Maintenance for the week of March 25:
• [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – March 26, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – March 26, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – March 28, 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)

What makes someone a "zergling" in your opinion?

Joshlenoir
Joshlenoir
✭✭✭✭
No description needed.
Edited by Joshlenoir on July 26, 2018 2:40PM
  • Sparr0w
    Sparr0w
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Runs with a large group. Can't win in a 1v1/1vX scenario is my understanding.
    @Sparr0w so I get the notification
    Xbox (EU) - l Sparrow x | CP 810+
    DD: All Mag + Stam
    Heal: Templar | Sorc | NB | Warden | Necro
    Tank: NB | DK | Warden
    Completions: All HM's + TTT + IR + GH
    PC (EU) - Sparrxw | CP 810+
    DD: All Mag + Stam
    Heal: Templar | Sorc
    Tank: DK | NB
    Completions: All HM's + TTT + IR + GH + GS
  • Lexxypwns
    Lexxypwns
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    I think it’s the lack of interest in improving moreso than the specific gameplay that one usually participates in.
  • VaranisArano
    VaranisArano
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I define a zerg as "one or more organized raids + disorganized players following along".

    To me, Cyrodiil's objective based gameplay encourages exactly that type of zerging.

    A zergling, as a derogatory term, for me, is the type of players that follow the organized raids and the proceed to contribute nothing to the fight, ineffectually firing light attacks at the wall instead of sieging, protecting siegers, or killing enemy players. Or in other words, a potato counting on others to do the hard work.
  • Danksta
    Danksta
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    Players that play in large groups that are so thirsty for kills they'll chase a single player halfway across the map. Players that play in groups much larger than what is required for their objectives.

    You're going to get different answers from different people, the above are what I consider 'zerglings'.
    BawKinTackWarDs PS4/NA

  • Starlight_Knight
    Starlight_Knight
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Large groups taking keeps is fine. Large groups vs large groups is fine. Large groups killing 1 person is fine.

    Large groups chancing the 1 person to Timbuktu as he runs for his life half way across the map spaming light attacks and loading them up with sloads, just to finally kill them with eye of flames and a 21k zaan proc - Zerglings :D

    ps Zerglings also tell me to slot purge and change my build to counter sloads. also dodge roll zaan as its so easy to counter. Oh and rune cage is fine, and its only OP because of the damage it dose. B)
  • tannips
    tannips
    ✭✭✭
    Someone who:
    * Runs in large groups
    * Frequently zerg surfs
    * Says things like “I can’t be a zergling because I’m not in a group” or “I’m solo” while he’s buried in a group of other players of their alliance
    * Chases down a solo player or small group across the map with a large group
    * Defends sloads/zaan/proc sets/other crutch sets as balanced
    * Says things like “This is war” to justify being surrounded by 50 other players
    * PvDoors empty keeps on the regular
    * Cares about campaign score
    * Won’t 1v1 anyone they zerg down but still claims to be better than them
    * Genuinely gets upset when people scroll farm/troll
    * Thinks that numbers should trump strategy/skill in fights

    Did I miss anything else?
    Edited by tannips on July 26, 2018 2:55PM
    PC | NA
    REGICIDE Guildmaster
    #StamWhip
    YouTube
  • Rickter
    Rickter
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    sloads
    RickterESO
    PC | NA | DC
    YouTube
    ______________________
    Guilds:
    Requiem GM | Dark Sisterhood Blood Knight | Legend Mod | Legend GvG Mod
    PvP:
    Bloodletter | StamDK | Alliance Rank 46 | Former Emperor of Shor (2018) | Former Emperor of Thornblade #4terms (2015)
    PvE:
    vAA HM | vHRC HM | vSO HM | vMA | vDSA | vMoL | ALL Vet 4 Man Dungeons


  • casparian
    casparian
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    Minno wrote: »
    Saying things like:
    Stop trying to balance the game for 1vX.

    And:
    I am starting to see that it's the 1vX'ers that are trying to ruin this game with nerfs to their playstyle all so they can show off to their friends on twitch and youtube.

    And:
    This game is AvAvA. Get with the program

    In his defense, it's like ZoS heard feedback about smaller scale players complaining they having no mode that dedicated to their playstyle, then added BGs which those same small scale players refuse to play in but still complain about zergs.

    So in that essence he's not wrong; if you want smaller groups for more fairer PvP play in BGs. It's like trying to play football but you only want to face against the quarterback and complain when 10 linebackers make you their ***.
    BGs aren't what small scale players were asking for at all though. Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic aren't dedicated to any small-scaler's playstyle, nor is the existence of a Power Sigil. (I say this as someone who enjoys BGs.)
    7-day PVP campaign regular 2016-2019, Flawless Conqueror. MagDK/stamplar/stamwarden/mageblade. Requiem, Legend, Knights of Daggerfall. Currently retired from the wars; waiting on performance improvements.
  • Biro123
    Biro123
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    tannips wrote: »
    Someone who:
    * Runs in large groups
    * Frequently zerg surfs
    * Says things like “I can’t be a zergling because I’m not in a group” or “I’m solo” while he’s buried in a group of other players of their alliance
    * Chases down a solo player or small group across the map with a large group
    * Defends sloads/zaan/proc sets/other crutch sets as balanced
    * Says things like “This is war” to justify being surrounded by 50 other players
    * PvDoors empty keeps on the regular
    * Cares about campaign score
    * Won’t 1v1 anyone they zerg down but still claims to be better than them
    * Genuinely gets upset when people scroll farm/troll
    * Thinks that numbers should trump strategy/skill in fights

    Did I miss anything else?

    Anyone who outnumbers their opponent by 4-1 or more.. (that includes 4-man groups btw)..
    Minalan owes me a beer.

    PC EU Megaserver
    Minie Mo - Stam/Magblade - DC
    Woody Ron - Stamplar - DC
    Aidee - Magsorc - DC
    Notadorf - Stamsorc - DC
    Khattman Doo - Stamblade - Relegated to Crafter, cos AD.
  • Minno
    Minno
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    casparian wrote: »
    Minno wrote: »
    Saying things like:
    Stop trying to balance the game for 1vX.

    And:
    I am starting to see that it's the 1vX'ers that are trying to ruin this game with nerfs to their playstyle all so they can show off to their friends on twitch and youtube.

    And:
    This game is AvAvA. Get with the program

    In his defense, it's like ZoS heard feedback about smaller scale players complaining they having no mode that dedicated to their playstyle, then added BGs which those same small scale players refuse to play in but still complain about zergs.

    So in that essence he's not wrong; if you want smaller groups for more fairer PvP play in BGs. It's like trying to play football but you only want to face against the quarterback and complain when 10 linebackers make you their ***.
    BGs aren't what small scale players were asking for at all though. Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic aren't dedicated to any small-scaler's playstyle, nor is the existence of a Power Sigil. (I say this as someone who enjoys BGs.)

    I think that's a valid opinion. Though chaos balls offers the most balanced PvP of the modes with the first 5 minutes of crazy king being about fights on limited but rotational flags (only objective that actively punishes healbots/tanks or punishes builds that kite too much). And maybe something got lost in the translation between feedback/Dev work (relic/domination are not PvP centric I agree) but overall I think BGs are alot more PvP oriented than players are willing to admit.

    Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into a score. If BGs aren't that, then what are small scale players trying to accomplish complaining about cyro being too zergy yet refuse to play the only game mode that doesn't result in any zerged fights? If you don't play it regularly, how can the devs take that feedback seriously?
    Minno - DC - Forum-plar Extraordinaire
    - Guild-lead for MV
    - Filthy Casual
  • casparian
    casparian
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    Minno wrote: »
    casparian wrote: »
    Minno wrote: »
    Saying things like:
    Stop trying to balance the game for 1vX.

    And:
    I am starting to see that it's the 1vX'ers that are trying to ruin this game with nerfs to their playstyle all so they can show off to their friends on twitch and youtube.

    And:
    This game is AvAvA. Get with the program

    In his defense, it's like ZoS heard feedback about smaller scale players complaining they having no mode that dedicated to their playstyle, then added BGs which those same small scale players refuse to play in but still complain about zergs.

    So in that essence he's not wrong; if you want smaller groups for more fairer PvP play in BGs. It's like trying to play football but you only want to face against the quarterback and complain when 10 linebackers make you their ***.
    BGs aren't what small scale players were asking for at all though. Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic aren't dedicated to any small-scaler's playstyle, nor is the existence of a Power Sigil. (I say this as someone who enjoys BGs.)

    I think that's a valid opinion. Though chaos balls offers the most balanced PvP of the modes with the first 5 minutes of crazy king being about fights on limited but rotational flags (only objective that actively punishes healbots/tanks or punishes builds that kite too much). And maybe something got lost in the translation between feedback/Dev work (relic/domination are not PvP centric I agree) but overall I think BGs are alot more PvP oriented than players are willing to admit.

    Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into a score. If BGs aren't that, then what are small scale players trying to accomplish complaining about cyro being too zergy yet refuse to play the only game mode that doesn't result in any zerged fights? If you don't play it regularly, how can the devs take that feedback seriously?

    Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into the Cyrodiil score. We wanted our actions to matter to the Alliance War, not some Elder Scrolls version of American Gladiator.

    What's more, most of us never asked for changes that would allow us to avoid fighting zergs entirely. Fighting outnumbered is part of the appeal. The request was always to eliminate gameplay elements that disproportionately favored sheer numbers. (The perfect example of this is the ult cost poison -- it's so sub-optimal to run this that the only way to get any net benefit out of it is to be within the safety of a group that's fighting lesser numbers).

    BGs just always felt like ZOS shrugging their shoulders and saying "we can't figure out how to make the Alliance War work for multiple types of group and player at once, so here's a way where we can get rid of the small-scalers". Again, I actually enjoy BGs, they just hardly do anything to address what small-scalers have been saying to ZOS for years, and don't replicate the experience of finding successful small-scale play in Cyrodiil.
    7-day PVP campaign regular 2016-2019, Flawless Conqueror. MagDK/stamplar/stamwarden/mageblade. Requiem, Legend, Knights of Daggerfall. Currently retired from the wars; waiting on performance improvements.
  • Minno
    Minno
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    casparian wrote: »
    Minno wrote: »
    casparian wrote: »
    Minno wrote: »
    Saying things like:
    Stop trying to balance the game for 1vX.

    And:
    I am starting to see that it's the 1vX'ers that are trying to ruin this game with nerfs to their playstyle all so they can show off to their friends on twitch and youtube.

    And:
    This game is AvAvA. Get with the program

    In his defense, it's like ZoS heard feedback about smaller scale players complaining they having no mode that dedicated to their playstyle, then added BGs which those same small scale players refuse to play in but still complain about zergs.

    So in that essence he's not wrong; if you want smaller groups for more fairer PvP play in BGs. It's like trying to play football but you only want to face against the quarterback and complain when 10 linebackers make you their ***.
    BGs aren't what small scale players were asking for at all though. Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic aren't dedicated to any small-scaler's playstyle, nor is the existence of a Power Sigil. (I say this as someone who enjoys BGs.)

    I think that's a valid opinion. Though chaos balls offers the most balanced PvP of the modes with the first 5 minutes of crazy king being about fights on limited but rotational flags (only objective that actively punishes healbots/tanks or punishes builds that kite too much). And maybe something got lost in the translation between feedback/Dev work (relic/domination are not PvP centric I agree) but overall I think BGs are alot more PvP oriented than players are willing to admit.

    Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into a score. If BGs aren't that, then what are small scale players trying to accomplish complaining about cyro being too zergy yet refuse to play the only game mode that doesn't result in any zerged fights? If you don't play it regularly, how can the devs take that feedback seriously?

    Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into the Cyrodiil score. We wanted our actions to matter to the Alliance War, not some Elder Scrolls version of American Gladiator.

    What's more, most of us never asked for changes that would allow us to avoid fighting zergs entirely. Fighting outnumbered is part of the appeal. The request was always to eliminate gameplay elements that disproportionately favored sheer numbers. (The perfect example of this is the ult cost poison -- it's so sub-optimal to run this that the only way to get any net benefit out of it is to be within the safety of a group that's fighting lesser numbers).

    BGs just always felt like ZOS shrugging their shoulders and saying "we can't figure out how to make the Alliance War work for multiple types of group and player at once, so here's a way where we can get rid of the small-scalers". Again, I actually enjoy BGs, they just hardly do anything to address what small-scalers have been saying to ZOS for years, and don't replicate the experience of finding successful small-scale play in Cyrodiil.

    Makes sense.

    Though I think we all know deep down you can't stop zerging unless you hard cap the numbers. Game modes/objectives can only go so far to influence play. But if you give the option to stack 100 players in one area, they are going to do exactly that regardless of the objective at hand (look at zos intention for resorces to be for smaller groups but giant zergs still take those resorces regularly or IC having bigger groups or towns being taken by large raids, etc.).

    BGs have a similar problem when premades stack objectives there with tankier specs. It's mostly because they can, and aside from friendly fire, I don't think an intelligent option exists to limit stacking of any number of players.
    Minno - DC - Forum-plar Extraordinaire
    - Guild-lead for MV
    - Filthy Casual
  • idk
    idk
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Pretty much it is used as a petty insult and nothing more. There are some salty people, I know that is hard to believe.

    While I have not been called a Zergling I have received whispers from people complaining because I kill them. I do not reply which seems to burn them even more. It is hilarious.
  • casparian
    casparian
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    Minno wrote: »
    casparian wrote: »
    Minno wrote: »
    casparian wrote: »
    Minno wrote: »
    Saying things like:
    Stop trying to balance the game for 1vX.

    And:
    I am starting to see that it's the 1vX'ers that are trying to ruin this game with nerfs to their playstyle all so they can show off to their friends on twitch and youtube.

    And:
    This game is AvAvA. Get with the program

    In his defense, it's like ZoS heard feedback about smaller scale players complaining they having no mode that dedicated to their playstyle, then added BGs which those same small scale players refuse to play in but still complain about zergs.

    So in that essence he's not wrong; if you want smaller groups for more fairer PvP play in BGs. It's like trying to play football but you only want to face against the quarterback and complain when 10 linebackers make you their ***.
    BGs aren't what small scale players were asking for at all though. Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic aren't dedicated to any small-scaler's playstyle, nor is the existence of a Power Sigil. (I say this as someone who enjoys BGs.)

    I think that's a valid opinion. Though chaos balls offers the most balanced PvP of the modes with the first 5 minutes of crazy king being about fights on limited but rotational flags (only objective that actively punishes healbots/tanks or punishes builds that kite too much). And maybe something got lost in the translation between feedback/Dev work (relic/domination are not PvP centric I agree) but overall I think BGs are alot more PvP oriented than players are willing to admit.

    Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into a score. If BGs aren't that, then what are small scale players trying to accomplish complaining about cyro being too zergy yet refuse to play the only game mode that doesn't result in any zerged fights? If you don't play it regularly, how can the devs take that feedback seriously?

    Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into the Cyrodiil score. We wanted our actions to matter to the Alliance War, not some Elder Scrolls version of American Gladiator.

    What's more, most of us never asked for changes that would allow us to avoid fighting zergs entirely. Fighting outnumbered is part of the appeal. The request was always to eliminate gameplay elements that disproportionately favored sheer numbers. (The perfect example of this is the ult cost poison -- it's so sub-optimal to run this that the only way to get any net benefit out of it is to be within the safety of a group that's fighting lesser numbers).

    BGs just always felt like ZOS shrugging their shoulders and saying "we can't figure out how to make the Alliance War work for multiple types of group and player at once, so here's a way where we can get rid of the small-scalers". Again, I actually enjoy BGs, they just hardly do anything to address what small-scalers have been saying to ZOS for years, and don't replicate the experience of finding successful small-scale play in Cyrodiil.

    Makes sense.

    Though I think we all know deep down you can't stop zerging unless you hard cap the numbers. Game modes/objectives can only go so far to influence play. But if you give the option to stack 100 players in one area, they are going to do exactly that regardless of the objective at hand (look at zos intention for resorces to be for smaller groups but giant zergs still take those resorces regularly or IC having bigger groups or towns being taken by large raids, etc.).

    BGs have a similar problem when premades stack objectives there with tankier specs. It's mostly because they can, and aside from friendly fire, I don't think an intelligent option exists to limit stacking of any number of players.
    Yeah, agreed.

    CU will enable player collision -- I still think it would be hilarious to try that in ESO.
    7-day PVP campaign regular 2016-2019, Flawless Conqueror. MagDK/stamplar/stamwarden/mageblade. Requiem, Legend, Knights of Daggerfall. Currently retired from the wars; waiting on performance improvements.
  • Minno
    Minno
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    casparian wrote: »
    Minno wrote: »
    casparian wrote: »
    Minno wrote: »
    casparian wrote: »
    Minno wrote: »
    Saying things like:
    Stop trying to balance the game for 1vX.

    And:
    I am starting to see that it's the 1vX'ers that are trying to ruin this game with nerfs to their playstyle all so they can show off to their friends on twitch and youtube.

    And:
    This game is AvAvA. Get with the program

    In his defense, it's like ZoS heard feedback about smaller scale players complaining they having no mode that dedicated to their playstyle, then added BGs which those same small scale players refuse to play in but still complain about zergs.

    So in that essence he's not wrong; if you want smaller groups for more fairer PvP play in BGs. It's like trying to play football but you only want to face against the quarterback and complain when 10 linebackers make you their ***.
    BGs aren't what small scale players were asking for at all though. Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic aren't dedicated to any small-scaler's playstyle, nor is the existence of a Power Sigil. (I say this as someone who enjoys BGs.)

    I think that's a valid opinion. Though chaos balls offers the most balanced PvP of the modes with the first 5 minutes of crazy king being about fights on limited but rotational flags (only objective that actively punishes healbots/tanks or punishes builds that kite too much). And maybe something got lost in the translation between feedback/Dev work (relic/domination are not PvP centric I agree) but overall I think BGs are alot more PvP oriented than players are willing to admit.

    Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into a score. If BGs aren't that, then what are small scale players trying to accomplish complaining about cyro being too zergy yet refuse to play the only game mode that doesn't result in any zerged fights? If you don't play it regularly, how can the devs take that feedback seriously?

    Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into the Cyrodiil score. We wanted our actions to matter to the Alliance War, not some Elder Scrolls version of American Gladiator.

    What's more, most of us never asked for changes that would allow us to avoid fighting zergs entirely. Fighting outnumbered is part of the appeal. The request was always to eliminate gameplay elements that disproportionately favored sheer numbers. (The perfect example of this is the ult cost poison -- it's so sub-optimal to run this that the only way to get any net benefit out of it is to be within the safety of a group that's fighting lesser numbers).

    BGs just always felt like ZOS shrugging their shoulders and saying "we can't figure out how to make the Alliance War work for multiple types of group and player at once, so here's a way where we can get rid of the small-scalers". Again, I actually enjoy BGs, they just hardly do anything to address what small-scalers have been saying to ZOS for years, and don't replicate the experience of finding successful small-scale play in Cyrodiil.

    Makes sense.

    Though I think we all know deep down you can't stop zerging unless you hard cap the numbers. Game modes/objectives can only go so far to influence play. But if you give the option to stack 100 players in one area, they are going to do exactly that regardless of the objective at hand (look at zos intention for resorces to be for smaller groups but giant zergs still take those resorces regularly or IC having bigger groups or towns being taken by large raids, etc.).

    BGs have a similar problem when premades stack objectives there with tankier specs. It's mostly because they can, and aside from friendly fire, I don't think an intelligent option exists to limit stacking of any number of players.
    Yeah, agreed.

    CU will enable player collision -- I still think it would be hilarious to try that in ESO.

    That would be great honestly lol. Even with the door trolling; it would force players to spread out so battles look like real battles but idk how that impacts calculations for server performance.

    I'd imagine it wouldn't be too bad for calculations but who the hell knows
    Minno - DC - Forum-plar Extraordinaire
    - Guild-lead for MV
    - Filthy Casual
  • zyk
    zyk
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Zergling is one of those terms that usually says less about the recipient and more about the one using it.
  • Mazbt
    Mazbt
    ✭✭✭✭
    It's better to unapologetically be a zergling than to appease to certain people you don't care about.
    Mazari the Resurrected (AD)- PVP stamplar main
    Maz the Druid - PVP group stam warden
    - many others
    ____________
    Fantasia
  • BRogueNZ
    BRogueNZ
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Rickter wrote: »
    Saying things like:
    Stop trying to balance the game for 1vX.

    And:
    I am starting to see that it's the 1vX'ers that are trying to ruin this game with nerfs to their playstyle all so they can show off to their friends on twitch and youtube.

    And:
    This game is AvAvA. Get with the program

    or how about people that say "get exposed" when they run over 4 players with 23? ;)<3

    what after they've been hassling a keep or a group who actually have an objective other than views or ego feeding keep coming back (x times - how many camps they have collectively in inventory) ?

    That's normally when the 'look how many people they sent just for 6 players, lmao chat, fzerglings!!'

    Edited by BRogueNZ on July 26, 2018 8:07PM
  • THEDKEXPERIENCE
    THEDKEXPERIENCE
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    Definition

    Zerg: “Defeat enemy by outnumbering rather than strategy or skill”

    Skill: “the ability to do something well; expertise”

    Reality

    Zerg: “Any group larger than 1 that kills me.”

    Skill: “I can push buttons faster than someone 1200 miles away, except when that person equips better abilities than what I have in which case that person is trash.”

    Irony

    Spending almost 2 years playing solo in Cyrodiil taking resources but jumping into a passing Zerg from time to time because video games are supposed to be fun, leading to forumers you’ve never met criticizing your build as “skill-less Zerg trash” to the point where you say F it and rejoin the largest Zerging guild you can find.

    Zergling

    Me? Yeah, sure.
    Edited by THEDKEXPERIENCE on July 26, 2018 8:04PM
  • lowlifer
    lowlifer
    I think we need more categories for players that don't like solo or small scale pvp. I feel that players who only play in large groups and players that only follow the objective shouldn't be classed into the same category.

    IMO a zergling is someone who is looking for / joins a large group who's numbers are larger than the opponents they fight.
  • THEDKEXPERIENCE
    THEDKEXPERIENCE
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    lowlifer wrote: »
    I think we need more categories for players that don't like solo or small scale pvp. I feel that players who only play in large groups and players that only follow the objective shouldn't be classed into the same category.

    IMO a zergling is someone who is looking for / joins a large group who's numbers are larger than the opponents they fight.

    The primary reason I bought ESO was because of the advertised large fights. Like it or not it’s the only console game I know of where 100 people can battle at once that isn’t one of those battle royale games. I’ve probably spent 2000 hours just in Cyrodiil alone. Sometimes I 1 on 1, sure ... a good duel is riveting, but so is the thrill of running headlong into 20 people and living to tell the tale about it.

    I am DK. I admit I like massive fights. I’m probably a zergling. I no longer care.

    Oh ... I’ll also be playing a level 30 pet sorc in all training gear tonight so come get your AP. >:)
  • CatchMeTrolling
    CatchMeTrolling
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Think it’s zerging 24/7 and your mindset. Such as chasing someone down like your life depends on it , especially when they’re not at an objective.

    It’s AvA so zerging is expected. Nothing wrong with zerging but it’s nothing fun about sitting in a zerg every time you log in either.
  • THEDKEXPERIENCE
    THEDKEXPERIENCE
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    Think it’s zerging 24/7 and your mindset. Such as chasing someone down like your life depends on it , especially when they’re not at an objective.

    It’s AvA so zerging is expected. Nothing wrong with zerging but it’s nothing fun about sitting in a zerg every time you log in either.

    You pretty much nailed it.
  • MalagenR
    MalagenR
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    A zerling is any member of a group that outnumbers their opponent by a ratio of 3 to 1 and kills them without reservation. This term was coined 15 years ago in Korean MMO's and then WoW - it references the number of zerglings necessary to kill a Protoss Zealot that hasn't been upgraded.

    3 or more Zerglings = Dead Zealot (you're a zergling if you fall into this category, yes even if your 4 man group ganks a solo NB)

    2 or less Zerglings = Dead Zerglings
  • CyrusArya
    CyrusArya
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    ESO is very high school cafeteria when it comes to labels and public opinion and such. With that out of the way, what it ultimately comes down to is there are two kinds of players:

    1.) the kind that NEEDS to outnumber their opponent to win.
    2.) that kind that doesnt.

    Regardless of actual behavior, its the first kind that gets labelled a zergling. The key distinction is that small scalers and respectable guilds go out of their way to seek fights where they are outnumbered and pursue a challenge. Zerglings seek the path of least resistance and are only bold when they know they have the advantage.

    Plenty of ppl who primarily play in larger groups that arent reduced to being just zerglings, and like wise there are plenty of people who play alone or in small groups that are definitely zerglings.
    A R Y A
    -Atmosphere
    -Ary'a
    Czarya
    The K-Hole ~ Phałanx
    My PvP Videos
  • NordSwordnBoard
    NordSwordnBoard
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    Is a simple drone without the Overmind (Crown) to give instructions.
    Fear is the Mindkiller
  • Xsorus
    Xsorus
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Minno wrote: »
    casparian wrote: »
    Minno wrote: »
    casparian wrote: »
    Minno wrote: »
    casparian wrote: »
    Minno wrote: »
    Saying things like:
    Stop trying to balance the game for 1vX.

    And:
    I am starting to see that it's the 1vX'ers that are trying to ruin this game with nerfs to their playstyle all so they can show off to their friends on twitch and youtube.

    And:
    This game is AvAvA. Get with the program

    In his defense, it's like ZoS heard feedback about smaller scale players complaining they having no mode that dedicated to their playstyle, then added BGs which those same small scale players refuse to play in but still complain about zergs.

    So in that essence he's not wrong; if you want smaller groups for more fairer PvP play in BGs. It's like trying to play football but you only want to face against the quarterback and complain when 10 linebackers make you their ***.
    BGs aren't what small scale players were asking for at all though. Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic aren't dedicated to any small-scaler's playstyle, nor is the existence of a Power Sigil. (I say this as someone who enjoys BGs.)

    I think that's a valid opinion. Though chaos balls offers the most balanced PvP of the modes with the first 5 minutes of crazy king being about fights on limited but rotational flags (only objective that actively punishes healbots/tanks or punishes builds that kite too much). And maybe something got lost in the translation between feedback/Dev work (relic/domination are not PvP centric I agree) but overall I think BGs are alot more PvP oriented than players are willing to admit.

    Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into a score. If BGs aren't that, then what are small scale players trying to accomplish complaining about cyro being too zergy yet refuse to play the only game mode that doesn't result in any zerged fights? If you don't play it regularly, how can the devs take that feedback seriously?

    Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into the Cyrodiil score. We wanted our actions to matter to the Alliance War, not some Elder Scrolls version of American Gladiator.

    What's more, most of us never asked for changes that would allow us to avoid fighting zergs entirely. Fighting outnumbered is part of the appeal. The request was always to eliminate gameplay elements that disproportionately favored sheer numbers. (The perfect example of this is the ult cost poison -- it's so sub-optimal to run this that the only way to get any net benefit out of it is to be within the safety of a group that's fighting lesser numbers).

    BGs just always felt like ZOS shrugging their shoulders and saying "we can't figure out how to make the Alliance War work for multiple types of group and player at once, so here's a way where we can get rid of the small-scalers". Again, I actually enjoy BGs, they just hardly do anything to address what small-scalers have been saying to ZOS for years, and don't replicate the experience of finding successful small-scale play in Cyrodiil.

    Makes sense.

    Though I think we all know deep down you can't stop zerging unless you hard cap the numbers. Game modes/objectives can only go so far to influence play. But if you give the option to stack 100 players in one area, they are going to do exactly that regardless of the objective at hand (look at zos intention for resorces to be for smaller groups but giant zergs still take those resorces regularly or IC having bigger groups or towns being taken by large raids, etc.).

    BGs have a similar problem when premades stack objectives there with tankier specs. It's mostly because they can, and aside from friendly fire, I don't think an intelligent option exists to limit stacking of any number of players.
    Yeah, agreed.

    CU will enable player collision -- I still think it would be hilarious to try that in ESO.

    That would be great honestly lol. Even with the door trolling; it would force players to spread out so battles look like real battles but idk how that impacts calculations for server performance.

    I'd imagine it wouldn't be too bad for calculations but who the hell knows

    Bout as well as it did in warhammer online is how well it would work... which is probably not well.
  • IZZEFlameLash
    IZZEFlameLash
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    The basic Zerg warrior.

    Added: Also someone who is a novice in a Starcraft Lore Forum.

    ^ true definition.

    But anycase, everyone is a zergling once you start outnumbering anyone. It is sort of moot to talk about. 2v1, 3v1, 4v1, Xv1... everyone's zerging. :D We all seek action after all.
    Imperials, the one and true masters of all mortal races of Tamriel
  • thankyourat
    thankyourat
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Anyone who groups with one or more players on a consistent basis is a zergling.
  • olsborg
    olsborg
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Someone that counts their chances at winning with how many they outnumber you, and how they count progressing (getting better) with how many more people they can keep adding to the group.

    Instead of actually getting better at pvping as an individual.

    PC EU
    PvP only
Sign In or Register to comment.