Idea to Reduce Incentive to Zerging

randomguy

So we all love zerging, I know I do. I play in lots of zerg guilds. Sometime, I'll join a pug zerg. Zerging is great! However, lately there have been certain groups that run over 24 players. Sure, there are going to be times when more than 24 players of the same faction are present in at one moment in time at a particular location, say, Chalman. Every DC i know loves their potatoes and they sure as hell love Chalman, so inevitably, they will show up at Chalman and say 40 are there at one time. but, this is kind of a problem. What's wrong with a good ol' time at Chalman with your fellow DC potatoes? Well for starters there's the lag issues. Once an area gets too populated the server starts to suffer. Honestly, that's the main issue. There are other things I perceive to be issues, like getting zerged down by 40 players, but hey maybe that's me.

The game was designed for large scale group combat, which means sometimes there are huge battles of 40 EP players fighting 40 DC players fighting 40 AD players. That's grand. I love these fights. They don't happen all the time though, and when they do, it can be a bit laggy. Sometimes, the lag is so bad you just get booted from the server. So I was thinking we could try to encourage other kinds of fights, smaller fights, that would be fun for people who aren't zerging all the time like I am. So far, the way I see it, there is an incentive to zerging and PvDooring. PvDooring is something that should be discouraged I think. Sure, its great to have some AP, continuous attack bonus, and extra points on the board for your alliance, but the sole objective of the alliance war should not be merely taking empty keeps for virtual points in a virtual world, as fun as that may be. I think, and I hope the developers agree, that the alliance war should mostly consist of PvP that results in capturing resources, taking keeps, and securing elder scrolls.

Today in the afternoon, there was a zerg guild that was almost exclusively PvDooring with many players, over 24 players they had several groups. Later today, there was another zerg running, which had several groups stacked together (50 or more players from the same faction in groups coordinating together). The first group was DC, the second was EP. The EP group was more or less unstoppable, there were no other groups to oppose it. If both DC and EP groups had run at the same time, maybe the DC would be able to stop the EP. Anyway, this EP group caused extreme lag, and this contributed to their "unstoppableness" to the point that DC players resorted to PvDooring keeps the EP group was not at. Sure they could have attacked AD or ERP or do other fun stuff, but basically this EP group forced DC to PvDoor since there was nothing that could have been done to stop them. Right now, there is no incentive to play in small groups nor is there a penalty for large groups. Both the DC and EP zergs are getting AP for capturing keeps and killing players, the same that would have been awarded a smaller group for the same feat.

Now I know you are wondering, what's my idea. It better be good because you just had to read all that text to get here. So here it is, cap alliance point gains at 24 players, or hell even 12 would be appreciated. Make zergers earn 0 ap basically. I know you guys have some fancy way of capping drops for world bosses at 12, so I think this is something you could pull off. Also, I would like to see alliance point gains scale upward based on how many people are in your group. Solo players should be rewarded for their bravery and gain more AP. Maybe that will encourage everyone to run in comm's instead of grouping, but if the alliance point gains are capped at 24 anyway, then we won't see insane group sizes as we have been witness to in Cyrodiil lately.

This idea will not be popular, especially because a lot of players (like myself) zerg. But I hope it will help change the way people zerg, and we can all say goodbye to (I think Crow was bragging about 70+ people in group?) insane zergs that ruin the fun for everyone. The main problem with my idea is that it will change the way people earn AP from keep ticks, so that only the first 24 (or whatever number) gain AP. I think this will also give incentive for more elite groups to run smaller and ball harder so to speak, and it would encourage people to split up and not coalesce at the same location just because we all want to potato to Chal.

Thanks for reading and please bump or respond so that devs will pay attention to my great idea! Huehuehue

_Crow

I was bragging about 86* people thank you very much!

And tbh, you take zergs out of the game, all you have is small scale fighting small scale, which will turn off casual players (majority of players), and ruin the last good campaign in the game. take out zergs and you have Shor... which everyone loves to play in...... right?

Also, if there are more "Elite Ball groups" around, people are going to want to zerg even more so they have a chance against the people who play the game 24/7

Ackwalan

Didn't we already go over this?

Draxys

1) dynamic ultimate

2) purge bug

3) profit

amir412

Best combat system there is in the market, get wasted on a zergling meta players.
Enough said.

idk

The idea fails from the start. There is an obvious work around that makes the idea totally useless. Just split the group in half and operate the two groups as one.

You cannot make it work by punishing players if they are not in the large group just because they are near a large group. That would put to much burden on even solo players to run around counting how many are there to see if they should help or move on. Just a bad idea from the start.

So it is not an issue of being a popular or unpopular idea. The idea is just not good for the game.

Vapirko

idk wrote: »

The idea fails from the start. There is an obvious work around that makes the idea totally useless. Just split the group in half and operate the two groups as one.

You cannot make it work by punishing players if they are not in the large group just because they are near a large group. That would put to much burden on even solo players to run around counting how many are there to see if they should help or move on. Just a bad idea from the start.

So it is not an issue of being a popular or unpopular idea. The idea is just not good for the game.

I don’t think it’s supposed to be a proximity thing, simply if you’re grouped with more than 12 players you earn no AP. People not in your group next to you (Zerg surfers) still earn AP. Frankly I’m for any idea that try’s to discourage zergs. From what I’ve seen Zerg types thrive on knowing how many players are next to them in their group, they feel safe in numbers. They want to know where people are going. So if you don’t see a bunch of group mates nearby they are more likely to panic, so anything that breaks up the mob mentality is a plus.

And to the people saying there would only be small scale without zergs, well no that’s just not true. There’s a massive difference between small scale (2-6?) and zergs. There’s a lot that could be done to discourage Zergs, and Cyrodiil is in no way in any danger of becoming only small scale.

ezio45

hears my veiw point on this.

I think cyro SHOULD be mainly large scale, its suppose to be a war with massive armies typing to conquer the map. When im in cyro i want to play the map, take keeps.

I dont care about killing 1 or 2 players for ap or even farming players for ap. Its not what i go to cyro for, when I want to do small scale i go to bgs.

Dont have interest in pvdoor or again killing 1 to 2 but it is a byproduct of doing what, imo, cyro is about.

if there is a way to refine that in a good way, im all for it. encouraging players to go defend and take keeps, play the map, instead of noone defending keeps or zergs worrying about 1 or 2 players then thats great. discouraging zergs though isnt what I want for cyro and it goes against what cyro should be.

gepe87

The only way is reworking skills just for pvp. It would take a lot of work, so it wont happen.

kylewwefan

Terribad idea. Better leave it up to someone with more insight to make decisions. Better how it is now than this idea.

I think pretty much everyone gets a slice of the pie at dolmens and such now. It’s better that way.

They do this idea with Molag Bal in the sewers. Never bothered to fix it. It blows. Could be why the imperial city is so dead.

JaZ2091

Everytime a zerg logs on, I just hop factions and leech AP.

MalagenR

What I think would be great is if they broke up Cyrodil into 3 distinct server nodes. Similar to the way EVE Online was set up.

The bridges and gates could function as entrances to each "instance" and each "instance" can fit as many players as was previously allowed. But, this would I think break up the server wide lag.

The only thing is that we might lose out on the ability to destroy bridges and gates. Which let's be honest..... is a really stupid concept in practice now that we've witnessed it.

"Let's put up breakable gates / bridges, but then add a goat path which means that destroying a bridge / gate has absolutely no impact on an organized group"

Doesn't make sense at all.

Recremen

_Crow wrote: »

Also, if there are more "Elite Ball groups" around, people are going to want to zerg even more so they have a chance against the people who play the game 24/7

LOL, honey, a lot of players in these "Elite Ball Groups" are only PvPing about six hours a week. If you're having trouble fighting them then you just have bad fundamentals.

TBois

Recremen wrote: »

_Crow wrote: »

Also, if there are more "Elite Ball groups" around, people are going to want to zerg even more so they have a chance against the people who play the game 24/7

LOL, honey, a lot of players in these "Elite Ball Groups" are only PvPing about six hours a week. If you're having trouble fighting them then you just have bad fundamentals.

This is also a time in eso with historically the least number of effective raid groups in my opinion.

Edit: I also believe that it would be better to incentivise small grp play rather than penalize large grp play.

Elong

Make the group cap 12, like trials.

Yes I know people will still get in a discord with 86 people, and brag about it, but it will help.

Ralamil

_Crow wrote: »

I was bragging about 86* people thank you very much!

And this is why you and your guild are a cancer to this game. If you can't compete against AD or DC with 12-24 people, maybe you shouldn't be a GM or a raid leader?

Back to the topic of the post:

I think what would ultimately be better is if they fix the server architecture or whatever the hell is wrong with it so that these massive zergs can't exploit the game to generate a fuckton of lag.

Literally the ONLY reason they win fights as frequently as they do is because they cripple the server, and field the numbers to get enough of their skills to go off to kill the groups who are suffering from an inability to fire skills. It's not because they're skilled players. It's not because they're learning and improving at gameplay. It's because they're intentionally breaking the server's ability to be performant.