Solving AotP

Ruckly

evivnada wrote: »

AotP hasn't been on in days. Sounds like yall were just butthurt, and had to use the entire server to take our scrolls from pugs.
I bow to your superior tactics.

Here is EP critique on stacking a bunch of people in one spot and creating a bunch of lag. This person doesn't like it and if it were used as a shank or done deliberately day after day for hours at a time they would probably say that doing so is wrong.

evivnada

Wrong again smarty pants the only thing I was mad about is we lost the scrolls as some EP stood at the transits,and that AP wasn't on to smash you back to your gates

Joy_Division

Thoragaal wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Thoragaal wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Thoragaal wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Thoragaal wrote: »

Elong wrote: »

Red_Nine wrote: »

Ralamil wrote: »

I don't get what the big deal is. AotP is just the natural response of a "leader" who's so impotent that his only means of being effective is stacking absolutely as many players on screen as he can and cause it to lag to hell. It's easy to be more effective when your enemies skills aren't firing and you have the numbers.

No but really, I never want to hear how other factions stack worse than EP ever again. xD

Maybe you'd have more fun in Battlegrounds or dueling then. Or maybe Shor is more your speed. Don't let a game make you so angry. It's not healthy. Surely you realize that complaining in the forums about it won't change anything. Let go, man, life is too short. A game is supposed to be fun. If you're not able to enjoy it, what's the point?

Some of us aren't able to enjoy because certain players willingly stack 80 deep in the same place and cause lag. You know what your actions cause. I'm not angry about it, just disappointed. There are other options to pvp, and I take those avenues a lot more lately, because of the selfishness of some of the playerbase.
Before you say "but the game is built for large battles etc", it might have been, but it can't do it anymore, it can't handle that many people, and they can't fix it, or won't fix it. We as players have to take a small amount of ownership if we love and value this game.

frozywozy wrote: »

Ralamil wrote: »

Red_Nine wrote: »

Ralamil wrote: »

I don't get what the big deal is. AotP is just the natural response of a "leader" who's so impotent that his only means of being effective is stacking absolutely as many players on screen as he can and cause it to lag to hell. It's easy to be more effective when your enemies skills aren't firing and you have the numbers.

No but really, I never want to hear how other factions stack worse than EP ever again. xD

Maybe you'd have more fun in Battlegrounds or dueling then. Or maybe Shor is more your speed. Don't let a game make you so angry. It's not healthy. Surely you realize that complaining in the forums about it won't change anything. Let go, man, life is too short. A game is supposed to be fun. If you're not able to enjoy it, what's the point?

I do have fun in pvp. I can have fun and still generally think your guild is a cancer that isn't healthy to the game that's basically skating by in terms of performance by exploiting the poor server infrastructure.

Besides, if you were concerned about anyone's fun but your own, you'd let us use our skills every once in a while. Now kindly take your faux concern elsewhere. Maybe brush up on your smallman (1 raid or less, I guess) gameplay.

It's been said before that they enjoy running with large numbers. Even if they could get better and be successful with 12, they would still run with more because they like big raids. This being said, that would be fine, IF and only if the servers could handle it which is not the case. Glad they have been doing efforts to spread their raids in different directions but it should not be a "once in a while thing". it should be a 95% of the time kind of thing.

Some people are able to handle themselves pretty good in various scenarios, others not so well. The personal skill and ability to get better also differs from person to person.
I know some people that's been doing Cyrodiil for 3-4 years and still don't know how to break free from a CC, because they don't have the reaction time for it. Others don't have the situational awareness to avoid AoE being poured on them. Some people can't find their own heal button before it's too late.
While others can easily kill 3 opponents alone.
For many people being in a large groups, even if it is causing lag, is their only way to enjoy Cyrodiil. It's a way to even the odds in their favour. Put 20 skilled players against 30 ppl that can't break free/get out of AoE/can't heal themselves (or others) and those other 20 (or even less) will wreck them apart by sheer personal skill.
But to make it clear, you don't want to make it impossible for those others to enjoy their game? Because not everyone is able to learn to the same capacity, or even as fast, as someone else.

Gonna stop you right there.

I'm the last person to point fingers at players for playing the game "wrong" or "irresponsibly," mostly because all of us are guilty of doing things at times that we know aren't the best for the game or the community. It happens from time to time for various circumstances and reasons. That being said:

All of us sucked at one point. The only way not to suck is to learn from mistakes, losses, and take off the proverbial training wheels and try to compete is situations beyond your skill level. It's humbling, it's frustrating, but it's a necessary step where there is no cutting corners. You don't need super fast twitch reactions or omniscience to enjoy Cyrodiil on your own. Rather, you need to the willingness to get kicked in the butt enough times and learn from it.

I get the appeal of playing in raid groups. It can be a lot of fun to have a legit impact on the map, whereas one person usually is just overwhelmed and zerged down. But when you state that's the "only way to enjoy Cyrodiil," that's way too exclusive and too narrow. It's A way, not the ONLY way. To have the perspective of the "only" way, that sounds like giving up on any other ways to play.

You as a player and your guild will be better off and find the game a lot more enjoyable under multiple circumstance if it is the occasional circumstance that prompts a unhealthy amount of players in a single spot at cyrodiil rather than a modus operandi.

You can learn from mutliple different approaches. Personally I observe first and foremost.
In a large scale situation I would therefor observe how the enemy, as a group, behave, and how my group, as the attacker, behave and do it vice versa (when we're defending). Point being that not everyone approaches a problem similarily.

I said "...impossible for those others to enjoy their game?". It was an intentional question.
Because, like I said, that's how I am as a person and also as a player. I observe, carefully first hand, before getting into anything. I enjoy large scale combat, I get more information with a group where I know there are healers or a tank that can take a beating and won't run away if he/she is being attacked.
This is ofc 1-2 years ago when I first got into Cyrodiil. This is no longer the case. But that's how and where I learned about Cyrodiil. I know I can handle myself with and without a group now. I probably pay more attention to enemy movement than someone that's mostly playing small scale/solo, but the small scale/solo player is probably paying more attention to his closest friends or their own resources, while I go /shout to try and save as many attackers as much as possible when being flanked.

Point being that not everyone learns the same way and people have different approaches to get by an obstacle. Grouping up is one of them, hence why my question

Also, there is a max capacity of siege weapons, that means beyond a certain point of attackers they lose effeciency by not spreading out. You can use this to your advantage and take keeps more effeciently, if you had a more organized group at your own disposal. If you were to create something similar and make tactical decissions to spread out on keeps, the enemy will be forced to spread out too or they will start losing an insane amount of points.

Things are being made too complicated here.

Most of the people here aren't saying that you are ruining people's enjoyment for making groups bigger than 4 (although undoubtedly some exist). People can group, have fun, learn, and have an impact on the map. It's fine. It's cool. It's part of the game.

Rather, the issue arises when stacking 50+ is seen as a matter of routine and as a standard operating procedure.

No, I don't want to make it impossible for other people to enjoy their game. That's why I generally don't accuse people of playing "wrong" or irresponsibly. Group up, totally fine with that. And I recognize there are instances where too many people are going to be in one spot and often it's not intentional. It happens. It's fine. all I am saying is that stacking 50+ should not become habit and seen as a tactic to win. Because at that point there is zero learning going on at all as the only lesson to be drawn when 3/4 the population is stacked at a single objective is that ZOS's servers can't handle it.

Individuals are complicated. We should never forget that it's a real person behind the screen

These people in AotP seem to have been gathered relatively fast. That shows that it's a very low standard for joining. With a low standard, and numbers quickly rising, would indicate that the majority of players aren't very experienced, unless every single one of them intentionally wanna break the server by causing lag, but that's highly improbable. With the majority being relatively inexperienced players, then what I've said before makes sense, no?

I can guarantee you that some of these players from AotP see this solution from the GM as the greatest thing done since the invention of ice cream, because now they feel like they can participate properly for once. Even if they only run around doing light attacks and die due to standing in AoE.

It's fine if you accuse the leaders of causing the lag, if said leader orders several full groups to one location with the intention to cause lag), but you need some solid proof before making such accusations. But don't blame the little guy, that's a part of the guild, that's just following the leader.

I know. The lag sucks. But the lag is there with or without organised groups due to how players organically form into zergs when they can't handle themselves, which is the case when they are inexperienced. The only solution can come from ZOS or that you make a similar guild where you take on the leader role and spread out your groups.
The lag has been there for as long as I can remember and nothing's been done by ZOS. My advice is really that you make your own guild and force the opponents to spread out

I did. The problem is successful guilds that can accomplish map control with less than 20 is that it does not prompt opponents to spread out. Rather it prompts guilds such as yours to stack together because it is unwilling to git gud.

You can take that perspective if you want to, but it's not intellectually honest of you.
I said "[...]or that you make a similar guild where you take on the leader role and spread out your groups."
Less than 20 people isn't a similar guild.
If you had this guild, spreading out your groups, means you'd have 3 groups out of less than 20 people. 6 people in each group. You mean to tell me that AotP comes charging with 3 full groups, 72 players, to kill 6 of your guys.
It sounds to me like it's enough for one person to put a keep in combat for them to get baited, while the rest of you can do what ever you like.
Somehow I don't believe you actually put much effort into doing something about it. If you in fact even tried.
I have never once stated or said I'm in AotP. In fact I have on several occasions through this thread said I'm not even on NA. But to somehow try and tie together my ideas to a group (AotP) is completely irrelevent to the subject; you're strawmanning. So once again, you're not being very honest about this. Making it personal because I'm somehow "unwilling to git gud", when I'm not even on the server... yeah.

It's clear that you're not here to actually discuss and talk about ideas on how to solve it. You're not even interested in it. You just wanna QQ, it's ok, people need to ventilate their frustrations sometimes. But for that reason I'm done.

What is there to discuss? The server performance goes to crap when 72 people stack in one spot and you're talking about how people stack that way because they have slow reflexes or aren't fast learners or don;t enjoy the game without doing so, as if any of those reasons somehow justify intentionally making the game perform like crap.

Here's a great idea how to solve this issue: attempt to be competent with a group of 24. It's not hard, it just requires "standard PuG" skill level and a lead who has half a brain and is willing to learn from losses.

HaroniNDeorum

evivnada wrote: »

AotP hasn't been on in days. Sounds like yall were just butthurt, and had to use the entire server to take our scrolls from pugs.
I bow to your superior tactics.

Hehe you talking about "entire server" go take a resource with 100 ppl

VaranisArano

Joy_Division wrote: »

Thoragaal wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Thoragaal wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Thoragaal wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Thoragaal wrote: »

Elong wrote: »

Red_Nine wrote: »

Ralamil wrote: »

I don't get what the big deal is. AotP is just the natural response of a "leader" who's so impotent that his only means of being effective is stacking absolutely as many players on screen as he can and cause it to lag to hell. It's easy to be more effective when your enemies skills aren't firing and you have the numbers.

No but really, I never want to hear how other factions stack worse than EP ever again. xD

Maybe you'd have more fun in Battlegrounds or dueling then. Or maybe Shor is more your speed. Don't let a game make you so angry. It's not healthy. Surely you realize that complaining in the forums about it won't change anything. Let go, man, life is too short. A game is supposed to be fun. If you're not able to enjoy it, what's the point?

Some of us aren't able to enjoy because certain players willingly stack 80 deep in the same place and cause lag. You know what your actions cause. I'm not angry about it, just disappointed. There are other options to pvp, and I take those avenues a lot more lately, because of the selfishness of some of the playerbase.
Before you say "but the game is built for large battles etc", it might have been, but it can't do it anymore, it can't handle that many people, and they can't fix it, or won't fix it. We as players have to take a small amount of ownership if we love and value this game.

frozywozy wrote: »

Ralamil wrote: »

Red_Nine wrote: »

Ralamil wrote: »

I don't get what the big deal is. AotP is just the natural response of a "leader" who's so impotent that his only means of being effective is stacking absolutely as many players on screen as he can and cause it to lag to hell. It's easy to be more effective when your enemies skills aren't firing and you have the numbers.

No but really, I never want to hear how other factions stack worse than EP ever again. xD

Maybe you'd have more fun in Battlegrounds or dueling then. Or maybe Shor is more your speed. Don't let a game make you so angry. It's not healthy. Surely you realize that complaining in the forums about it won't change anything. Let go, man, life is too short. A game is supposed to be fun. If you're not able to enjoy it, what's the point?

I do have fun in pvp. I can have fun and still generally think your guild is a cancer that isn't healthy to the game that's basically skating by in terms of performance by exploiting the poor server infrastructure.

Besides, if you were concerned about anyone's fun but your own, you'd let us use our skills every once in a while. Now kindly take your faux concern elsewhere. Maybe brush up on your smallman (1 raid or less, I guess) gameplay.

It's been said before that they enjoy running with large numbers. Even if they could get better and be successful with 12, they would still run with more because they like big raids. This being said, that would be fine, IF and only if the servers could handle it which is not the case. Glad they have been doing efforts to spread their raids in different directions but it should not be a "once in a while thing". it should be a 95% of the time kind of thing.

Some people are able to handle themselves pretty good in various scenarios, others not so well. The personal skill and ability to get better also differs from person to person.
I know some people that's been doing Cyrodiil for 3-4 years and still don't know how to break free from a CC, because they don't have the reaction time for it. Others don't have the situational awareness to avoid AoE being poured on them. Some people can't find their own heal button before it's too late.
While others can easily kill 3 opponents alone.
For many people being in a large groups, even if it is causing lag, is their only way to enjoy Cyrodiil. It's a way to even the odds in their favour. Put 20 skilled players against 30 ppl that can't break free/get out of AoE/can't heal themselves (or others) and those other 20 (or even less) will wreck them apart by sheer personal skill.
But to make it clear, you don't want to make it impossible for those others to enjoy their game? Because not everyone is able to learn to the same capacity, or even as fast, as someone else.

Gonna stop you right there.

I'm the last person to point fingers at players for playing the game "wrong" or "irresponsibly," mostly because all of us are guilty of doing things at times that we know aren't the best for the game or the community. It happens from time to time for various circumstances and reasons. That being said:

All of us sucked at one point. The only way not to suck is to learn from mistakes, losses, and take off the proverbial training wheels and try to compete is situations beyond your skill level. It's humbling, it's frustrating, but it's a necessary step where there is no cutting corners. You don't need super fast twitch reactions or omniscience to enjoy Cyrodiil on your own. Rather, you need to the willingness to get kicked in the butt enough times and learn from it.

I get the appeal of playing in raid groups. It can be a lot of fun to have a legit impact on the map, whereas one person usually is just overwhelmed and zerged down. But when you state that's the "only way to enjoy Cyrodiil," that's way too exclusive and too narrow. It's A way, not the ONLY way. To have the perspective of the "only" way, that sounds like giving up on any other ways to play.

You as a player and your guild will be better off and find the game a lot more enjoyable under multiple circumstance if it is the occasional circumstance that prompts a unhealthy amount of players in a single spot at cyrodiil rather than a modus operandi.

You can learn from mutliple different approaches. Personally I observe first and foremost.
In a large scale situation I would therefor observe how the enemy, as a group, behave, and how my group, as the attacker, behave and do it vice versa (when we're defending). Point being that not everyone approaches a problem similarily.

I said "...impossible for those others to enjoy their game?". It was an intentional question.
Because, like I said, that's how I am as a person and also as a player. I observe, carefully first hand, before getting into anything. I enjoy large scale combat, I get more information with a group where I know there are healers or a tank that can take a beating and won't run away if he/she is being attacked.
This is ofc 1-2 years ago when I first got into Cyrodiil. This is no longer the case. But that's how and where I learned about Cyrodiil. I know I can handle myself with and without a group now. I probably pay more attention to enemy movement than someone that's mostly playing small scale/solo, but the small scale/solo player is probably paying more attention to his closest friends or their own resources, while I go /shout to try and save as many attackers as much as possible when being flanked.

Point being that not everyone learns the same way and people have different approaches to get by an obstacle. Grouping up is one of them, hence why my question

Also, there is a max capacity of siege weapons, that means beyond a certain point of attackers they lose effeciency by not spreading out. You can use this to your advantage and take keeps more effeciently, if you had a more organized group at your own disposal. If you were to create something similar and make tactical decissions to spread out on keeps, the enemy will be forced to spread out too or they will start losing an insane amount of points.

Things are being made too complicated here.

Most of the people here aren't saying that you are ruining people's enjoyment for making groups bigger than 4 (although undoubtedly some exist). People can group, have fun, learn, and have an impact on the map. It's fine. It's cool. It's part of the game.

Rather, the issue arises when stacking 50+ is seen as a matter of routine and as a standard operating procedure.

No, I don't want to make it impossible for other people to enjoy their game. That's why I generally don't accuse people of playing "wrong" or irresponsibly. Group up, totally fine with that. And I recognize there are instances where too many people are going to be in one spot and often it's not intentional. It happens. It's fine. all I am saying is that stacking 50+ should not become habit and seen as a tactic to win. Because at that point there is zero learning going on at all as the only lesson to be drawn when 3/4 the population is stacked at a single objective is that ZOS's servers can't handle it.

Individuals are complicated. We should never forget that it's a real person behind the screen

These people in AotP seem to have been gathered relatively fast. That shows that it's a very low standard for joining. With a low standard, and numbers quickly rising, would indicate that the majority of players aren't very experienced, unless every single one of them intentionally wanna break the server by causing lag, but that's highly improbable. With the majority being relatively inexperienced players, then what I've said before makes sense, no?

I can guarantee you that some of these players from AotP see this solution from the GM as the greatest thing done since the invention of ice cream, because now they feel like they can participate properly for once. Even if they only run around doing light attacks and die due to standing in AoE.

It's fine if you accuse the leaders of causing the lag, if said leader orders several full groups to one location with the intention to cause lag), but you need some solid proof before making such accusations. But don't blame the little guy, that's a part of the guild, that's just following the leader.

I know. The lag sucks. But the lag is there with or without organised groups due to how players organically form into zergs when they can't handle themselves, which is the case when they are inexperienced. The only solution can come from ZOS or that you make a similar guild where you take on the leader role and spread out your groups.
The lag has been there for as long as I can remember and nothing's been done by ZOS. My advice is really that you make your own guild and force the opponents to spread out

I did. The problem is successful guilds that can accomplish map control with less than 20 is that it does not prompt opponents to spread out. Rather it prompts guilds such as yours to stack together because it is unwilling to git gud.

You can take that perspective if you want to, but it's not intellectually honest of you.
I said "[...]or that you make a similar guild where you take on the leader role and spread out your groups."
Less than 20 people isn't a similar guild.
If you had this guild, spreading out your groups, means you'd have 3 groups out of less than 20 people. 6 people in each group. You mean to tell me that AotP comes charging with 3 full groups, 72 players, to kill 6 of your guys.
It sounds to me like it's enough for one person to put a keep in combat for them to get baited, while the rest of you can do what ever you like.
Somehow I don't believe you actually put much effort into doing something about it. If you in fact even tried.
I have never once stated or said I'm in AotP. In fact I have on several occasions through this thread said I'm not even on NA. But to somehow try and tie together my ideas to a group (AotP) is completely irrelevent to the subject; you're strawmanning. So once again, you're not being very honest about this. Making it personal because I'm somehow "unwilling to git gud", when I'm not even on the server... yeah.

It's clear that you're not here to actually discuss and talk about ideas on how to solve it. You're not even interested in it. You just wanna QQ, it's ok, people need to ventilate their frustrations sometimes. But for that reason I'm done.

What is there to discuss? The server performance goes to crap when 72 people stack in one spot and you're talking about how people stack that way because they have slow reflexes or aren't fast learners or don;t enjoy the game without doing so, as if any of those reasons somehow justify intentionally making the game perform like crap.

Here's a great idea how to solve this issue: attempt to be competent with a group of 24. It's not hard, it just requires "standard PuG" skill level and a lead who has half a brain and is willing to learn from losses.

I'm all in support of the idea of "Try to be competent in a group of 24." I've done it. Enjoyed it.

However, its not going to make a difference in server performance. Not the sort of Cyrodiil-saving difference people seem to want.

Because of how Cyrodiil works, there are lots of times when objectives bring in a lot more than 24 players.

For example, I'll bring up one instance at Roebeck on PC/NA. Roebeck was AD's last emperorship keep, so they were defending against the dethrone. Roebeck also held EP's home scroll.

So should AD "attempt to be competent with a group of 24" to defend their emperor and the scroll?
Should DC "attempt to be competent with a group of 24" to dethrone the AD emperor and capture an EP scroll?
Should EP "attempt to be competent with a group of 24" to dethrone and recapture their own scroll, which is worth 10 points now?

Even if they "should," we all know that's just not how Cyrodiil works. That's pretty silly to tell a faction to limit their numbers at an important objective like an emperorship defense or a home scroll take.

In actual practice, Roebeck pulled 3 raids of EP, 2 raids of defending AD, 1 group of DC, plus PUGs on all sides, and had loads and loads of crashing, freezing, load screens, and disconnects. I've seen the same happen at BRK and at Ash. Those are numbers that are appropriate to the importance of those objectives and the game simply could not handle it well for everyone involved.

Important objectives always draw large numbers of players. Increasingly, Cyrodiil's performance cannot handle large numbers of players - whether that's a deliberate grouping of raids into a mass zerg or a organically formed faction stack for an important objective.


You say, "What is there to discuss? The server performance goes to crap when 72 people stack in one spot."

I say, "Maybe we ought to discuss how the server performance now goes to crap during completely normal and encouraged gameplay regardless of whether or not raids are deliberately stacking or players are merely playing for important objectives. Because that is absolutely ZOS' fault if Cyrodiil no longer functions as designed and intended."

AllegraLionheart

_Crow wrote: »

My guild (AP not AoTOP ), Is pulling players into Cyro that have never played before, people are logging in to just play with us in mass. What's funny is that WAY more people like Zerging then don't... which is why Zergs are a thing LOL.

People hate on us every night, but the funny thing is, the other big guilds that bring in the most players into PvP that actually do stuff in cyro and make PvP better, don't hate us, and even want to GvG us! The people hating on us are the "Zone generals" that no one wants around anymore because Guilds have taken over, and solo players that zerg surf, cry about zergs, and don't go play in Shor for some reason.

AP helps players that guilds have closed their doors to, that like teamwork, like a chill environment, and want to learn more about the basics of PvP

We now split up our 72+ man raids when we need to and take multiple keeps at once, and if AD or DC stack, we are going to stack when we need to. We are growing bigger every day and we are going to keep helping new players, and we are going to keep getting more powerful, so get used to seeing us

This is what I came here for. Crow's a good dude, and tbh he takes a lot of the inexperienced PUGs and lets them have fun and learn in a supportive environment. A lot of the pro guilds don't do that as readily.
AND he took the advice from a lot of folks to split up the groups into different areas with multiple raid leads on the super heavy raids. It's done a lot for the lag, in my experience.

However... AP is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself, which is a less-than-optimized Cyrodiil. It's been this way for a while.
Cyro is clearly built for warfare on a large scale. MASSIVE groups WILL converge at some battles, and we've experience siege and skills not firing, massive crashing, etc. when the servers get bogged down with 150+ people in a multi-faction stack fighting over a scroll, etc. If this was optimized at its maximum end, then the lag which follows AP around wouldn't be a problem beyond being a LOT of players (a non-issue in a warfare-sized game).

Joy_Division

VaranisArano wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Thoragaal wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Thoragaal wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Thoragaal wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Thoragaal wrote: »

Elong wrote: »

Red_Nine wrote: »

Ralamil wrote: »

I don't get what the big deal is. AotP is just the natural response of a "leader" who's so impotent that his only means of being effective is stacking absolutely as many players on screen as he can and cause it to lag to hell. It's easy to be more effective when your enemies skills aren't firing and you have the numbers.

No but really, I never want to hear how other factions stack worse than EP ever again. xD

Maybe you'd have more fun in Battlegrounds or dueling then. Or maybe Shor is more your speed. Don't let a game make you so angry. It's not healthy. Surely you realize that complaining in the forums about it won't change anything. Let go, man, life is too short. A game is supposed to be fun. If you're not able to enjoy it, what's the point?

Some of us aren't able to enjoy because certain players willingly stack 80 deep in the same place and cause lag. You know what your actions cause. I'm not angry about it, just disappointed. There are other options to pvp, and I take those avenues a lot more lately, because of the selfishness of some of the playerbase.
Before you say "but the game is built for large battles etc", it might have been, but it can't do it anymore, it can't handle that many people, and they can't fix it, or won't fix it. We as players have to take a small amount of ownership if we love and value this game.

frozywozy wrote: »

Ralamil wrote: »

Red_Nine wrote: »

Ralamil wrote: »

I don't get what the big deal is. AotP is just the natural response of a "leader" who's so impotent that his only means of being effective is stacking absolutely as many players on screen as he can and cause it to lag to hell. It's easy to be more effective when your enemies skills aren't firing and you have the numbers.

No but really, I never want to hear how other factions stack worse than EP ever again. xD

Maybe you'd have more fun in Battlegrounds or dueling then. Or maybe Shor is more your speed. Don't let a game make you so angry. It's not healthy. Surely you realize that complaining in the forums about it won't change anything. Let go, man, life is too short. A game is supposed to be fun. If you're not able to enjoy it, what's the point?

I do have fun in pvp. I can have fun and still generally think your guild is a cancer that isn't healthy to the game that's basically skating by in terms of performance by exploiting the poor server infrastructure.

Besides, if you were concerned about anyone's fun but your own, you'd let us use our skills every once in a while. Now kindly take your faux concern elsewhere. Maybe brush up on your smallman (1 raid or less, I guess) gameplay.

It's been said before that they enjoy running with large numbers. Even if they could get better and be successful with 12, they would still run with more because they like big raids. This being said, that would be fine, IF and only if the servers could handle it which is not the case. Glad they have been doing efforts to spread their raids in different directions but it should not be a "once in a while thing". it should be a 95% of the time kind of thing.

Some people are able to handle themselves pretty good in various scenarios, others not so well. The personal skill and ability to get better also differs from person to person.
I know some people that's been doing Cyrodiil for 3-4 years and still don't know how to break free from a CC, because they don't have the reaction time for it. Others don't have the situational awareness to avoid AoE being poured on them. Some people can't find their own heal button before it's too late.
While others can easily kill 3 opponents alone.
For many people being in a large groups, even if it is causing lag, is their only way to enjoy Cyrodiil. It's a way to even the odds in their favour. Put 20 skilled players against 30 ppl that can't break free/get out of AoE/can't heal themselves (or others) and those other 20 (or even less) will wreck them apart by sheer personal skill.
But to make it clear, you don't want to make it impossible for those others to enjoy their game? Because not everyone is able to learn to the same capacity, or even as fast, as someone else.

Gonna stop you right there.

I'm the last person to point fingers at players for playing the game "wrong" or "irresponsibly," mostly because all of us are guilty of doing things at times that we know aren't the best for the game or the community. It happens from time to time for various circumstances and reasons. That being said:

All of us sucked at one point. The only way not to suck is to learn from mistakes, losses, and take off the proverbial training wheels and try to compete is situations beyond your skill level. It's humbling, it's frustrating, but it's a necessary step where there is no cutting corners. You don't need super fast twitch reactions or omniscience to enjoy Cyrodiil on your own. Rather, you need to the willingness to get kicked in the butt enough times and learn from it.

I get the appeal of playing in raid groups. It can be a lot of fun to have a legit impact on the map, whereas one person usually is just overwhelmed and zerged down. But when you state that's the "only way to enjoy Cyrodiil," that's way too exclusive and too narrow. It's A way, not the ONLY way. To have the perspective of the "only" way, that sounds like giving up on any other ways to play.

You as a player and your guild will be better off and find the game a lot more enjoyable under multiple circumstance if it is the occasional circumstance that prompts a unhealthy amount of players in a single spot at cyrodiil rather than a modus operandi.

You can learn from mutliple different approaches. Personally I observe first and foremost.
In a large scale situation I would therefor observe how the enemy, as a group, behave, and how my group, as the attacker, behave and do it vice versa (when we're defending). Point being that not everyone approaches a problem similarily.

I said "...impossible for those others to enjoy their game?". It was an intentional question.
Because, like I said, that's how I am as a person and also as a player. I observe, carefully first hand, before getting into anything. I enjoy large scale combat, I get more information with a group where I know there are healers or a tank that can take a beating and won't run away if he/she is being attacked.
This is ofc 1-2 years ago when I first got into Cyrodiil. This is no longer the case. But that's how and where I learned about Cyrodiil. I know I can handle myself with and without a group now. I probably pay more attention to enemy movement than someone that's mostly playing small scale/solo, but the small scale/solo player is probably paying more attention to his closest friends or their own resources, while I go /shout to try and save as many attackers as much as possible when being flanked.

Point being that not everyone learns the same way and people have different approaches to get by an obstacle. Grouping up is one of them, hence why my question

Also, there is a max capacity of siege weapons, that means beyond a certain point of attackers they lose effeciency by not spreading out. You can use this to your advantage and take keeps more effeciently, if you had a more organized group at your own disposal. If you were to create something similar and make tactical decissions to spread out on keeps, the enemy will be forced to spread out too or they will start losing an insane amount of points.

Things are being made too complicated here.

Most of the people here aren't saying that you are ruining people's enjoyment for making groups bigger than 4 (although undoubtedly some exist). People can group, have fun, learn, and have an impact on the map. It's fine. It's cool. It's part of the game.

Rather, the issue arises when stacking 50+ is seen as a matter of routine and as a standard operating procedure.

No, I don't want to make it impossible for other people to enjoy their game. That's why I generally don't accuse people of playing "wrong" or irresponsibly. Group up, totally fine with that. And I recognize there are instances where too many people are going to be in one spot and often it's not intentional. It happens. It's fine. all I am saying is that stacking 50+ should not become habit and seen as a tactic to win. Because at that point there is zero learning going on at all as the only lesson to be drawn when 3/4 the population is stacked at a single objective is that ZOS's servers can't handle it.

Individuals are complicated. We should never forget that it's a real person behind the screen

These people in AotP seem to have been gathered relatively fast. That shows that it's a very low standard for joining. With a low standard, and numbers quickly rising, would indicate that the majority of players aren't very experienced, unless every single one of them intentionally wanna break the server by causing lag, but that's highly improbable. With the majority being relatively inexperienced players, then what I've said before makes sense, no?

I can guarantee you that some of these players from AotP see this solution from the GM as the greatest thing done since the invention of ice cream, because now they feel like they can participate properly for once. Even if they only run around doing light attacks and die due to standing in AoE.

It's fine if you accuse the leaders of causing the lag, if said leader orders several full groups to one location with the intention to cause lag), but you need some solid proof before making such accusations. But don't blame the little guy, that's a part of the guild, that's just following the leader.

I know. The lag sucks. But the lag is there with or without organised groups due to how players organically form into zergs when they can't handle themselves, which is the case when they are inexperienced. The only solution can come from ZOS or that you make a similar guild where you take on the leader role and spread out your groups.
The lag has been there for as long as I can remember and nothing's been done by ZOS. My advice is really that you make your own guild and force the opponents to spread out

I did. The problem is successful guilds that can accomplish map control with less than 20 is that it does not prompt opponents to spread out. Rather it prompts guilds such as yours to stack together because it is unwilling to git gud.

You can take that perspective if you want to, but it's not intellectually honest of you.
I said "[...]or that you make a similar guild where you take on the leader role and spread out your groups."
Less than 20 people isn't a similar guild.
If you had this guild, spreading out your groups, means you'd have 3 groups out of less than 20 people. 6 people in each group. You mean to tell me that AotP comes charging with 3 full groups, 72 players, to kill 6 of your guys.
It sounds to me like it's enough for one person to put a keep in combat for them to get baited, while the rest of you can do what ever you like.
Somehow I don't believe you actually put much effort into doing something about it. If you in fact even tried.
I have never once stated or said I'm in AotP. In fact I have on several occasions through this thread said I'm not even on NA. But to somehow try and tie together my ideas to a group (AotP) is completely irrelevent to the subject; you're strawmanning. So once again, you're not being very honest about this. Making it personal because I'm somehow "unwilling to git gud", when I'm not even on the server... yeah.

It's clear that you're not here to actually discuss and talk about ideas on how to solve it. You're not even interested in it. You just wanna QQ, it's ok, people need to ventilate their frustrations sometimes. But for that reason I'm done.

What is there to discuss? The server performance goes to crap when 72 people stack in one spot and you're talking about how people stack that way because they have slow reflexes or aren't fast learners or don;t enjoy the game without doing so, as if any of those reasons somehow justify intentionally making the game perform like crap.

Here's a great idea how to solve this issue: attempt to be competent with a group of 24. It's not hard, it just requires "standard PuG" skill level and a lead who has half a brain and is willing to learn from losses.

I'm all in support of the idea of "Try to be competent in a group of 24." I've done it. Enjoyed it.

However, its not going to make a difference in server performance. Not the sort of Cyrodiil-saving difference people seem to want.

Because of how Cyrodiil works, there are lots of times when objectives bring in a lot more than 24 players.

For example, I'll bring up one instance at Roebeck on PC/NA. Roebeck was AD's last emperorship keep, so they were defending against the dethrone. Roebeck also held EP's home scroll.

So should AD "attempt to be competent with a group of 24" to defend their emperor and the scroll?
Should DC "attempt to be competent with a group of 24" to dethrone the AD emperor and capture an EP scroll?
Should EP "attempt to be competent with a group of 24" to dethrone and recapture their own scroll, which is worth 10 points now?

Even if they "should," we all know that's just not how Cyrodiil works. That's pretty silly to tell a faction to limit their numbers at an important objective like an emperorship defense or a home scroll take.

In actual practice, Roebeck pulled 3 raids of EP, 2 raids of defending AD, 1 group of DC, plus PUGs on all sides, and had loads and loads of crashing, freezing, load screens, and disconnects. I've seen the same happen at BRK and at Ash. Those are numbers that are appropriate to the importance of those objectives and the game simply could not handle it well for everyone involved.

Important objectives always draw large numbers of players. Increasingly, Cyrodiil's performance cannot handle large numbers of players - whether that's a deliberate grouping of raids into a mass zerg or a organically formed faction stack for an important objective.


You say, "What is there to discuss? The server performance goes to crap when 72 people stack in one spot."

I say, "Maybe we ought to discuss how the server performance now goes to crap during completely normal and encouraged gameplay regardless of whether or not raids are deliberately stacking or players are merely playing for important objectives. Because that is absolutely ZOS' fault if Cyrodiil no longer functions as designed and intended."

You're discussing something different than the person I responded to.

There is a difference between coordinating 72 people to go to a single objective and bringing a max of 24 to a important objective. In a heavily defended keep that has a scroll and a transit junction, I know perfectly well that its probably going to take more than 24 to take it and, as I said earlier, I am fine with that. It happens. In the heat of the competitive moment, I don't blame players from engaging in those sorts of fights. That's stacking by circumstance or because of a specific strategic situation, quite a different thing than bringing 72 as a matter of routine every night.

Because I recognize that there are going to be times where more than 24 is just going to happen, 99% of the time I don;t blame players or even complain about it in the privacy of Teamspeak when it does. However, when stacking 72 becomes seen as a modus operandi or how players can "learn," that's totally different and ought to be strongly discouraged.

Insofar as PvDooring bleakers with 72, there isn't anything to discuss.

As far as the instances where the map plays out that such more than 24 is going to happen, that is something worthy of discussion. It is my opinion that asking people nicely or not nicely (e.g. by trying to degrade them as "skillless zergling) to spread out on a map or onto different servers is futile. We have 4+years of consistent evidence of PvP behavior, we know ESO lends itself to one populated server and herding.

What is there to do in Cyrdoiil if you are by yourself?

Ganking? What if they don't particular enjoy that style of play or are on a build unsuited for that?

Take a resource? After 4+ years, the prospect of killing some annoying PvE guards just to get zerged down by 20 people waiting inside the keep for crossed swords hasn't proved exciting to most PvPers. If you find that sort of thing fun, well, that's fine, but obviously most don't. And asking them to ride and extra 5 minutes to a backline keep so "only" 4 or 5 come after them isn't working either; besides how many people playing this game can take on 2 enemy players, let alone more? ZOS needs to recognize their original vision for small scale at resources isn't enticing and the community needs to stop suggesting players to "git gud" such that they can 1vX potatoes who have unlimited respawn, especially when it just takes 1 of the X to not be a potato and then they're screwed.

There isn't much for a player to do. So many people either group or zerg-surf to the next obvious objective, or wait at a frontline keep looking at their map for crossed swords.

At this point ZOS either needs to invest the resources to make their servers better handle how PvP plays out (like I heard that Guild Wars did) or they need to invest the resources in coming up with more enticing objectives away from keeps that taking won't be akin to kicking a hornet's nest. Either way, ZOS has to invest resources because after 4+ years we know how Cyrodiil plays out.

frozywozy

It's funny that the only reason why this thread is still opened is because staff members have no idea what an AotP is.

Ruckly

frozywozy wrote: »

It's funny that the only reason why this thread is still opened is because staff members have no idea what an AotP is.

The thread probably hasn't been closed because the original problem hasn't been solved. Rather the original problem would appear to have manifested in the campaign score. DC down 1800 points with 16 days to go after 3 close campaigns? The campaign is pretty much over for DC at this point I would say but to compound the problem even further EP has a troll guild parking in nikel outpost(worth 1 point) for way to long shutting down the lane between DC and AD. I don't have a clue what's going on it seems the overall EP strategy is to try and get everyone to swap to one faction and have boring campaigns again like the ones before the previous three.

VaranisArano

Joy_Division wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Thoragaal wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Thoragaal wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Thoragaal wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Thoragaal wrote: »

Elong wrote: »

Red_Nine wrote: »

Ralamil wrote: »

I don't get what the big deal is. AotP is just the natural response of a "leader" who's so impotent that his only means of being effective is stacking absolutely as many players on screen as he can and cause it to lag to hell. It's easy to be more effective when your enemies skills aren't firing and you have the numbers.

No but really, I never want to hear how other factions stack worse than EP ever again. xD

Maybe you'd have more fun in Battlegrounds or dueling then. Or maybe Shor is more your speed. Don't let a game make you so angry. It's not healthy. Surely you realize that complaining in the forums about it won't change anything. Let go, man, life is too short. A game is supposed to be fun. If you're not able to enjoy it, what's the point?

Some of us aren't able to enjoy because certain players willingly stack 80 deep in the same place and cause lag. You know what your actions cause. I'm not angry about it, just disappointed. There are other options to pvp, and I take those avenues a lot more lately, because of the selfishness of some of the playerbase.
Before you say "but the game is built for large battles etc", it might have been, but it can't do it anymore, it can't handle that many people, and they can't fix it, or won't fix it. We as players have to take a small amount of ownership if we love and value this game.

frozywozy wrote: »

Ralamil wrote: »

Red_Nine wrote: »

Ralamil wrote: »

I don't get what the big deal is. AotP is just the natural response of a "leader" who's so impotent that his only means of being effective is stacking absolutely as many players on screen as he can and cause it to lag to hell. It's easy to be more effective when your enemies skills aren't firing and you have the numbers.

No but really, I never want to hear how other factions stack worse than EP ever again. xD

Maybe you'd have more fun in Battlegrounds or dueling then. Or maybe Shor is more your speed. Don't let a game make you so angry. It's not healthy. Surely you realize that complaining in the forums about it won't change anything. Let go, man, life is too short. A game is supposed to be fun. If you're not able to enjoy it, what's the point?

I do have fun in pvp. I can have fun and still generally think your guild is a cancer that isn't healthy to the game that's basically skating by in terms of performance by exploiting the poor server infrastructure.

Besides, if you were concerned about anyone's fun but your own, you'd let us use our skills every once in a while. Now kindly take your faux concern elsewhere. Maybe brush up on your smallman (1 raid or less, I guess) gameplay.

It's been said before that they enjoy running with large numbers. Even if they could get better and be successful with 12, they would still run with more because they like big raids. This being said, that would be fine, IF and only if the servers could handle it which is not the case. Glad they have been doing efforts to spread their raids in different directions but it should not be a "once in a while thing". it should be a 95% of the time kind of thing.

Some people are able to handle themselves pretty good in various scenarios, others not so well. The personal skill and ability to get better also differs from person to person.
I know some people that's been doing Cyrodiil for 3-4 years and still don't know how to break free from a CC, because they don't have the reaction time for it. Others don't have the situational awareness to avoid AoE being poured on them. Some people can't find their own heal button before it's too late.
While others can easily kill 3 opponents alone.
For many people being in a large groups, even if it is causing lag, is their only way to enjoy Cyrodiil. It's a way to even the odds in their favour. Put 20 skilled players against 30 ppl that can't break free/get out of AoE/can't heal themselves (or others) and those other 20 (or even less) will wreck them apart by sheer personal skill.
But to make it clear, you don't want to make it impossible for those others to enjoy their game? Because not everyone is able to learn to the same capacity, or even as fast, as someone else.

Gonna stop you right there.

I'm the last person to point fingers at players for playing the game "wrong" or "irresponsibly," mostly because all of us are guilty of doing things at times that we know aren't the best for the game or the community. It happens from time to time for various circumstances and reasons. That being said:

All of us sucked at one point. The only way not to suck is to learn from mistakes, losses, and take off the proverbial training wheels and try to compete is situations beyond your skill level. It's humbling, it's frustrating, but it's a necessary step where there is no cutting corners. You don't need super fast twitch reactions or omniscience to enjoy Cyrodiil on your own. Rather, you need to the willingness to get kicked in the butt enough times and learn from it.

I get the appeal of playing in raid groups. It can be a lot of fun to have a legit impact on the map, whereas one person usually is just overwhelmed and zerged down. But when you state that's the "only way to enjoy Cyrodiil," that's way too exclusive and too narrow. It's A way, not the ONLY way. To have the perspective of the "only" way, that sounds like giving up on any other ways to play.

You as a player and your guild will be better off and find the game a lot more enjoyable under multiple circumstance if it is the occasional circumstance that prompts a unhealthy amount of players in a single spot at cyrodiil rather than a modus operandi.

You can learn from mutliple different approaches. Personally I observe first and foremost.
In a large scale situation I would therefor observe how the enemy, as a group, behave, and how my group, as the attacker, behave and do it vice versa (when we're defending). Point being that not everyone approaches a problem similarily.

I said "...impossible for those others to enjoy their game?". It was an intentional question.
Because, like I said, that's how I am as a person and also as a player. I observe, carefully first hand, before getting into anything. I enjoy large scale combat, I get more information with a group where I know there are healers or a tank that can take a beating and won't run away if he/she is being attacked.
This is ofc 1-2 years ago when I first got into Cyrodiil. This is no longer the case. But that's how and where I learned about Cyrodiil. I know I can handle myself with and without a group now. I probably pay more attention to enemy movement than someone that's mostly playing small scale/solo, but the small scale/solo player is probably paying more attention to his closest friends or their own resources, while I go /shout to try and save as many attackers as much as possible when being flanked.

Point being that not everyone learns the same way and people have different approaches to get by an obstacle. Grouping up is one of them, hence why my question

Also, there is a max capacity of siege weapons, that means beyond a certain point of attackers they lose effeciency by not spreading out. You can use this to your advantage and take keeps more effeciently, if you had a more organized group at your own disposal. If you were to create something similar and make tactical decissions to spread out on keeps, the enemy will be forced to spread out too or they will start losing an insane amount of points.

Things are being made too complicated here.

Most of the people here aren't saying that you are ruining people's enjoyment for making groups bigger than 4 (although undoubtedly some exist). People can group, have fun, learn, and have an impact on the map. It's fine. It's cool. It's part of the game.

Rather, the issue arises when stacking 50+ is seen as a matter of routine and as a standard operating procedure.

No, I don't want to make it impossible for other people to enjoy their game. That's why I generally don't accuse people of playing "wrong" or irresponsibly. Group up, totally fine with that. And I recognize there are instances where too many people are going to be in one spot and often it's not intentional. It happens. It's fine. all I am saying is that stacking 50+ should not become habit and seen as a tactic to win. Because at that point there is zero learning going on at all as the only lesson to be drawn when 3/4 the population is stacked at a single objective is that ZOS's servers can't handle it.

Individuals are complicated. We should never forget that it's a real person behind the screen

These people in AotP seem to have been gathered relatively fast. That shows that it's a very low standard for joining. With a low standard, and numbers quickly rising, would indicate that the majority of players aren't very experienced, unless every single one of them intentionally wanna break the server by causing lag, but that's highly improbable. With the majority being relatively inexperienced players, then what I've said before makes sense, no?

I can guarantee you that some of these players from AotP see this solution from the GM as the greatest thing done since the invention of ice cream, because now they feel like they can participate properly for once. Even if they only run around doing light attacks and die due to standing in AoE.

It's fine if you accuse the leaders of causing the lag, if said leader orders several full groups to one location with the intention to cause lag), but you need some solid proof before making such accusations. But don't blame the little guy, that's a part of the guild, that's just following the leader.

I know. The lag sucks. But the lag is there with or without organised groups due to how players organically form into zergs when they can't handle themselves, which is the case when they are inexperienced. The only solution can come from ZOS or that you make a similar guild where you take on the leader role and spread out your groups.
The lag has been there for as long as I can remember and nothing's been done by ZOS. My advice is really that you make your own guild and force the opponents to spread out

I did. The problem is successful guilds that can accomplish map control with less than 20 is that it does not prompt opponents to spread out. Rather it prompts guilds such as yours to stack together because it is unwilling to git gud.

You can take that perspective if you want to, but it's not intellectually honest of you.
I said "[...]or that you make a similar guild where you take on the leader role and spread out your groups."
Less than 20 people isn't a similar guild.
If you had this guild, spreading out your groups, means you'd have 3 groups out of less than 20 people. 6 people in each group. You mean to tell me that AotP comes charging with 3 full groups, 72 players, to kill 6 of your guys.
It sounds to me like it's enough for one person to put a keep in combat for them to get baited, while the rest of you can do what ever you like.
Somehow I don't believe you actually put much effort into doing something about it. If you in fact even tried.
I have never once stated or said I'm in AotP. In fact I have on several occasions through this thread said I'm not even on NA. But to somehow try and tie together my ideas to a group (AotP) is completely irrelevent to the subject; you're strawmanning. So once again, you're not being very honest about this. Making it personal because I'm somehow "unwilling to git gud", when I'm not even on the server... yeah.

It's clear that you're not here to actually discuss and talk about ideas on how to solve it. You're not even interested in it. You just wanna QQ, it's ok, people need to ventilate their frustrations sometimes. But for that reason I'm done.

What is there to discuss? The server performance goes to crap when 72 people stack in one spot and you're talking about how people stack that way because they have slow reflexes or aren't fast learners or don;t enjoy the game without doing so, as if any of those reasons somehow justify intentionally making the game perform like crap.

Here's a great idea how to solve this issue: attempt to be competent with a group of 24. It's not hard, it just requires "standard PuG" skill level and a lead who has half a brain and is willing to learn from losses.

I'm all in support of the idea of "Try to be competent in a group of 24." I've done it. Enjoyed it.

However, its not going to make a difference in server performance. Not the sort of Cyrodiil-saving difference people seem to want.

Because of how Cyrodiil works, there are lots of times when objectives bring in a lot more than 24 players.

For example, I'll bring up one instance at Roebeck on PC/NA. Roebeck was AD's last emperorship keep, so they were defending against the dethrone. Roebeck also held EP's home scroll.

So should AD "attempt to be competent with a group of 24" to defend their emperor and the scroll?
Should DC "attempt to be competent with a group of 24" to dethrone the AD emperor and capture an EP scroll?
Should EP "attempt to be competent with a group of 24" to dethrone and recapture their own scroll, which is worth 10 points now?

Even if they "should," we all know that's just not how Cyrodiil works. That's pretty silly to tell a faction to limit their numbers at an important objective like an emperorship defense or a home scroll take.

In actual practice, Roebeck pulled 3 raids of EP, 2 raids of defending AD, 1 group of DC, plus PUGs on all sides, and had loads and loads of crashing, freezing, load screens, and disconnects. I've seen the same happen at BRK and at Ash. Those are numbers that are appropriate to the importance of those objectives and the game simply could not handle it well for everyone involved.

Important objectives always draw large numbers of players. Increasingly, Cyrodiil's performance cannot handle large numbers of players - whether that's a deliberate grouping of raids into a mass zerg or a organically formed faction stack for an important objective.


You say, "What is there to discuss? The server performance goes to crap when 72 people stack in one spot."

I say, "Maybe we ought to discuss how the server performance now goes to crap during completely normal and encouraged gameplay regardless of whether or not raids are deliberately stacking or players are merely playing for important objectives. Because that is absolutely ZOS' fault if Cyrodiil no longer functions as designed and intended."

You're discussing something different than the person I responded to.

There is a difference between coordinating 72 people to go to a single objective and bringing a max of 24 to a important objective. In a heavily defended keep that has a scroll and a transit junction, I know perfectly well that its probably going to take more than 24 to take it and, as I said earlier, I am fine with that. It happens. In the heat of the competitive moment, I don't blame players from engaging in those sorts of fights. That's stacking by circumstance or because of a specific strategic situation, quite a different thing than bringing 72 as a matter of routine every night.

Because I recognize that there are going to be times where more than 24 is just going to happen, 99% of the time I don;t blame players or even complain about it in the privacy of Teamspeak when it does. However, when stacking 72 becomes seen as a modus operandi or how players can "learn," that's totally different and ought to be strongly discouraged.

Insofar as PvDooring bleakers with 72, there isn't anything to discuss.

As far as the instances where the map plays out that such more than 24 is going to happen, that is something worthy of discussion. It is my opinion that asking people nicely or not nicely (e.g. by trying to degrade them as "skillless zergling) to spread out on a map or onto different servers is futile. We have 4+years of consistent evidence of PvP behavior, we know ESO lends itself to one populated server and herding.

What is there to do in Cyrdoiil if you are by yourself?

Ganking? What if they don't particular enjoy that style of play or are on a build unsuited for that?

Take a resource? After 4+ years, the prospect of killing some annoying PvE guards just to get zerged down by 20 people waiting inside the keep for crossed swords hasn't proved exciting to most PvPers. If you find that sort of thing fun, well, that's fine, but obviously most don't. And asking them to ride and extra 5 minutes to a backline keep so "only" 4 or 5 come after them isn't working either; besides how many people playing this game can take on 2 enemy players, let alone more? ZOS needs to recognize their original vision for small scale at resources isn't enticing and the community needs to stop suggesting players to "git gud" such that they can 1vX potatoes who have unlimited respawn, especially when it just takes 1 of the X to not be a potato and then they're screwed.

There isn't much for a player to do. So many people either group or zerg-surf to the next obvious objective, or wait at a frontline keep looking at their map for crossed swords.

At this point ZOS either needs to invest the resources to make their servers better handle how PvP plays out (like I heard that Guild Wars did) or they need to invest the resources in coming up with more enticing objectives away from keeps that taking won't be akin to kicking a hornet's nest. Either way, ZOS has to invest resources because after 4+ years we know how Cyrodiil plays out.

Hey, I think that sounds pretty awesome! From your words to ZOS's ears.

evivnada

The thread probably hasn't been closed because the original problem hasn't been solved. Rather the original problem would appear to have manifested in the campaign score. DC down 1800 points with 16 days to go after 3 close campaigns? The campaign is pretty much over for DC at this point I would say but to compound the problem even further EP has a troll guild parking in nikel outpost(worth 1 point) for way to long shutting down the lane between DC and AD. I don't have a clue what's going on it seems the overall EP strategy is to try and get everyone to swap to one faction and have boring campaigns again like the ones before the previous three.[/quote]

I agree... that lone wolf guild should camp Seg some nights
DC had a couple shots to stick it to EP, but AD was Jonny on the spot and stole your points.

No one wants a lopsided map in any one color..

Ruckly

100 people stacked in one spot is a pretty lopsided map. The blob bends space-time warping the map into pointlessness. If you go near it you either disappear from existence giving off hawking radiation or you phase in and out of existence near it or there are time anomalies and all kinds of weird crap happens.

Reverb

I feel like the solution to AotP is Shor. Even if the servers could handle it (and they very clearly cannot) there's no fun in engaging with 50+ enemies at every resource, or 75+ sweeping like locusts through the map. There's another server out there offering better performance.

Elong

Reverb wrote: »

I feel like the solution to AotP is Shor. Even if the servers could handle it (and they very clearly cannot) there's no fun in engaging with 50+ enemies at every resource, or 75+ sweeping like locusts through the map. There's another server out there offering better performance.

I've been going to Sotha while they are on. They destroy my game experience.

AyelineESO

Reverb wrote: »

I feel like the solution to AotP is Shor. Even if the servers could handle it (and they very clearly cannot) there's no fun in engaging with 50+ enemies at every resource, or 75+ sweeping like locusts through the map. There's another server out there offering better performance.

Im suprised that not a lot more people are doing this. I dont know AP or whatever they are called but I wonder what they'd do If one day the map doesent get contested by the other factions anymore and everyone (and yes I mean everyone - I know thats never gonna happen but lets just imagine it would be possible) would actively avoid them. Like, as soon as they get seen (no matter which campaign they show up)... boom, everyone switches campaigns leaving them to fight no1.

Would they actually flip every map they show up? Would they quit after some time? What else could you imagine would happen?

Reverb

AyelineESO wrote: »

Reverb wrote: »

I feel like the solution to AotP is Shor. Even if the servers could handle it (and they very clearly cannot) there's no fun in engaging with 50+ enemies at every resource, or 75+ sweeping like locusts through the map. There's another server out there offering better performance.

Im suprised that not a lot more people are doing this. I dont know AP or whatever they are called but I wonder what they'd do If one day the map doesent get contested by the other factions anymore and everyone (and yes I mean everyone - I know thats never gonna happen but lets just imagine it would be possible) would actively avoid them. Like, as soon as they get seen (no matter which campaign they show up)... boom, everyone switches campaigns leaving them to fight no1.

Would they actually flip every map they show up? Would they quit after some time? What else could you imagine would happen?

They're primarily pve'ers, so pvdooring an undefended map is right in their wheelhouse. It probably wouldn't deter them at all, and they'd be laughing the whole way to cap every scroll. Leaving the server would be for our own sanity and enjoyment of the game, not to send a message.

Feanor

AyelineESO wrote: »

Reverb wrote: »

I feel like the solution to AotP is Shor. Even if the servers could handle it (and they very clearly cannot) there's no fun in engaging with 50+ enemies at every resource, or 75+ sweeping like locusts through the map. There's another server out there offering better performance.

Im suprised that not a lot more people are doing this. I dont know AP or whatever they are called but I wonder what they'd do If one day the map doesent get contested by the other factions anymore and everyone (and yes I mean everyone - I know thats never gonna happen but lets just imagine it would be possible) would actively avoid them. Like, as soon as they get seen (no matter which campaign they show up)... boom, everyone switches campaigns leaving them to fight no1.

Would they actually flip every map they show up? Would they quit after some time? What else could you imagine would happen?

This approach hasn't worked with the EP on EU Sotha Sil either. There were stretches - whole weeks or months even - when all you had was 24/7 poplocked EP and 1 or 2 bars of AD and DC. I recall AD without any keeps every evening, and trying to retake BM and BB vs. 50+. It didn't make the EP go away, migrate or logging off. It's as the previous poster said - to these players, PvDoor is awesome, and they bask in the glory of a campaign win.

mague

_Crow wrote: »

Elong... if you don't understand sarcasm or that 99% of what i say is me joking... then you are too far gone

Well.. i think you are right. People *love* the huge battles. I see it on EU/PC every day. People rather waste an hour on a large, triple colored battle then on saving a keep or protecting a gate. You are not the only one and the trend is swapping over to EU. Selfish, ego or fun doesnt matter.

The real problem remains.There is no counter against a, lets say 50 ppl, momentum. Its a spear that revives itself at the tail. Thats not the three snakes of the ESO logo.

To get on with this problem we have to ask: Do we want to ask for a new large scale battleground-ish campaign or should we ask for new siege items like barricades ? Because right now we cant duck behind the corpse of our mount or build a keep out of trail wagons. But this is what we need when we keep on with very large battles on the meadow to stop a 50ppl momentum.

Thoragaal

Elong wrote: »

The GM of AotP has whispered me that he enjoys causing all the lag. So yes, that is one of their goals.

This is the type of evidence you'd need!

Ruckly wrote: »

If AotP has the sole intent of stacking 100 people in one place without any intent of creating lag behold it creates lag. They know it creates lag. Thus knowing it creates lag they do it anyways. So say they get the "manslaughter verdict". I wouldn't stop there because it would have to be further determined whether or not they are sane. The definition of criminal insanity is not knowing the difference between right and wrong in what you do. Thus if we were to use your scenario they would be found criminally insane.

Hahah, I would say Anyone playing during the lag in Cyrodiil isn't 100% sane :P
Look, I get your frustrations. I really do. I'm not on AotP's side, but I'm not automatically on yours.

When I started doing pvp I was solo. Wherever I went there were more enemies than I could handle. If I tried to take a resource I would get 5-10 enemies on me. And it was flat out impossible to play during the evenings because of the lag. Even if I had one guy pinned down, I would get CC'd by someone else, the lag made it impossible to break free and my target would get away.
I slowly started joining pick up groups to increase my chances of actually doing something other than just wasting time; dying due to being outnumbered, dying because of lag or seeing my target get away because of lag. And god forbid if I was able to actually pull off a combo.. either the first ability wouldn't go off.. if the first one did then the second one wouldn't. There's like 1/100 chance that I would be able to actually play. Even if someone died it gave no satisfaction, because I knew that the other guy that died probably pressed 100 buttons without anything happening.
I've always had random times for when I can play (mostly because I've had issues with my sleep for the past 20 years) and I was lucky to find a guild that's really active, with like 200 players and about the only time they're not doing anything serious is during the evenings (due to lag).
The guild's one intention is to win the campaigns.
I could've have tried to do something similar myself (create a guild), but I had no idea there were so many people in the same situation as me that got tired of constantly dying due to lag, feeling completely helpless, no joy inside Cyrodiil. Most of the time spent riding from one location to another.

Does it create lag when our group clashes with another big group around an emp keep/trying to dethrone/cut off enemy re-inforcements/taking or defending a scroll? Hell yeah!
But do you honestly think our intention is to create lag, just because it's a side effect of what we're trying to achieve?

Look at what Elong (above) said. That atleast is in the correct direction of the type of evidence for intent I'm talking about. But even then, I know hundreds of people replying sarcastic things, just because they're constantly being targeted by accusations and they're tired of it.
You don't need to say that they're doing it on purpose or not. More truthfully would be to say that you don't know and let ZOS be the judge. Meanwhile you do have the possability to make a guild/group of your own and go for more stategic options with less lag. I have plenty of times thought of going NA, to start out fresh. Maybe we can make something together if that happens?

AyelineESO

Reverb wrote: »

AyelineESO wrote: »

Reverb wrote: »

I feel like the solution to AotP is Shor. Even if the servers could handle it (and they very clearly cannot) there's no fun in engaging with 50+ enemies at every resource, or 75+ sweeping like locusts through the map. There's another server out there offering better performance.

Im suprised that not a lot more people are doing this. I dont know AP or whatever they are called but I wonder what they'd do If one day the map doesent get contested by the other factions anymore and everyone (and yes I mean everyone - I know thats never gonna happen but lets just imagine it would be possible) would actively avoid them. Like, as soon as they get seen (no matter which campaign they show up)... boom, everyone switches campaigns leaving them to fight no1.

Would they actually flip every map they show up? Would they quit after some time? What else could you imagine would happen?

They're primarily pve'ers, so pvdooring an undefended map is right in their wheelhouse. It probably wouldn't deter them at all, and they'd be laughing the whole way to cap every scroll. Leaving the server would be for our own sanity and enjoyment of the game, not to send a message.

I see, interesting. PvE'ers and PvP newbs are usually easily turned off from PvP If things arent going the way they want them to go so I'd honestly fight their toxic way of playing with toxicity. Make their PvP experience as bad as possible/make them waste their time and effort and they'll be gone sooner or later. Honestly, why should you care about those people when they dont care about the rest of the playerbase in cyro?

Ruckly

Thoragaal wrote: »

Elong wrote: »

The GM of AotP has whispered me that he enjoys causing all the lag. So yes, that is one of their goals.

This is the type of evidence you'd need!

Ruckly wrote: »

If AotP has the sole intent of stacking 100 people in one place without any intent of creating lag behold it creates lag. They know it creates lag. Thus knowing it creates lag they do it anyways. So say they get the "manslaughter verdict". I wouldn't stop there because it would have to be further determined whether or not they are sane. The definition of criminal insanity is not knowing the difference between right and wrong in what you do. Thus if we were to use your scenario they would be found criminally insane.

Hahah, I would say Anyone playing during the lag in Cyrodiil isn't 100% sane :P
Look, I get your frustrations. I really do. I'm not on AotP's side, but I'm not automatically on yours.

When I started doing pvp I was solo. Wherever I went there were more enemies than I could handle. If I tried to take a resource I would get 5-10 enemies on me. And it was flat out impossible to play during the evenings because of the lag. Even if I had one guy pinned down, I would get CC'd by someone else, the lag made it impossible to break free and my target would get away.
I slowly started joining pick up groups to increase my chances of actually doing something other than just wasting time; dying due to being outnumbered, dying because of lag or seeing my target get away because of lag. And god forbid if I was able to actually pull off a combo.. either the first ability wouldn't go off.. if the first one did then the second one wouldn't. There's like 1/100 chance that I would be able to actually play. Even if someone died it gave no satisfaction, because I knew that the other guy that died probably pressed 100 buttons without anything happening.
I've always had random times for when I can play (mostly because I've had issues with my sleep for the past 20 years) and I was lucky to find a guild that's really active, with like 200 players and about the only time they're not doing anything serious is during the evenings (due to lag).
The guild's one intention is to win the campaigns.
I could've have tried to do something similar myself (create a guild), but I had no idea there were so many people in the same situation as me that got tired of constantly dying due to lag, feeling completely helpless, no joy inside Cyrodiil. Most of the time spent riding from one location to another.

Does it create lag when our group clashes with another big group around an emp keep/trying to dethrone/cut off enemy re-inforcements/taking or defending a scroll? Hell yeah!
But do you honestly think our intention is to create lag, just because it's a side effect of what we're trying to achieve?

Look at what Elong (above) said. That atleast is in the correct direction of the type of evidence for intent I'm talking about. But even then, I know hundreds of people replying sarcastic things, just because they're constantly being targeted by accusations and they're tired of it.
You don't need to say that they're doing it on purpose or not. More truthfully would be to say that you don't know and let ZOS be the judge. Meanwhile you do have the possability to make a guild/group of your own and go for more stategic options with less lag. I have plenty of times thought of going NA, to start out fresh. Maybe we can make something together if that happens?

EP was lag bombing give me a break. The campaign is sabotaged. If you play an EP toon in cyrodill it is Elder Scrolls with the difficulty slider on the lowest setting. Getting numbers on DC side during prime-time isn't easy. And now it is gone the balance that has built up between faction pops. People want to play the game with the difficulty slider set on the lowest setting. The last great campaign was probably the one before murkmire was released. Now it is a vainglory...it is a body count game or a fancy TDM. I guess that is where DC does have advantage because where it really matters even though DC terrain sucks there are not a lot of corridors for ball groups to troll. The TDM is relatively open. Although if information passes to certain there will probably be more lag shank to keep DC fun in check.

Ralamil

AllegraLionheart wrote: »

_Crow wrote: »

My guild (AP not AoTOP ), Is pulling players into Cyro that have never played before, people are logging in to just play with us in mass. What's funny is that WAY more people like Zerging then don't... which is why Zergs are a thing LOL.

People hate on us every night, but the funny thing is, the other big guilds that bring in the most players into PvP that actually do stuff in cyro and make PvP better, don't hate us, and even want to GvG us! The people hating on us are the "Zone generals" that no one wants around anymore because Guilds have taken over, and solo players that zerg surf, cry about zergs, and don't go play in Shor for some reason.

AP helps players that guilds have closed their doors to, that like teamwork, like a chill environment, and want to learn more about the basics of PvP

We now split up our 72+ man raids when we need to and take multiple keeps at once, and if AD or DC stack, we are going to stack when we need to. We are growing bigger every day and we are going to keep helping new players, and we are going to keep getting more powerful, so get used to seeing us

This is what I came here for. Crow's a good dude, and tbh he takes a lot of the inexperienced PUGs and lets them have fun and learn in a supportive environment. A lot of the pro guilds don't do that as readily.
AND he took the advice from a lot of folks to split up the groups into different areas with multiple raid leads on the super heavy raids. It's done a lot for the lag, in my experience.

However... AP is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself, which is a less-than-optimized Cyrodiil. It's been this way for a while.
Cyro is clearly built for warfare on a large scale. MASSIVE groups WILL converge at some battles, and we've experience siege and skills not firing, massive crashing, etc. when the servers get bogged down with 150+ people in a multi-faction stack fighting over a scroll, etc. If this was optimized at its maximum end, then the lag which follows AP around wouldn't be a problem beyond being a LOT of players (a non-issue in a warfare-sized game).

No, AotP is very much the problem right now because, yes while the server performance is the ultimate cause, Crowe and AotP are purposefully exploiting that fact to lag the game to *** for everyone involved in their fights.

Wrangling a bunch of pugs who are incompetent in less than 72 is not a "good guy." It's someone using the masses for his own purposes. You're not going to magically get better playing in a horde where your individual contribution is basically negligible compared to your negative impact on server stability.

You do not only stack when AD or DC stack. You stack whenever you *** can. We're already used to seeing you. And we pity your inability to be considered a threat any other way.

Ruckly

This campaign has completely fallen apart. I imagine it will cause withdrawal in some players because there is nothing to do. It is either too easy or you are stonewalled. No epic fort battles at all. The PC NA Vivec campaign has reached the nihilist apex. This because the problem in the OP hasn't been solved.

GAME OVER

NBrookus

Thoragaal wrote: »

Meanwhile you do have the possability to make a guild/group of your own and go for more stategic options with less lag.

That doesn't work. It lags all the way on the other side of the map when this stuff is going on if you even try to buff inside an empty outpost. Literally 3-4 second latency.

My schedule has had me busy daytimes so I've been trying to play in prime time on DC. I think the EP faction stack is getting worse. I've seen every faction at various times stack to take a meaningless outpost or similar, but the stack usually peters out and splits up after a while. 80 people taking a resource and setting up siege for one person trying to get out the way of the stampede is a *bit* extreme.

I miss doors on resource towers; you could run in, pop an invis pot and be out the back before most zergs realized there was an exit.

Mazbt

Multi-raid stealth bombs...Don't even know what to say about that.

frozywozy

Yesterday I was playing with 6-8 friends in a group. AotP moved toward us with 60+ players at high speed and half of my group crashed. I mentioned in zone chat and got as a reply a bunch of their people being proud and laughing about it.

I heard that they have a discord lobby dedicated to the rage whispers that they all laugh about.

I mean, they do bring 70 players together so they must have some ultimate sentence they bring to justify their behaviors and make them feel better about themselves. I wonder if it's still the good old "It's on ZOS to fix their game, we are just doing what was promised at release, epic large scale battles".

JumpAllOver

Joy_Division wrote: »

At this point ZOS either needs to invest the resources to make their servers better handle how PvP plays out (like I heard that Guild Wars did) or they need to invest the resources in coming up with more enticing objectives away from keeps that taking won't be akin to kicking a hornet's nest. Either way, ZOS has to invest resources because after 4+ years we know how Cyrodiil plays out.

During the time I played GW2, ArenaNet never really fixed the server performance. It was a big meme in the World vs. World (kinda like Cyrodiil) community. They did attempt some bandaid fixes, like lowering faction caps from ~75 to ~65 players per map (official numbers were never confirmed afaik), but if there was a big faction threeway fight (usual numbers around 50v50v50) the server just took a big dump on everyone for a few minutes. I quit GW2 for a number of reasons back in January 2017, so the performance might've gotten better since, but before that (2014-17, when I was playing), there never was any real improvement.

Sadly, I see many parallels with ESO's Cyrodiil. Even if you've never played GW2, I'm sure the meme video might strike a few familiar chords.

RDMyers65b14_ESO

frozywozy wrote: »

Yesterday I was playing with 6-8 friends in a group. AotP moved toward us with 60+ players at high speed and half of my group crashed. I mentioned in zone chat and got as a reply a bunch of their people being proud and laughing about it.

I heard that they have a discord lobby dedicated to the rage whispers that they all laugh about.

I mean, they do bring 70 players together so they must have some ultimate sentence they bring to justify their behaviors and make them feel better about themselves. I wonder if it's still the good old "It's on ZOS to fix their game, we are just doing what was promised at release, epic large scale battles".

When you have one of the members of the most COMPETENT EP guild saying that AP is a problem, then it is a very serious problem. I know that my PVP guild would rather fight a fair fight against DRAC who runs in about equal numbers anyday over the zergblob that is AP. Even though Drac wipes us more than not, it is fun. Crashing due to lag, being told by the game 'Unable to connect to the game server' multiple times and then finally after 10 to 15 minutes and then back in queue only to get back to Cyrodil is NOT fun.

But, I think that I have it figured out. AP HATES PVP. Therefore, they are going to destroy Cyrodiil to make it safe for PVE.

Wrathmane

So this is ultimately the problem I've been having as well....... my question is how do they stay log on? how come they don't constantly crash.... last night I made the mistake of getting to close to Sej while AP was capturing it...... after my crash I got the "unable to connect to the game server" five times before I was able to get back in...... Thats a problem.... and I'm EP.... when your crashing out your allies. Why is it so bad to spread your raids out to multiple objectives instead of taking one crashing everyone out around you then moving to the next.... while leaving the one you left behind to fall...

I don't know..... I like PVPing, been doing it since launch....... this is the worst this have been..... and if it being caused by my "allies" and they are laughing about it.... so not good.

TBois

If everyone loses a third of their grp during a crash, a normal raid will have 16 while they will have 2 full raids