VaranisArano wrote: »Its almost like Cyrodiil is designed for groups of 2 to 24 players, originally for groups of 8 to 24 players, and consistently favors organized groups over disorganized ones.
I like how large-scale siege based organized PvP is looked down upon in Cyrodiil of all places.
VaranisArano wrote: »Its almost like Cyrodiil is designed for groups of 2 to 24 players, originally for groups of 8 to 24 players, and consistently favors organized groups over disorganized ones.
VaranisArano wrote: »Its almost like Cyrodiil is designed for groups of 2 to 24 players, originally for groups of 8 to 24 players, and consistently favors organized groups over disorganized ones.
Cyrodiil was designed for every number. Dynamic ult was a thing.
Honestly they'd be better catering to the smaller group players because they don't give everyone a seething hatred of cyrodiil and lag that the ball groups do.
OP don't really bother. Game is too casual and you'll be crucified for thinking that better players should get better results. And that... god forbid... people have to... git gud.
"The siege masters of Vivec and Shor have learned from their counterparts in Sotha Sil, and all siege weapons will be more effective against players in Champion enabled Campaigns."
and this is your developer response to that
"Siege damage over the years has tailed off in terms of raw output when comparing CP vs. No-CP campaigns. Siege in Non-CP campaigns deal damage that more closely resembles the original design and intent of Siege weaponry. The changes we’re doing to Siege damage in Champion-enabled campaigns result in closer parity between CP and Non-CP Siege damage."
Basically you're Siege damage isn't enough to kill a lot of CP players compared to how it is on NO CP....
Yet... 3 patches later what do I see
"Siege Shield: This ability and its morphs now reduce the damage you take from siege attacks by 50%, originally 35%."
So you buffed siege damage to make it stronger on CP, then turn around and buff the Siege shield ability...the ability that pretty much only Ball Groups are able to run because everyone else who's not in a group can't support it in a build... So you're buffing ball groups...making everyone else take more Siege Damage.
This is a problem that you guys have..you consistently do this every patch cycle...
STOP BUFFING BALL GROUPS.
VaranisArano wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »Its almost like Cyrodiil is designed for groups of 2 to 24 players, originally for groups of 8 to 24 players, and consistently favors organized groups over disorganized ones.
Cyrodiil was designed for every number. Dynamic ult was a thing.
Honestly they'd be better catering to the smaller group players because they don't give everyone a seething hatred of cyrodiil and lag that the ball groups do.
OP don't really bother. Game is too casual and you'll be crucified for thinking that better players should get better results. And that... god forbid... people have to... git gud.
Strangely enough, I do think that better players and especially more organized players should get better results. I certainly find that better players and organized groups already do better than disorganized groups or less skilled players. That's pretty obvious in Battlegrounds and in Cyrodiil.
But it sounds like you think an organized small group should be able to take on an organized large group and win.
That's the part I can't see, because if both groups have equal organization and tactical skill, obviously the larger organized group should win. Just like an organized small group can do very well against a large group of disorganized players. Whoever has the best organization and group tactics should win, or if those are equal, the larger group will win.
So I guess my response to "git gud," is "Sure, but its even more effective to 'git organized' when it comes to group combat."
And that's why everything ZOS does winds up buffing organized groups, because its their organization that lets them dominate over many more disorganized players, no matter whether we're talking organized small scale or large group organized players. But I don't expect organized small scalers to beat equally organized large groups.
VaranisArano wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »Its almost like Cyrodiil is designed for groups of 2 to 24 players, originally for groups of 8 to 24 players, and consistently favors organized groups over disorganized ones.
Cyrodiil was designed for every number. Dynamic ult was a thing.
Honestly they'd be better catering to the smaller group players because they don't give everyone a seething hatred of cyrodiil and lag that the ball groups do.
OP don't really bother. Game is too casual and you'll be crucified for thinking that better players should get better results. And that... god forbid... people have to... git gud.
Strangely enough, I do think that better players and especially more organized players should get better results. I certainly find that better players and organized groups already do better than disorganized groups or less skilled players. That's pretty obvious in Battlegrounds and in Cyrodiil.
But it sounds like you think an organized small group should be able to take on an organized large group and win.
That's the part I can't see, because if both groups have equal organization and tactical skill, obviously the larger organized group should win. Just like an organized small group can do very well against a large group of disorganized players. Whoever has the best organization and group tactics should win, or if those are equal, the larger group will win.
So I guess my response to "git gud," is "Sure, but its even more effective to 'git organized' when it comes to group combat."
And that's why everything ZOS does winds up buffing organized groups, because its their organization that lets them dominate over many more disorganized players, no matter whether we're talking organized small scale or large group organized players. But I don't expect organized small scalers to beat equally organized large groups.
Nah, I don't think organized small should be better than organized large, I think that large, organized or no instead has too much too easily. As it is, things like low counterplay strengths like siege, sloads, and stacking easy heals mean that large groups even if less organized can get more firepower and healing than the individuals added together.
Its super easy to roll over a group just because of numbers, organized or no because of mechanics in the game that means effectiveness increases due to the ease of specializing. This shouldn't happen, there should be no incentive bar being more, and those members should have to spec for their own defense/offense a little too, not "oh well someone will heal me no biggie lets go full damage."
For example, a 2/3/4vX each player has to pull their weight as they are organized, you can spec specific healers and damage dealers, however healer has to spec for some damage that isn't just be tanky and sit in a 30 person moshpit, and the damage dealer has to spec for some defense as to not rely solely on the healer.
That difficulty or base level effort is what I want to be applied to zergs. Then, everyone will have to start from the ground up getting beat, or joining small skirmishes to gain skill, not just jump into the local lag ball and not get better or be incentivised to get better because you are being carried. Call it elitism or whatever but in my eyes elitism is a good thing.
Also, AoE effect cap. Why does this still exist? Like talons/encase/spikes can only root 6 people, and shooting star can only return ult for 6 people, so a max of 72 ult returned. These effects should be uncapped.
VaranisArano wrote: »Its almost like Cyrodiil is designed for groups of 2 to 24 players, originally for groups of 8 to 24 players, and consistently favors organized groups over disorganized ones.
Narvuntien wrote: »Cryodil should reward organisation and co-ordination.
That includes being able to gather a large group of people together and get them to the right place.
If you hate ball groups play battlegrounds.
I like how large-scale siege based organized PvP is looked down upon in Cyrodiil of all places.
leepalmer95 wrote: »When to have a balanced game it should be the more people in a group the less effective boost to the group each person adds.
leepalmer95 wrote: »Currently the games groups work as follows:
The more people you add the more effective each person added becomes to the group.
A healer in a 8 man on the exact same build is less effective than a healing in a 40 man. Spamming springs to heal 8 ppl or to heal 20+ ppl, the ball healer is going to get more heal/s just by doing the same thing.
When to have a balanced game it should be the more people in a group the less effective boost to the group each person adds.
1 more person in a group should be more effective joining a 4 man group than joining a 23 man group, but thats not the case.
1 more person in a 4 man isn't going to help much, an extra healer in a 23 man is going to make a difference, especially with sets like earthgore etc..
The-Baconator wrote: »leepalmer95 wrote: »Currently the games groups work as follows:
The more people you add the more effective each person added becomes to the group.
A healer in a 8 man on the exact same build is less effective than a healing in a 40 man. Spamming springs to heal 8 ppl or to heal 20+ ppl, the ball healer is going to get more heal/s just by doing the same thing.
When to have a balanced game it should be the more people in a group the less effective boost to the group each person adds.
1 more person in a group should be more effective joining a 4 man group than joining a 23 man group, but thats not the case.
1 more person in a 4 man isn't going to help much, an extra healer in a 23 man is going to make a difference, especially with sets like earthgore etc..
After the removal of AoE caps the healer hitting 8 ppl with their springs will be far more impactful than the guy hitting +20 because healing is capped at 6 ppl while damage is completely uncapped. Essentially a 24 man will take 3x as much damage as an 8 man, assuming they are stacked similarly, while healing is the same on a per person basis. Generally when I'm in a small group I PREFER my enemies to be supper stacked because they're far easier to kill that way.
VaranisArano wrote: »The-Baconator wrote: »leepalmer95 wrote: »Currently the games groups work as follows:
The more people you add the more effective each person added becomes to the group.
A healer in a 8 man on the exact same build is less effective than a healing in a 40 man. Spamming springs to heal 8 ppl or to heal 20+ ppl, the ball healer is going to get more heal/s just by doing the same thing.
When to have a balanced game it should be the more people in a group the less effective boost to the group each person adds.
1 more person in a group should be more effective joining a 4 man group than joining a 23 man group, but thats not the case.
1 more person in a 4 man isn't going to help much, an extra healer in a 23 man is going to make a difference, especially with sets like earthgore etc..
After the removal of AoE caps the healer hitting 8 ppl with their springs will be far more impactful than the guy hitting +20 because healing is capped at 6 ppl while damage is completely uncapped. Essentially a 24 man will take 3x as much damage as an 8 man, assuming they are stacked similarly, while healing is the same on a per person basis. Generally when I'm in a small group I PREFER my enemies to be supper stacked because they're far easier to kill that way.
That's true that the single healer in an 8-man group is more effective than a single healer in a 24-man group, but show me the 24-man raid that only runs 1 healer. Most 24-man raids I fight run enough healers for their group size. Now, PUGs or disorganized zergs might definitely run into the 1 healer per 24 players ratio, and that's one reason why disorganized zergs are easier to defeat.
leepalmer95 wrote: »Ball groups are their whales.
Why would they buff the small scalers/ solo players.
The-Baconator wrote: »leepalmer95 wrote: »Currently the games groups work as follows:
The more people you add the more effective each person added becomes to the group.
A healer in a 8 man on the exact same build is less effective than a healing in a 40 man. Spamming springs to heal 8 ppl or to heal 20+ ppl, the ball healer is going to get more heal/s just by doing the same thing.
When to have a balanced game it should be the more people in a group the less effective boost to the group each person adds.
1 more person in a group should be more effective joining a 4 man group than joining a 23 man group, but thats not the case.
1 more person in a 4 man isn't going to help much, an extra healer in a 23 man is going to make a difference, especially with sets like earthgore etc..
After the removal of AoE caps the healer hitting 8 ppl with their springs will be far more impactful than the guy hitting +20 because healing is capped at 6 ppl while damage is completely uncapped. Essentially a 24 man will take 3x as much damage as an 8 man, assuming they are stacked similarly, while healing is the same on a per person basis. Generally when I'm in a small group I PREFER my enemies to be supper stacked because they're far easier to kill that way.
Also I completely disagree with your 3+1 vs 23+1 argument. The extra 1 in a 23 man isn't doing much of anything where having a 4 man as opposed to a 3 man is huge. You're adding 33% more burst\healing\etc while also throwing in someone else who can draw single target aggro\pressure that saves another member of the group from having to eat 4-5 ults as opposed to 2-3.