Large group play, heavy outnumbering and zerging need to be more difficult

Fawn4287

Now first and foremost I’m not trying to say “make it ez pz so I can get 400 views on my unkillable stamsorc 1vX montage greymoor video”, but playing in a large group is just so incredibly and ridiculously easy. You can be so bad that you don’t even break CCs but thankfully with the game being comprised of 40% healers and everyone with a resto staff spamming auto aim regen its actually so hard to kill grouped people a lot of the time. Im not saying I should be able to survive a 24 man zerg spamming attacks at me but when its 4 or 5 bad players v 1 I don’t want to be spammed with back to back fossilise/streaks whilst having back to back mets dropped on me, getting triple imcapped by a group of nightblades or absolutely spammed with roots and snares that half seem to persist through shuffle. Again I’m not saying that it should be easy by any means but I shouldn’t be seeing 3/5 death recap skills being single target ults from uncoordinated players that can’t do much more than spam light attacks. Dynamic ulti gain definitely needs to be implemented again, not having the outnumbered player generate more ult but have the group thats heavily outnumbering generate far, far less. Significantly nerf cross healing is desperately needed, its crazy how much healing a 35k health warden or templar tank can pump out, and with such cheap but very strong healing ultimates its so difficult to kill anyone once one of these players comes by and supplements everyones healing with their bogdan and healing repertoire. Once again I don’t want it to gain anything but I want raise the skill gap of group play and it to require players to do more than spam regen, cleanse and magcro bomb for kills.

GrumpyDuckling

Fawn4287 wrote: »

but when its 4 or 5 bad players v 1 I don’t want to be spammed with back to back fossilise/streaks whilst having back to back mets dropped on me, getting triple imcapped by a group of nightblades or absolutely spammed with roots and snares that half seem to persist through shuffle.

Yes, I don't want enemy players using skills and ultimates against me either...

idk

I am not sure where to start with a reply. The thread seems to start off talking about large groups which would be somewhere more than 10 players but ends up talking about 4 or 5 players against one which is far from a large group.

When solo against a small group several factors play a key role. First is player skill and the internet is full of 1vX against potatoes. The second factor is the use of the environment to LoS but patience and some skill still play a role here. Again, the internet is full of videos of a player running around rocks while several players trying to kill them. It can be funny.

Unless there is a very serious skill level difference a single player going up against a small group will be at a disadvantage.

SmukkeHeks

It’s safe zone warmongering.

When they can’t fix racial passives, nightblades or lag, this isn’t going to be addressed either

Bergzorn

idk wrote: »

Unless there is a very serious skill level difference a single player going up against a small group will be at a disadvantage.

Yes, and there is nothing wrong with that, IMO.

But on top of the natural advantage of larger numbers, do the groups really need further strong buffs from game mechanics without much investment from their side, like smart cross healing, while the solo player gets debuffed by multiple skills, glyphs, and poisons to Oblivion?

It's an MMO, group play should be viable and encouraged. But the game is also designed for solo and smallscale play to be viable, it just has been made harder and harder over the years, by direct changes and by how the playerbase has changed. It's time for ZOS to find a working way to break up at least the huge faction stack zergs a bit.

idk

Bergzorn wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Unless there is a very serious skill level difference a single player going up against a small group will be at a disadvantage.

Yes, and there is nothing wrong with that, IMO.

But on top of the natural advantage of larger numbers, do the groups really need further strong buffs from game mechanics without much investment from their side, like smart cross healing, while the solo player gets debuffed by multiple skills, glyphs, and poisons to Oblivion?

It's an MMO, group play should be viable and encouraged. But the game is also designed for solo and smallscale play to be viable, it just has been made harder and harder over the years, by direct changes and by how the playerbase has changed. It's time for ZOS to find a working way to break up at least the huge faction stack zergs a bit.

As someone who pretty much sticks to a small group and runs solo when they are not around I strongly say yes, that there should be an advantage when running in a group. ESO Cyrodiil is designed for group PvP. To run solo in it is very much a choice I enjoy but there are zero reasons to expect a balance between a solo player and an organized group, or even a group of random players. Heck, there should be an advantage when someone else can heal you while you continue to do damage and an advantage when you can slot something else for A certain buff (or even cleanse) because someone else in your group can do so.

Further, a small scale works great. A disciplined group with a good leader can take out a zerg several times their size. We often do so.

PvP combat should not be balanced to the solo player which seems to be what you are suggesting when you complain about the advantages of a group.

Qbiken

In my opinion a few things should happen in PvP:
* Reduce group size to 12: This does not go against the AvAvA design because you can still participate in large scale fights. No it doesn't prevent people from stacking multiple 12 man groups on top of eachother but that's where my next suggestion comes in. No one needs a 24 man group to accomplish anything in Cyrodil. + smaller groups gives better performance. The fewer bigger ballgroups running around spamming AoE's, the better performance.

* Limit cross healing to people within your group. This mea s you can only receive and give healing to people you're grouped wtih. This means as a soloplayer/un-grouped player, your heals will only go to yourself (looking at you rapid regen). This change also promotes group play because if you want to have an impact in a large scale fight, you need to group up if you want to support your allies.

These two changes benefits everyone in Cyrodil. Only people I see that are against similar suggestions are the ones who wants to continue with their unhealthy playstyle of running in 24+ man groups that causes the majority of all problems in Cyrodil.

Integral1900

Complaining about big mobs of players in cyrodiil is like playing street fighter and saying it’s okay but the whole ‘one on one’ thing gets a bit dull 🤓

If you don’t want to end up fighting an army don’t go walking around a battlefield 😆

We have duels for a reason 😇 ...so I can enjoy avoiding yet another type of pvp...

Nyteshade

Bergzorn wrote: »

It's an MMO, group play should be viable and encouraged. But the game is also designed for solo and smallscale play to be viable, it just has been made harder and harder over the years, by direct changes and by how the playerbase has changed. It's time for ZOS to find a working way to break up at least the huge faction stack zergs a bit.

But it's really not time for that. See, AvAvA was designed from the beginning as faction wars. Castles, siege, large numbers, group objectives.

That's how it was advertised and sold. No confusion about it. It's got nothing to do with player base changing, aside from a segment of the population who think that they can buy something sold to them as a pickup truck and get mad when it's not a sports car.

The solo and small scale play you speak of was talked about for PvE, since the beginning. Not AvA. Now they did hear the players base and add in BG's and dueling for small scale PvP.

Sorry but AvA was never, and never should, be adjusted for solo roaming.

I prefer solo roaming too, even though I am not good at it. But I realize I'm playing contrary to the design and will get wrecked. A lot.

Taleof2Cities

Solo and small man groups have to be smarter about picking the right fights, too.

You can't go head-first into a ball group or zerg ... and then come to the forums complaining that fossilize/streak/triple incaps/group size/cross-heals need to be nerfed.

Berenhir

I don't think that large group play needs to be more difficult than it is now. Playing in a large group already has a lot of drawbacks looking at actual gameplay and reward mechanics but is still very popular because most players are just too bad to do anything else. Their only strategy to kill other players is to overwhelm them with numbers so their individual performance does not matter much.

Fawn4287 wrote: »

the game being comprised of 40% healers

There are very few healers worthy to be mentioned in PvP.

Fawn4287 wrote: »

back to back fossilise/streaks [...] back to back mets dropped on me, getting triple imcapped by a group of nightblades [...] 3/5 death recap skills being single target ults

Fawn4287 wrote: »

from uncoordinated players that can’t do much more than spam light attacks

You are contradicting yourself. You are getting ult-dumped by people only able to spam light attacks?

Fawn4287 wrote: »

but I want raise the skill gap of group play and it to require players to do more than spam regen, cleanse and magcro bomb for kills.

If you want to fight outnumbered against larger groups, maybe you should just get good yourself?

DocFrost72

Qbiken wrote: »

In my opinion a few things should happen in PvP:
* Reduce group size to 12: This does not go against the AvAvA design because you can still participate in large scale fights. No it doesn't prevent people from stacking multiple 12 man groups on top of eachother but that's where my next suggestion comes in. No one needs a 24 man group to accomplish anything in Cyrodil. + smaller groups gives better performance. The fewer bigger ballgroups running around spamming AoE's, the better performance.

* Limit cross healing to people within your group. This mea s you can only receive and give healing to people you're grouped wtih. This means as a soloplayer/un-grouped player, your heals will only go to yourself (looking at you rapid regen). This change also promotes group play because if you want to have an impact in a large scale fight, you need to group up if you want to support your allies.

These two changes benefits everyone in Cyrodil. Only people I see that are against similar suggestions are the ones who wants to continue with their unhealthy playstyle of running in 24+ man groups that causes the majority of all problems in Cyrodil.

I'm occasionally a solo healer that goes to keep defense to help the 4 defenders out against the 16-20 man take forces. To be clear, under your proposed changes I'd have to

-get their attention for group
-ensure they were all in the same group
-group any newcomers
-leave group when done.

That's a lot of hassle I don't really want to go through, respectfully.

OBJnoob

This thread is a lot better than the last one on this topic. I think there are some legitimately good ideas to “fix the Zerg”. Limiting group sizes... probably a good idea... doesn’t really effect anything or anybody. Groups of 16 instead of 20? Cool. 12? Hmm maybe.

I think we should be careful with some of the other suggestions though. Some of these things aren’t only strong in groups they are nice for solo players too.

“We” thought that cross healing was too strong so we got healing nerfed by 20%. We thought to ourselves... too many people spamming rapid regen in a tiny area... 20% of 4x rapid regens is more than 20% of 1x rapid regens... this cuts group healing more than it cuts solo healing, this is obviously a good idea.

Oops. Getting melted. Solo players complaining they can’t heal. Surprise surprise, the 20 man group can still heal. Changed their gear. Not a big deal— they have protection. You can’t change your build the same way they did because you need to be balanced but they don’t.

What’s going to happen if we stop letting heals go to anyone not in your group? Is that a nerf to zergs? Why? They have a full group. The solo player is the one that might happen across a friendly but receive no help. There is now a clear and obvious benefit to grouping.

Which there always will be, unless we accept some really severe and frankly really bad punishments/debuffs. Which I will not.

Limiting group size is about the only change I can personally support. And maybe even subdividing ap further than it already is based on how many allies were involved.

Anything that more literally effects combat would go against the intended game design. More importantly it would go against sportsmanship.

A group of 3 isn’t going to beat a group of 10. They just aren’t. Not if all players involved are equal. It’s funny to me that the 3 can lose, and lose bad, and then leave with the feeling that “that whole Zerg is trash.” That Zerg just clapped you over and over. It’s time to show just a little respect I think. A little appreciation for the obvious. Grouping and teamwork is beneficial, and trying to mitigate such a FAIR and obvious fact of life is going to be an exercise in futility.

Emma_Overload

NB4 Emma Overload's obligatory "ZOS loves zergs" comment!

Oh, wait...

erio

Fawn4287 wrote: »

Now first and foremost I’m not trying to say “make it ez pz so I can get 400 views on my unkillable stamsorc 1vX montage greymoor video”, but playing in a large group is just so incredibly and ridiculously easy. You can be so bad that you don’t even break CCs but thankfully with the game being comprised of 40% healers and everyone with a resto staff spamming auto aim regen its actually so hard to kill grouped people a lot of the time. Im not saying I should be able to survive a 24 man zerg spamming attacks at me but when its 4 or 5 bad players v 1 I don’t want to be spammed with back to back fossilise/streaks whilst having back to back mets dropped on me, getting triple imcapped by a group of nightblades or absolutely spammed with roots and snares that half seem to persist through shuffle. Again I’m not saying that it should be easy by any means but I shouldn’t be seeing 3/5 death recap skills being single target ults from uncoordinated players that can’t do much more than spam light attacks. Dynamic ulti gain definitely needs to be implemented again, not having the outnumbered player generate more ult but have the group thats heavily outnumbering generate far, far less. Significantly nerf cross healing is desperately needed, its crazy how much healing a 35k health warden or templar tank can pump out, and with such cheap but very strong healing ultimates its so difficult to kill anyone once one of these players comes by and supplements everyones healing with their bogdan and healing repertoire. Once again I don’t want it to gain anything but I want raise the skill gap of group play and it to require players to do more than spam regen, cleanse and magcro bomb for kills.

What, are we putting social distancing into pvp now too?

technohic

Just make heals require targets rather than smart targeting. or at least do what 5gey did with HTD/BOL which requires you to be facing your healed targets. Enough of just spamming and it automatically picking who needs what.

Kartalin

technohic wrote: »

Just make heals require targets rather than smart targeting. or at least do what 5gey did with HTD/BOL which requires you to be facing your healed targets. Enough of just spamming and it automatically picking who needs what.

So fire and forget AOE damage is okay but not heals? Should AOE heals function like damage, either PBAOE or ground targeted with a radius? Just playing devil’s advocate here. Actually I would love for radiant regen to function like echoing vigor.

idk

Qbiken wrote: »

In my opinion a few things should happen in PvP:
* Reduce group size to 12: This does not go against the AvAvA design because you can still participate in large scale fights. No it doesn't prevent people from stacking multiple 12 man groups on top of eachother but that's where my next suggestion comes in. No one needs a 24 man group to accomplish anything in Cyrodil. + smaller groups gives better performance. The fewer bigger ballgroups running around spamming AoE's, the better performance.

* Limit cross healing to people within your group. This mea s you can only receive and give healing to people you're grouped wtih. This means as a soloplayer/un-grouped player, your heals will only go to yourself (looking at you rapid regen). This change also promotes group play because if you want to have an impact in a large scale fight, you need to group up if you want to support your allies.

These two changes benefits everyone in Cyrodil. Only people I see that are against similar suggestions are the ones who wants to continue with their unhealthy playstyle of running in 24+ man groups that causes the majority of all problems in Cyrodil.

True, your first point does not go against the idea of AvA. However, your second point does. I have never seen a PvP where I could not use a group heal on a team member yet the second point here suggests exactly that.

Also, you seem to have missed OP's point. They specifically state this not about 24 man groups but their survival against 4-5 men groups when they are solo.

Dr_Ganknstein

They can make it more laggy and add loading screens i guess.

technohic

Kartalin wrote: »

technohic wrote: »

Just make heals require targets rather than smart targeting. or at least do what 5gey did with HTD/BOL which requires you to be facing your healed targets. Enough of just spamming and it automatically picking who needs what.

So fire and forget AOE damage is okay but not heals? Should AOE heals function like damage, either PBAOE or ground targeted with a radius? Just playing devil’s advocate here. Actually I would love for radiant regen to function like echoing vigor.

You can make the PBAOE heals with as small a radius and coefficient, sure. The spam of regen flashing out like a spider web like 20m any direction right to the target in need is too much though.

Nord_Raseri

On my server "large groups" is usually 50 players to the imminent server zerg that comes crashing through the map.

SodanTok

Qbiken wrote: »

In my opinion a few things should happen in PvP:
* Reduce group size to 12: This does not go against the AvAvA design because you can still participate in large scale fights. No it doesn't prevent people from stacking multiple 12 man groups on top of eachother but that's where my next suggestion comes in. No one needs a 24 man group to accomplish anything in Cyrodil. + smaller groups gives better performance. The fewer bigger ballgroups running around spamming AoE's, the better performance.

* Limit cross healing to people within your group. This mea s you can only receive and give healing to people you're grouped wtih. This means as a soloplayer/un-grouped player, your heals will only go to yourself (looking at you rapid regen). This change also promotes group play because if you want to have an impact in a large scale fight, you need to group up if you want to support your allies.

These two changes benefits everyone in Cyrodil. Only people I see that are against similar suggestions are the ones who wants to continue with their unhealthy playstyle of running in 24+ man groups that causes the majority of all problems in Cyrodil.

Good attempt to shut down any argument quickly. You dont need to be running 24+ man groups to enjoy large scale AvA solo or in small group of friends scattered around the battlefield and there is nothing unhealthy on that. Only ingroup healing goes against ESO playstyle and punishes hard purely casual players while merely annoys a bit premade groups.

idk

Nord_Raseri wrote: »

On my server "large groups" is usually 50 players to the imminent server zerg that comes crashing through the map.

In the early months of the game, there were some groups over 75 players large. In one zerg they had 4 groups going, all working together. Of course, we had a larger player cap back then and less load on the server.

But again, OP is actually focused on being disadvantaged against groups of only 4 or 5 players against them solo.

Toc de Malsvi

Qbiken wrote: »

In my opinion a few things should happen in PvP:
* Reduce group size to 12: This does not go against the AvAvA design because you can still participate in large scale fights. No it doesn't prevent people from stacking multiple 12 man groups on top of eachother but that's where my next suggestion comes in. No one needs a 24 man group to accomplish anything in Cyrodil. + smaller groups gives better performance. The fewer bigger ballgroups running around spamming AoE's, the better performance.

* Limit cross healing to people within your group. This mea s you can only receive and give healing to people you're grouped wtih. This means as a soloplayer/un-grouped player, your heals will only go to yourself (looking at you rapid regen). This change also promotes group play because if you want to have an impact in a large scale fight, you need to group up if you want to support your allies.

These two changes benefits everyone in Cyrodil. Only people I see that are against similar suggestions are the ones who wants to continue with their unhealthy playstyle of running in 24+ man groups that causes the majority of all problems in Cyrodil.

I’m kinda thinking a bit of the opposite. Let people heal everyone. But don’t actually let people formally group. Then they are free to follow a specific player, or get on mics, or in chat to communicate. It won’t hinder groups from doing what they already do, but it will make it maybe a small bit less advantageous.

When I play I’m fighting for the Queen. I’m not fighting for a specific guild. It would be nice if people started seeing their faction as members of their team and not just focusing on their guildies. A change like this could foster more kindness between those of the same faction.

idk

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

Qbiken wrote: »

In my opinion a few things should happen in PvP:
* Reduce group size to 12: This does not go against the AvAvA design because you can still participate in large scale fights. No it doesn't prevent people from stacking multiple 12 man groups on top of eachother but that's where my next suggestion comes in. No one needs a 24 man group to accomplish anything in Cyrodil. + smaller groups gives better performance. The fewer bigger ballgroups running around spamming AoE's, the better performance.

* Limit cross healing to people within your group. This mea s you can only receive and give healing to people you're grouped wtih. This means as a soloplayer/un-grouped player, your heals will only go to yourself (looking at you rapid regen). This change also promotes group play because if you want to have an impact in a large scale fight, you need to group up if you want to support your allies.

These two changes benefits everyone in Cyrodil. Only people I see that are against similar suggestions are the ones who wants to continue with their unhealthy playstyle of running in 24+ man groups that causes the majority of all problems in Cyrodil.

I’m kinda thinking a bit of the opposite. Let people heal everyone. But don’t actually let people formally group. Then they are free to follow a specific player, or get on mics, or in chat to communicate. It won’t hinder groups from doing what they already do, but it will make it maybe a small bit less advantageous.

When I play I’m fighting for the Queen. I’m not fighting for a specific guild. It would be nice if people started seeing their faction as members of their team and not just focusing on their guildies. A change like this could foster more kindness between those of the same faction.

The issue with blocking grouping is it manes PvP guilds are worthless. Also, the grouping itself does not harm the server's performance. It is the sheer number of players in combat at one location. We see players flock to the same keep under attack regardless of being in a group or not. In fact, a group with a good leader will often set their own course and targets vs following sheep.

Qbiken

idk wrote: »

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

Qbiken wrote: »

In my opinion a few things should happen in PvP:
* Reduce group size to 12: This does not go against the AvAvA design because you can still participate in large scale fights. No it doesn't prevent people from stacking multiple 12 man groups on top of eachother but that's where my next suggestion comes in. No one needs a 24 man group to accomplish anything in Cyrodil. + smaller groups gives better performance. The fewer bigger ballgroups running around spamming AoE's, the better performance.

* Limit cross healing to people within your group. This mea s you can only receive and give healing to people you're grouped wtih. This means as a soloplayer/un-grouped player, your heals will only go to yourself (looking at you rapid regen). This change also promotes group play because if you want to have an impact in a large scale fight, you need to group up if you want to support your allies.

These two changes benefits everyone in Cyrodil. Only people I see that are against similar suggestions are the ones who wants to continue with their unhealthy playstyle of running in 24+ man groups that causes the majority of all problems in Cyrodil.

I’m kinda thinking a bit of the opposite. Let people heal everyone. But don’t actually let people formally group. Then they are free to follow a specific player, or get on mics, or in chat to communicate. It won’t hinder groups from doing what they already do, but it will make it maybe a small bit less advantageous.

When I play I’m fighting for the Queen. I’m not fighting for a specific guild. It would be nice if people started seeing their faction as members of their team and not just focusing on their guildies. A change like this could foster more kindness between those of the same faction.

The issue with blocking grouping is it manes PvP guilds are worthless. Also, the grouping itself does not harm the server's performance. It is the sheer number of players in combat at one location. We see players flock to the same keep under attack regardless of being in a group or not. In fact, a group with a good leader will often set their own course and targets vs following sheep.

This is where you're kinda wrong. A few months ago PCNA had a bug where people couldn't group up, and PvP on the main campaign during primetime wasn't laggy or malfunctioning (and that was with a pop locked campaign)

And I've I've during midyear event seen a clear pattern when performance goes down south. As soon as the ballgroups comes online, skills stops firing, delays becomes worse etc.

Even when campaigns are pop locked and no ballgroups are present the performance is manageable, but the moment they show up you might as well go off.

So yes, groups and their sheer size does affect performance. And people can make whatever excuse they want about how Cyrodil "was designed for large scale fights" etc. But guess what, the game can't handle them, so something needs to be changed.

idk

Qbiken wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

Qbiken wrote: »

In my opinion a few things should happen in PvP:
* Reduce group size to 12: This does not go against the AvAvA design because you can still participate in large scale fights. No it doesn't prevent people from stacking multiple 12 man groups on top of eachother but that's where my next suggestion comes in. No one needs a 24 man group to accomplish anything in Cyrodil. + smaller groups gives better performance. The fewer bigger ballgroups running around spamming AoE's, the better performance.

* Limit cross healing to people within your group. This mea s you can only receive and give healing to people you're grouped wtih. This means as a soloplayer/un-grouped player, your heals will only go to yourself (looking at you rapid regen). This change also promotes group play because if you want to have an impact in a large scale fight, you need to group up if you want to support your allies.

These two changes benefits everyone in Cyrodil. Only people I see that are against similar suggestions are the ones who wants to continue with their unhealthy playstyle of running in 24+ man groups that causes the majority of all problems in Cyrodil.

I’m kinda thinking a bit of the opposite. Let people heal everyone. But don’t actually let people formally group. Then they are free to follow a specific player, or get on mics, or in chat to communicate. It won’t hinder groups from doing what they already do, but it will make it maybe a small bit less advantageous.

When I play I’m fighting for the Queen. I’m not fighting for a specific guild. It would be nice if people started seeing their faction as members of their team and not just focusing on their guildies. A change like this could foster more kindness between those of the same faction.

The issue with blocking grouping is it manes PvP guilds are worthless. Also, the grouping itself does not harm the server's performance. It is the sheer number of players in combat at one location. We see players flock to the same keep under attack regardless of being in a group or not. In fact, a group with a good leader will often set their own course and targets vs following sheep.

This is where you're kinda wrong. A few months ago PCNA had a bug where people couldn't group up, and PvP on the main campaign during primetime wasn't laggy or malfunctioning (and that was with a pop locked campaign)

And I've I've during midyear event seen a clear pattern when performance goes down south. As soon as the ballgroups comes online, skills stops firing, delays becomes worse etc.

Even when campaigns are pop locked and no ballgroups are present the performance is manageable, but the moment they show up you might as well go off.

So yes, groups and their sheer size does affect performance. And people can make whatever excuse they want about how Cyrodil "was designed for large scale fights" etc. But guess what, the game can't handle them, so something needs to be changed.

The server being pop-locked is not the issue. It is the sheer number of players in a small area of the map in combat. Zos has even specifically stated this and nothing in what I quoted actually supports that grouping is the issue. It merely states more players entered the area and that seems to indicate that the number of players in the area hit a tipping point for the server. It is anecdotal at best.

katorga

Aren't BG's the solution for players who can't deal with large groups?

ESO is at its core an openworld, alliance v. alliance, pvp model. It will naturally gravitate toward large numbers of players trying to steam roll a map, and other groups gathering to counter them. It would happen even if you could not create groups at all in Cyro.

Toc de Malsvi

idk wrote: »

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

Qbiken wrote: »

In my opinion a few things should happen in PvP:
* Reduce group size to 12: This does not go against the AvAvA design because you can still participate in large scale fights. No it doesn't prevent people from stacking multiple 12 man groups on top of eachother but that's where my next suggestion comes in. No one needs a 24 man group to accomplish anything in Cyrodil. + smaller groups gives better performance. The fewer bigger ballgroups running around spamming AoE's, the better performance.

* Limit cross healing to people within your group. This mea s you can only receive and give healing to people you're grouped wtih. This means as a soloplayer/un-grouped player, your heals will only go to yourself (looking at you rapid regen). This change also promotes group play because if you want to have an impact in a large scale fight, you need to group up if you want to support your allies.

These two changes benefits everyone in Cyrodil. Only people I see that are against similar suggestions are the ones who wants to continue with their unhealthy playstyle of running in 24+ man groups that causes the majority of all problems in Cyrodil.

I’m kinda thinking a bit of the opposite. Let people heal everyone. But don’t actually let people formally group. Then they are free to follow a specific player, or get on mics, or in chat to communicate. It won’t hinder groups from doing what they already do, but it will make it maybe a small bit less advantageous.

When I play I’m fighting for the Queen. I’m not fighting for a specific guild. It would be nice if people started seeing their faction as members of their team and not just focusing on their guildies. A change like this could foster more kindness between those of the same faction.

The issue with blocking grouping is it manes PvP guilds are worthless. Also, the grouping itself does not harm the server's performance. It is the sheer number of players in combat at one location. We see players flock to the same keep under attack regardless of being in a group or not. In fact, a group with a good leader will often set their own course and targets vs following sheep.

I don’t think this is good counterpoint.

Can PVP guilds not go into Cyrodiil together?
Can PVP guilds not communicate over mics?

The only thing this does is slightly reduce the effective information organized groups receive in combat. Knowing if their members are close and knowing if their members are in danger, without knowing where their members are exactly.

It won’t greatly reduce server lag, if at all. It will foster greater unity among factions. You won’t immediately know if the fellow red/blue/yellow next to you is your group/guild member immediately at a glance.

It’s supposed to be AvAvA, not yellow guild 1 vs red guild 3 vs blue randoms.

There is no chain of command in Cyrodiil. Allowing sub grouping fractures factions and subverts faction identity, kinsmanship, and loyalty.

Fawn4287

Qbiken wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

Qbiken wrote: »

In my opinion a few things should happen in PvP:
* Reduce group size to 12: This does not go against the AvAvA design because you can still participate in large scale fights. No it doesn't prevent people from stacking multiple 12 man groups on top of eachother but that's where my next suggestion comes in. No one needs a 24 man group to accomplish anything in Cyrodil. + smaller groups gives better performance. The fewer bigger ballgroups running around spamming AoE's, the better performance.

* Limit cross healing to people within your group. This mea s you can only receive and give healing to people you're grouped wtih. This means as a soloplayer/un-grouped player, your heals will only go to yourself (looking at you rapid regen). This change also promotes group play because if you want to have an impact in a large scale fight, you need to group up if you want to support your allies.

These two changes benefits everyone in Cyrodil. Only people I see that are against similar suggestions are the ones who wants to continue with their unhealthy playstyle of running in 24+ man groups that causes the majority of all problems in Cyrodil.

I’m kinda thinking a bit of the opposite. Let people heal everyone. But don’t actually let people formally group. Then they are free to follow a specific player, or get on mics, or in chat to communicate. It won’t hinder groups from doing what they already do, but it will make it maybe a small bit less advantageous.

When I play I’m fighting for the Queen. I’m not fighting for a specific guild. It would be nice if people started seeing their faction as members of their team and not just focusing on their guildies. A change like this could foster more kindness between those of the same faction.

The issue with blocking grouping is it manes PvP guilds are worthless. Also, the grouping itself does not harm the server's performance. It is the sheer number of players in combat at one location. We see players flock to the same keep under attack regardless of being in a group or not. In fact, a group with a good leader will often set their own course and targets vs following sheep.

This is where you're kinda wrong. A few months ago PCNA had a bug where people couldn't group up, and PvP on the main campaign during primetime wasn't laggy or malfunctioning (and that was with a pop locked campaign)

And I've I've during midyear event seen a clear pattern when performance goes down south. As soon as the ballgroups comes online, skills stops firing, delays becomes worse etc.

Even when campaigns are pop locked and no ballgroups are present the performance is manageable, but the moment they show up you might as well go off.

So yes, groups and their sheer size does affect performance. And people can make whatever excuse they want about how Cyrodil "was designed for large scale fights" etc. But guess what, the game can't handle them, so something needs to be changed.

Ballgroups especially take advantage of the lag, magnecro bombing wouldn’t be that effective with a solid connection, however when someone Uses turn evil/necro totem, combined with someone spamming encase its near impossible to actually CC break whilst getting bombed. I think a ridiculous amount of calculation involved with the 12+ people spamming regen non stop causes huge lag spikes

Fawn4287

katorga wrote: »

Aren't BG's the solution for players who can't deal with large groups?

ESO is at its core an openworld, alliance v. alliance, pvp model. It will naturally gravitate toward large numbers of players trying to steam roll a map, and other groups gathering to counter them. It would happen even if you could not create groups at all in Cyro.

Non cp is unbearable It has all the same issues as CP PvP but with the addition of heavy overperformance of DOTs, proc damage sets, proc healing sets and the incredibly painful cost to CC break and remove snares makes it not a enjoyable an experience.