seek 40 players. but ZS 10 player group does. Do you understand this point or do you want me to explicate this simple point further? Alright, ill do that:
The relation between increase of players in ZS group and the number of enemies sought after by ZS is not linear.
(i am pretty certain you still don't understand what i mean)

-

Fel wrote: »

it doesnt really makes sense to equate the hardest Action to execute to be the Action that the least amount of Players are actually able perform because a lot more People would be able to perfom leading ZS or raiding "zs style" if they wanted to do so or practiced that Long.
why does it matter in any way that someone has to have done all of these things on the highest Level, if some ppl jsut say that they would not enjoy that Kind of gameplay? . its not like that ZS grp consists only of exceptional individual Players, and since it does not matter that much how good you are as in individual in such a "big" grp, just raiding with ZS basicly means not much. and it is definitly not much harder than smallscale.
you cant really argue that the individual skill required does not fall off if the grp gets bigger. and you will never be able to convince those Players who talk bad about this Kind of gameplay because they frequently get killled by it.

It NECESSARILY matters if you want to have a quality discussion about any subject. Most apparently because you need to have experience of a subject to speak about it in a reasonable and founded manner. If ones own reasoning about a subject isnt actually based on experience and information about that specific subject, then is it based on - opinion?

@Fasold666
I dont want to insult or be rude to anyone but just because someone duels doesnt make them a dueler in EU standard language. 99% of the old dueling community either quit eso or quit dueling. The ones that are left came when Homestead was released. And there is actually only one legitimate (old school) dueling guild on EU and that is Dusks guild Aether. And many there dont even duel anymore... just social.

About 2 years ago and earlier than that every single good 1vxer (really stupid term tbh, ridiculous) in EU was a top dueler aswell. I know this and many others know this so none in this forum can just come and talk nonsense about these things.

And for the record, I remember sometimes when we were like 8-10 player group in ZS, like 8 or 9 or 10 players in that group was pretty much top tier duelers aswell.


So wtf are you people talking about?

Sandman929

I've never noticed lag generated by 12-16 players in an organized group. I've noticed lag in the presence of the 40-50 ungrouped solo players combined with a few small-scale groups surfing the zerg though.
An organized raid has no business being near a friendly zerg, they have the means to play on the map without pug help and should be off seeking the unfriendly zerg.

CyrusArya

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »

It seems you dont realise the most because things in this reasoning. Every player increase in your group brings forth a higher enemy number. A two player group doesnt seek 40 players. but ZS 10 player group does. Do you understand this point or do you want me to explicate this simple point further? Alright, ill do that:
The relation between increase of players in ZS group and the number of enemies sought after by ZS is not linear.
(i am pretty certain you still don't understand what i mean)

A 10v40 is proportionately no different from a 1v4 or 2v8. Do you understand this point or do you want me to teach you basic arithmetic?

And for the record, a 1v4 or 2v8 is harder seeing as how a smaller % of players can pull of a these fights than can win a 10v40. The game gets easier and easier as your group size grows for the reasons I’ve already explained. In a 2v8 both people are required to perform the functions of damage healing and tanking at the same time.

Fel

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »

So wtf are you people talking about?

ppl kept telling you but all your answers Show that you dont really get the Point ^^

Fasold666

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »

@Fasold666
I dont want to insult or be rude to anyone but just because someone duels doesnt make them a dueler in EU standard language. 99% of the old dueling community either quit eso or quit dueling. The ones that are left came when Homestead was released. And there is actually only one legitimate (old school) dueling guild on EU and that is Dusks guild Aether. And many there dont even duel anymore... just social.

About 2 years ago and earlier than that every single good 1vxer (really stupid term tbh, ridiculous) in EU was a top dueler aswell. I know this and many others know this so none in this forum can just come and talk nonsense about these things.

And for the record, I remember sometimes when we were like 8-10 player group in ZS, like 8 or 9 or 10 players in that group was pretty much top tier duelers aswell.

So wtf are you people talking about?

Did you even read what i said?

My only intention was to say that there are way more duelers, smallscalers and people playing in a raid then 1vX players nowadays. You said dueling > 1vX > smallscale didnt you? I don`t agree.

I have no idea what a "dueler in EU standard language" for you is. I guess you mean your described longterm players that have dueled for a long time (myself included btw from Arena, Colosseum and Mystical Playground). Doesn`t change the fact that the majority even of these players dont`t 1vX anymore and instead go for smallscale/raiding/dueling/pve/bgs or whatever. Which is cool. No problem with that.

You even said yourself now that "every single good 1vXer in EU was a top dueler awell". It`s the exact same thing I said. But it`s not vice versa. Good 1vX players duel/used to duel <-> many of the people I see dueling (lets take the most common Alik´r spot) are either not able to 1vX or just don`t play 1vX anymore at all and prefer to do something else . So why would you think dueling is harder to do then 1vX?? Same goes for smallscale but there is still quite a good amount of smallscalers left.

Same goes for you talking about ZS had/having top tier duelers. Yea I know that. Where did I imply I wouldn`t?

I think you completely missunderstood my post. Again my point only was: 1vX > smallscale > dueling in terms of how many people play/are able to play it. I respect ZS and their playstyle. I find the GvG videos for example impressive. I never said people playing in a raid couldn´t be top duelists/1vX/smallscale players. For example I know quite a few people from ZS being awesome players outside of the raid as well. I just generally said it is more likely that a 1vX player will be able to be useful in a raid then the other way around. And that has it´s reasons.

I just don`t agree with you saying that playing in a raid or dueling is harder to pull off then 1vX ing regulary. And I disliked your idea of making a hierarchy (as also said in my previous post).

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos

CyrusArya wrote: »

A 10v40 is proportionately no different from a 1v4 or 2v8. Do you understand this point or do you want me to teach you basic arithmetic?

And for the record, a 2v8 is harder because a smaller % of players can pull of a 2v8 than can win a 10v40. The game gets easier and easier as our group size grows for the reasons I’ve already explained. In a 2v8 both people are required to perform the functions of damage healing and tanking at the same time.

Like i said, you dont understand my point, i wont explicate it further because i dont want to lose more hair reading your second reply.

And 2v8 isnt a consistent scenario in the way a 10v40 is.

Mayrael

MLRPZ wrote: »

In my opinion, it doesn't give space to individual if you run 24 (or +) man group, what S

CyrusArya wrote: »

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »

If you equate the hardest action to execute in eso to be that which the least amount of players are actually able to perform then you'll get a hierarchy like this:
Leading a group like ZS ->pvp raiding (zs style)-> dueling -> solo open world -> small scale -> pve.

I don't know in what universe being carried by group support makes the gameplay less accessible, but in reality true solo play is the hardest thing in this game because you can only rely on yourself. The more players you add, the easier it gets as you get more resources, more specialization, more mitigation by way of splitting aggro, and more killing power by way of coordination.

What youre claiming is objectively and observably wrong. In my opinion, in terms of accessibility and difficulty, the hierarchy actually looks like this:

Solo PvP->Small Scale->Leading a Zerg Guild->Dueling->raiding in a zerg guild->Xv1. (Edit: Put leading a raid above dueling since duels are so build dependent and not necessarily reflective of player ability)

The proof is in the pudding. 1vXers/small scalers perform great in raid groups so long as they are willing to comply. In contrast, the majority of large scale PvP raiders are totally underwhelming outside their raid groups when caught in bgs, duels, or small scale. Theres a reason for that. There are far fewer consistently successful solo players and small scale outfits than zerg guilds, theres a reason for that. Theres a reason solo and small scale content (youtube, twitch streams) gets exponentially more views and following than zerg content. And its definitely not because pvp raiding is so difficult and inspiring lol.

Aelakhaii was one of the most consistent solo/small scale player on EU (Idk if he's still playing) and he was in ZS back in the days, So I'd say he knows what he's talking about.
We're not talking about Zerg group (which for me are 24 man raid) but more about bomb group (12-16). The difference lies more in what you are trying to achieve than the numbers of people in your group. Bomb groups tend to go for backline and heavily outnumbered tri faction fights, zergs just go from keep to keep with pugs following (or the other way around)
I don't know about NA, but on EU Vivec, there's 2 succesful bomb group, who are ZS and UF, the rest of the guild are mostly "playing the map" and do not care about how many they fight with.

I played everything in this game, I was never a good dueler but I was a pretty succesful small scaler and I happened to play solo sometimes back in the days. The only thing I'm doing consistenly on this game is playing in an organised group. Why ? because I enjoy it. I like the high level of dedication/focus/self awareness/ group awerness that it requires.
So, my point is, To each their own but don't spit on our playstyle because YOU find it boring. I now find boring to ride across the entire map to take a ressource with your 4 man group just to get zerged 3 mn earlier by an entire faction.

To your final point : Yes and no, solo players / small scalers can perform really great in a raid group but they also sometimes just can't fit because they have a way too personal point of view and can't dedicate themselves 100% for the group.
You can ask anyone is ZS how much they are commited to our group, the answer will be over 100% all the time, guaranteed.

You see just one side of the coin. Truth is that this play style is boring. ZS is not the only one organised group, we all are playing in guild TSed groups but we dont use most cheese mechanics to be succesful (earthgore, purge and at least 4 dedicated healers). Ive been facing ZS many times and guess what? There was days when they didnt killed me even once after hour of fifhting them 1/2 deaths at best. Their playstye is predictible and focused on defending, just to pull as much potatoes as possible and then ult them. When you know their tactics ZS is anyoing at best. Well, they are one of the best at farming "hard try" players and the ones that get tunnel vision while trying to get them. Im not saying they are bad players, no! They are one of the bests! But bomb groups are efficent not because of their player skills, its because thats the most effective way of group play, thats all. Shido was able to create amazing bomb groups even with pugs.

killimandrosb16_ESO

Fasold666 wrote: »

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »

@Fasold666
I dont want to insult or be rude to anyone but just because someone duels doesnt make them a dueler in EU standard language. 99% of the old dueling community either quit eso or quit dueling. The ones that are left came when Homestead was released. And there is actually only one legitimate (old school) dueling guild on EU and that is Dusks guild Aether. And many there dont even duel anymore... just social.

About 2 years ago and earlier than that every single good 1vxer (really stupid term tbh, ridiculous) in EU was a top dueler aswell. I know this and many others know this so none in this forum can just come and talk nonsense about these things.

And for the record, I remember sometimes when we were like 8-10 player group in ZS, like 8 or 9 or 10 players in that group was pretty much top tier duelers aswell.

So wtf are you people talking about?

Did you even read what i said?

My only intention was to say that there are way more duelers, smallscalers and people playing in a raid then 1vX players nowadays. You said dueling > 1vX > smallscale didnt you? I don`t agree.

I have no idea what a "dueler in EU standard language" for you is. I guess you mean your described longterm players that have dueled for a long time (myself included btw from Arena, Colosseum and Mystical Playground). Doesn`t change the fact that the majority even of these players dont`t 1vX anymore and instead go for smallscale/raiding/dueling/pve/bgs or whatever. Which is cool. No problem with that.

You even said yourself now that "every single good 1vXer in EU was a top dueler awell". It`s the exact same thing I said. But it`s not vice versa. Good 1vX players duel/used to duel <-> many of the people I see dueling (lets take the most common Alik´r spot) are either not able to 1vX or just don`t play 1vX anymore at all and prefer to do something else . So why would you think dueling is harder to do then 1vX?? Same goes for smallscale but there is still quite a good amount of smallscalers left.

Same goes for you talking about ZS had/having top tier duelers. Yea I know that. Where did I imply I wouldn`t?

I think you completely missunderstood my post. Again my point only was: 1vX > smallscale > dueling in terms of how many people play/are able to play it. I respect ZS and their playstyle. I find the GvG videos for example impressive. I never said people playing in a raid couldn´t be top duelists/1vX/smallscale players. For example I know quite a few people from ZS being awesome players outside of the raid as well. I just generally said it is more likely that a 1vX player will be able to be useful in a raid then the other way around. And that has it´s reasons.

I just don`t agree with you saying that playing in a raid or dueling is harder to pull off then 1vX ing regulary. And I disliked your idea of making a hierarchy (as also said in my previous post).

Why dont you gather 6-7 of your small scale friends and challenge ZS for a fight? If youre so much more skilled (your team) in 1vx, your group should easily beat ZS's 10 man group, right? Or am I missing something?

Being part of an organized bomb group is completely different than duelling or 1vx'ing because you dont have to pay much attention to your groups synergy, when to time your abilities at the most conventient time. Some bomb teams can litterally withstand anything. At a certain point you reach a perfect number of teammates with the right combination of skills being set off at the perfect time. Then theres nothing which can kill you, apart from an equally adapted team. This is why GW2 had so many awesome guildfights, there were a lot of dedicated guilds training and increasing their performance to be the best. That competitiveness is not present in Cyrodiil at all. Imagine your party moving as one, instead of 1 fasold, there are 10, moving in perfect coordination deploying 10 times the abilities Fasold can as one, but still moving as one. Then come tell me single roaming is more difficult

Fel

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »

No, you are actually incorrect. When you're soloing you dont seek a MASSIVE outnumbered situation, you seek at the most,
3-5 players. If you deny this and youre on EU then please tell me your @ name because then i can get some info on whether youre competent to judge or not

It seems you dont realise the most because things in this reasoning. Every player increase in your group brings forth a higher enemy number. A two player group doesnt seek 40 players. but ZS 10 player group does. Do you understand this point or do you want me to explicate this simple point further? Alright, ill do that:
The relation between increase of players in ZS group and the number of enemies sought after by ZS is not linear.
(i am pretty certain you still don't understand what i mean)

you dont get the Point .... sure the amount of palyers you fight against scales with the amount of ppl in your grp. ppl are taking about the fact that the indidviudal skill required by teammates gets less significant as the size of your grp increases. the ppl you are aguing with here dont doubt that ZS is good at what they are doing ...they just Point out this undeniable fact

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »

Fel wrote: »

it doesnt really makes sense to equate the hardest Action to execute to be the Action that the least amount of Players are actually able perform because a lot more People would be able to perfom leading ZS or raiding "zs style" if they wanted to do so or practiced that Long.

It NECESSARILY matters if you want to have a quality discussion about any subject. Most apparently because you need to have experience of a subject to speak about it in a reasonable and founded manner. If ones own reasoning about a subject isnt actually based on experience and information about that specific subject, then is it based on - opinion?

well, now ist based on your opinion of ranking of the hardest Action. which as you see, not many ppl agree with. and ppl dont have to have much experience in leading or playing with a raidgrp to say that ist not their type of gameplay or to understand that teammates are required to have less skill the bigger the Group gets. just put someone in the Position of a raidleader and a couple of weeks of preactice later and he will be quite decent at it

killimandrosb16_ESO wrote: »

Being part of an organized bomb group is completely different than duelling or 1vx'ing because you dont have to pay much attention to your groups synergy, when to time your abilities at the most conventient time. Some bomb teams can litterally withstand anything. At a certain point you reach a perfect number of teammates with the right combination of skills being set off at the perfect time. Then theres nothing which can kill you, apart from an equally adapted team. Imagine your party moving as one, instead of 1 fasold, there are 10, moving in perfect coordination deploying 10 times the abilities Fasold can as one, but still moving as one. Then come tell me single roaming is more difficult

you totally forgot to mention that it also gets so much easier to Play with more ppl.....mistakes are so much easier to compensate, more damage, more ults, more burst, more viarity of buffs, more variety ultimates, more variety of debuffs, more variety of itemsets, more ppl to place camps, more ppl to rezz eachother, etc, etc, etc ....

all These Things you dont have that much in a smaller grps, but yet you have the same amount of enemies in Terms of scaling´

killimandrosb16_ESO wrote: »

This is why GW2 had so many awesome guildfights, there were a lot of dedicated guilds training and increasing their performance to be the best. That competitiveness is not present in Cyrodiil at all.

the pvp Player base is pretty small, if ZS wants to have more challenging fights with equal grps, they would have to scale
down their grp size

Mayrael wrote: »

You see just one side of the coin. Truth is that this play style is boring. ZS is not the only one organised group, we all are playing in guild TSed groups but we dont use most cheese mechanics to be succesful (earthgore, purge and at least 4 dedicated healers). Ive been facing ZS many times and guess what? There was days when they didnt killed me even once after hour of fifhting them 1/2 deaths at best. Their playstye is predictible and focused on defending, just to pull as much potatoes as possible and then ult them. When you know their tactics ZS is anyoing at best.

why is it boring just because you dont like it? im sure there are plenty of Players in this game who think the way you Play is the Definition of boring pvp. you cant really blame ppl for adapting the Kind of challenge These palyers are facing.

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos

@Fasold666

I see. I was unjust and read your comment fast and crudely.

I just put that list up without much thought, my point was to show that there are hierachies between the ambiences and that they are not at all equal concerning skill needed to play them efficiently. Perhaps 1vxing > dueling but it would need alot of discussions. And now that dueling doesnt mean anything it's not really much sense to say otherwise, so i'll retract that statement.

I remember dueling players like Fahad, Karras, Hyssia, Zettapeta and so on around the times of Orsinium patch. It needed more attention and planning from my side to duel these type of players than 1vxing potatoes. You had to actually think a minute ahead of your actions. It was INTENSE. But yes, same could go for 1vxing but as everyone knows, 1vxing is vs completely worthless players. And make a note that there exists about 20 players like these on EU today...

@Fel

I understand that it might seem to be more room for error while playing in bigger groups. But is that a misconception or is it REALLY so? I think it is very hard to decide that in an experienced group such as ZS... How often do the players in that group make major mistakes? I think very seldom, and if it is very seldom - the situtations in which they make mistakes must be such situations in which it requires EXCEPTIONAL situational awareness. Myself would NEVER be able to do what Sanct does.

Actually, I'm not even sure anyone can just learn what Sanct does in the way which one can learn to play solo or duel.
I cant even talk as fast as he does to start with much less see the best action for a whole group to make in a second, each second... People musnt underestimate such an ability. And concerning the members who are follow the leader, it is not about mindlessly following a leader. It is seeing and understanding what the leader is saying, why he is saying that specific thing and not some other thing and what might be the next action etc etc.

That kind of group composition opens up scenarios that a soloer, dueler, 1vxer cannot perform.

Vilestride

Groups like these are far from just following the leader. To be blunt if someone is just following the leader they are going to be too slow to move and react. Each member of their raid must predict their own leader each time and for every action.

Sanct16

Can you guys please stop arguing?

I respect everyone here and you all are right in some things and wrong in others. The major problem in this dicussion is that there are no clear definitions, so everything is extremly subjective. A 10v20 against a very organised guild is more challenging than a 1v4 against some cp10 guys and a 1v2 against two top tier players is harder than a 10v50 against pugs on a lagfree campaign.

In the end everyone thinks their playstyle is the "best", "most challenging" or simply "most fun" and it's completly fine. I personally enjoy raiding more because the fight is much faster and more of a teamsport (which I have always prefered in RL) but I can also understand that others value the individual aspect of soloing more. Making rankings which playstyle is the hardest is quite pointless as it's again very subjective. I think in smaller groups you need better practical gameplay whereas in bigger groups you need better anticipation, precise communication skills and quick tactical thinking (you need these abilities even when you are not leading).
A good player will, given some time to practice, be able to perform well in both styles and a bad player will not perform in either. It is easier for a bad player to join a big group as his underperforming has less impact there of course and as a result the majority of largescale guilds are worse than unorganised pugs. However even one underperforming player has an incredibly negative influence on a raid, so for top guilds it's not desireable to carry some noob.

TLDR: Stop [snip] what playstyle is best, just try to understand that other playstyles are different to your playstyle.

[Edited to remove profanity]

Vilestride

Sanct16 wrote: »

Can you guys please stop arguing?

I respect everyone here and you all are right in some things and wrong in others. The major problem in this dicussion is that there are no clear definitions, so everything is extremly subjective. A 10v20 against a very organised guild is more challenging than a 1v4 against some cp10 guys and a 1v2 against two top tier players is harder than a 10v50 against pugs on a lagfree campaign.

In the end everyone thinks their playstyle is the "best", "most challenging" or simply "most fun" and it's completly fine. I personally enjoy raiding more because the fight is much faster and more of a teamsport (which I have always prefered in RL) but I can also understand that others value the individual aspect of soloing more. Making rankings which playstyle is the hardest is quite pointless as it's again very subjective. I think in smaller groups you need better practical gameplay whereas in bigger groups you need better anticipation, precise communication skills and quick tactical thinking (you need these abilities even when you are not leading).
A good player will, given some time to practice, be able to perform well in both styles and a bad player will not perform in either. It is easier for a bad player to join a big group as his underperforming has less impact there of course and as a result the majority of largescale guilds are worse than unorganised pugs. However even one underperforming player has an incredibly negative influence on a raid, so for top guilds it's not desireable to carry some noob.

TLDR: Stop [snip] what playstyle is best, just try to understand that other playstyles are different to your playstyle.

Sounds like a zergling attitude.

[Edited for quote]

Mayrael

The problem with this discussion is that ZS members tend to present them selves as the best of the best. Maybe some of the realy are but Ive faced some of them 1v1 when roaming arround Cyrodiil and guess what? Some were a bit better than me but there was also ones that was worse than me (I won't mention nicknames, but this was some of their regular group members) and Im far form being best dueler or whatever. ZS is so effective because BOMB GROUPS in general are the most effective way of group play - you focus your fire and heal power at one place while scattering enemy fire. Add to this some coordination - always follow the leader no matter what, don't enter places with just one way of escape, when going through tight places like gates and sucha don't attack just go on manuever and spam purges and heals. Realy basic things. All you need to be succesful is DISCIPLINE. Yes ZS has one of the most disciplined players, but do not confuse this with skills.

Valencer

If bomb groups are the most effective way to play, why are most other bomb groups in Cyrodiil horrible nowadays?

Etaniel

Sanct16 wrote: »

Can you guys please stop arguing?

I respect everyone here and you all are right in some things and wrong in others. The major problem in this dicussion is that there are no clear definitions, so everything is extremly subjective. A 10v20 against a very organised guild is more challenging than a 1v4 against some cp10 guys and a 1v2 against two top tier players is harder than a 10v50 against pugs on a lagfree campaign.

In the end everyone thinks their playstyle is the "best", "most challenging" or simply "most fun" and it's completly fine. I personally enjoy raiding more because the fight is much faster and more of a teamsport (which I have always prefered in RL) but I can also understand that others value the individual aspect of soloing more. Making rankings which playstyle is the hardest is quite pointless as it's again very subjective. I think in smaller groups you need better practical gameplay whereas in bigger groups you need better anticipation, precise communication skills and quick tactical thinking (you need these abilities even when you are not leading).
A good player will, given some time to practice, be able to perform well in both styles and a bad player will not perform in either. It is easier for a bad player to join a big group as his underperforming has less impact there of course and as a result the majority of largescale guilds are worse than unorganised pugs. However even one underperforming player has an incredibly negative influence on a raid, so for top guilds it's not desireable to carry some noob.

TLDR: Stop [snip] what playstyle is best, just try to understand that other playstyles are different to your playstyle.

This ^

Who gives a crap tbh, this debate has been going on for 3 years now.
If these issues trigger people so much, they should chill out and take a break from the game like I did. 7 months without eso does you some serious good, trust me. And from the little playtime I had yesterday, potatoes will still potato when you come back, so there's no loss there.

[Edited for quote]

Fel

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »

@Fasold666
1vxing is vs completely worthless players. And make a note that there exists about 20 players like these on EU today...

thats actually not true in my experience. yes the majority of time you have the Problem that as soon as there is 1 good Player with the enemies you will have Trouble to kill anything. but at the same time it is very much possible to kill decent to very good palyers in a 1vX Situation if you kite them propperly (not to mention the stambuilds who can jsut kite and turn around a oneshot soemone)

Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »

@Fel
I understand that it might seem to be more room for error while playing in bigger groups. But is that a misconception or is it REALLY so? I think it is very hard to decide that in an experienced group such as ZS... How often do the players in that group make major mistakes? I think very seldom, and if it is very seldom - the situtations in which they make mistakes must be such situations in which it requires EXCEPTIONAL situational awareness. Myself would NEVER be able to do what Sanct does.
Actually, I'm not even sure anyone can just learn what Sanct does in the way which one can learn to play solo or duel.
That kind of group composition opens up scenarios that a soloer, dueler, 1vxer cannot perform.

well, if you do a Major mistake when you Play solo or smallscale it usually means you are dead. in a bigger grp its just not that big of a deal usually and you can just get rezzed. i dont know, but i just think that it is an undiniable fact. and the room for mistakes get also smaller when youa re told what to do most of the time

leading is just something that Needs practice like anything else in this game. i dont think there is any difference between mastering how to paly solo or how to lead a Group.

ofc that Kind of Group composition opens up Scenarios that other cant perform, just in terms of the numbers youa re fighting or the objectives you are going for, but it just makes no sense to compare These Things in that way

Sanct16 wrote: »

Can you guys please stop arguing?
In the end everyone thinks their playstyle is the "best", "most challenging" or simply "most fun" and it's completly fine. I personally enjoy raiding more because the fight is much faster and more of a teamsport (which I have always prefered in RL) but I can also understand that others value the individual aspect of soloing more.

Making rankings which playstyle is the hardest is quite pointless as it's again very subjective. I think in smaller groups you need better practical gameplay whereas in bigger groups you need better anticipation, precise communication skills and quick tactical thinking (you need these abilities even when you are not leading).
A good player will, given some time to practice, be able to perform well in both styles and a bad player will not perform in either. It is easier for a bad player to join a big group as his underperforming has less impact there of course and as a result the majority of largescale guilds are worse than unorganised pugs. However even one underperforming player has an incredibly negative influence on a raid, so for top guilds it's not desireable to carry some noob.

TLDR: Stop [snip] what playstyle is best, just try to understand that other playstyles are different to your playstyle.

i dont think the current discussion is about what playstyle is best^^ its not about These ppl who complain about about that Kind of gameplay and say it is boring, probably because they are on the receiving end and get farmed each night. i just think some ppl did not really agree with the Statement that largescale pvp is much harder to execute than 1vX or playing solo

well, you also Need anticipation and quick tactical thinking in solo or smallscale sitauations^^ playing that way is all about thinking 2steps ahead, but jeah...communication skills might be not that important as an solopalyer :DDD

Sanct16 wrote: »

TLDR: Stop [snip] what playstyle is best, just try to understand that other playstyles are different to your playstyle.

like i said, i dont think thats what the current discussion is about

[Edited for quote]

montiferus

Fel wrote: »

Sanct16 wrote: »

TLDR: Stop [snip] what playstyle is best, just try to understand that other playstyles are different to your playstyle.

like i said, i dont think thats what the current discussion is about

[Edited for quote]

Agreed the discussion to me isn’t about that either. I believe all play styles should have a place in the game. If people want to play large scale there absolutely should be a place for it. I only responded when mr doesn’t want snares or cloaks in the game, lol, ranked in order of difficulty what is hardest to do in PVP. On that note I could not disagree more.

Bit my bit, whether intentional or not, ZOS has made it more and more challenging to play solo/small and I think that is a bad thing. I’ll still do it because I love it and you can still find pockets of fun but damn they don’t make it easy.

Lieblingsjunge

AyelineESO wrote: »

Sanct16 wrote: »

The problem with you people is that you don't understand what is important to be successful as a group. Seeing comments like "destro ult, earthgore, basic coordination and thats it", "Running about in a ball spamming 2 buttons and being told what to do by the crown" is like saying in a football match "you chase after a ball and kick it away".

Liebs got rekt there haha

Shadap. Thats what football is okay xDD

Reading this discussion was predictable. Always same arguments - always same circle of argumentation.

Why can't we all just respect the various playstyle that this game offers.