Elder Wars 2 Volume 2 (AoE Caps are a problem)
-
Krinaman✭✭✭So apparently the assumption here is that the large group is "stupid/unskilled" and the small group is "smart/skilled". One would have to question that assumption since the large group is "winning" while the small group isn't but whatever.
The unlimited AOE cap creates more issues than it solves. Taking keeps would become nearly impossible as "stupid/unskilled" players surround the choke points that occur at every one spamming one skill to take out all the "smart/skilled" attackers.
Plus the small group is still going to get rolled on a open field because the large group will just used ranged attacks to stay out of your AOE while the whole group gets unlimited AOE heals/buffs because despite what you think they really aren't that "stupid/unskilled".0 -
Bramir✭✭✭✭Lava_Croft wrote: »
'The community' isn't upset about AoE caps at all. The <1% of the community that is upset is also the same <1% that keeps making threads like this in an attempt to make it look like something 'the community' is upset about."hey uhhh i think the community is upset about ae caps, maybe you should address it."
One of two translations:
1. I can't kill anyone in Cyrodil unless I'm part of a zerg ball.
Or
2. I don't play in Cyrodil, so I shouldn't be posting in a thread about it.
0 -
Lowbei✭✭✭✭✭i didnt call them "stupid/unskilled", you did.
however, when the large group blobs up so tight that a smaller group can aoe it down, then the large group is obviously doing something "_ _ _ _" and the result is failure.
fact, without the aoe cap as a crutch, the impulse blobs would die to negates in less than 5 seconds.
it is a crutch, that only benefits zergers, promoting skillless gameplay and turning away skilled players, who now eagerly await arenas to provide some semblance of skilled pvp.
protip, even zergers hate the idea of "zerging" because they know how unskillful it is... thus they get offended by the term. they will call themselves a "raid group" or something else to avoid admitting to zerging.Edited by Lowbei on July 22, 2014 4:42PM1 -
So apparently the assumption here is that the large group is "stupid/unskilled" and the small group is "smart/skilled".
No one made that assumption, like, at all. Read again.
What people said was that stupid large groups, as in "large groups that are stupid", should be possible to beat with a smart small group, as in a "small group that is smart".
Please, make it worth the time 4 people spent typing articulatd anwers to your question by actually trying to understand.Edited by frosth.darkomenb16_ESO on July 22, 2014 4:42PM1 -
Bramir✭✭✭✭So apparently the assumption here is that the large group is "stupid/unskilled" and the small group is "smart/skilled". One would have to question that assumption since the large group is "winning" while the small group isn't but whatever.
The unlimited AOE cap creates more issues than it solves. Taking keeps would become nearly impossible as "stupid/unskilled" players surround the choke points that occur at every one spamming one skill to take out all the "smart/skilled" attackers.
Plus the small group is still going to get rolled on a open field because the large group will just used ranged attacks to stay out of your AOE while the whole group gets unlimited AOE heals/buffs because despite what you think they really aren't that "stupid/unskilled".
Seriously? Did you go back and read your first paragraph before posting that nonsense?
Or your second paragraph? You do know most players can use ranged attacks, right?
And in your third paragraph, at least it makes the large group do something other than follow the leader pressing '1'. Maybe the pvers in zergballs can prove that they don't suck at pvp, given the chance...maybe they will stay out of Cyrodil once their 'win' button is taken away.
0 -
shanersimms_ESO✭✭✭frosth.darkomenb16_ESO wrote: »Luvsfuzzybunnies wrote: »I agree here. I dont know what makes people think removing aoe caps is gonna stop zerg balling.
Quick answer: maths, more specifically, game theory.
Long answer:
To facilitate the readability, let's assume that each player has 2000hp and can dish out 200 damage per attack spread over 6 targets.
Take a case study of three group size: 30 players, 20 players and 10 players.
WIth AoE cap, if zerg balling:
The effective hp of each group is: large group 60 000hp, medium group 40 000hp, small group 20 000hp
Large group does 30 x 6 x 200=> 36 000 damage per attack:
60% to large, 90% to medium, 180% to small.
Medium group does 20 x 6 x 200=> 24 000 damage per attack:
40% to large, 60% to medium, 120% to small.
Small group does 10 x 6 x 200=> 12 000 damage per attack:
20% to large, 30% to medium, 60% to small
Conclusion: A larger group gains both an innate damage resistance and damage buff that increases with the size difference. It gives a mechanical advantage to zergs and this makes it an optimum choice in game theory terms.
Without AoE cap, if zerg balling:
No need to calculate total damage. 10 players are enough to one shot a blob no matter its size, but the larger the group difference, the more damage the smaller group causes to the enemy faction, risking 10 to kill 20-30+.
Conclusion: No AoE cap benefit smaller groups against larger groups that zerg ball, making zerg balling a non viable choice. Hence stoping zerg balling
Bonus round without AoE cap, if not zerg balling:
In choke points situations like keep/bridges, the larger group offers an higher density of targets per area, giving each coordinated attacks of the small group more weight, up to potential wipe.
In open field battle, the large group occupies more space than the smaller one, so the player density for the large group is either equal or lower than the small group. But due to that the smaller group can create local contexts where it is effectively fighting equal numbers or smaller.
In both those situations, the larger group is more likely to win, higher numbers remain an organic advantage. However, the larger group cannot win with mechanical invulnerability. The zerg will lose members to the smaller groups, and it will create attrition rather than infinite momentum.
This is the framework in which a skilled group can shine by taking more than their pound of flesh.
Someone give this man a God **** medal. Taking the time to spell it out for those who just don't get it...
*eyes trail slowly to ZoS*
Also people mentioned this would make taking keeps harder. This is how it should be. Generally speaking the zergball punches one hole and funnels through there. Since this tactic would not be viable with no AoE caps, the larger groups would need to break down into smaller units; attacking the keep from multiple sides and making multiple breaches to be successful.
This would be so much more fun.-Lord Shaszahan the Archmage, of The Septim Bloodline1 -
Krinaman✭✭✭And in your third paragraph, at least it makes the large group do something other than follow the leader pressing '1'. Maybe the pvers in zergballs can prove that they don't suck at pvp, given the chance...maybe they will stay out of Cyrodil once their 'win' button is taken away.
No, it doesn't. It simply makes them slot their ranged skill in 1 instead of impulse. You still die, you have even less of a chance of killing them because of unlimited AOE heals/buffs. people still come to forums QQing because they died in PvP.1 -
Bramir✭✭✭✭And in your third paragraph, at least it makes the large group do something other than follow the leader pressing '1'. Maybe the pvers in zergballs can prove that they don't suck at pvp, given the chance...maybe they will stay out of Cyrodil once their 'win' button is taken away.
No, it doesn't. It simply makes them slot their ranged skill in 1 instead of impulse. You still die, you have even less of a chance of killing them because of unlimited AOE heals/buffs. people still come to forums QQing because they died in PvP.
I'm not sure you understand...you have to aim or target ranged abilities, which requires infinitely more thought than spamming impulse or another targetless aoe.
0 -
Krinaman✭✭✭Really? That's the complaint? You are dying to people who aren't aiming?
And the solution is you should be able to kill them all using a skill you don't have to aim....Edited by Krinaman on July 22, 2014 6:04PM0 -
Xsorus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Really? That's the complaint? You are dying to people who aren't aiming?
And the solution is you should be able to kill them all using a skill you don't have to aim....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=FopyRHHlt3M
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXpX7JMwRXtczc5GTrIYRIw
ESO and GW2 PvP videos0 -
TheBucket✭✭✭✭They already said 100x that the AoE caps in place were intentional from the start and only a few abilities were bugged. Just a handful of the same people keep denying it and making new threads about it. They are never going to remove the caps so deal with it.
They only thing they might consider is diminishing returns and even that would take optimization of several abilities and reworking, testing, etcWilliam Reignes
Magic Nightblade - Rogue Bomber
Creator of Thirsty Thief Build (Retired 1.5)1 -
TheBucket✭✭✭✭Lava_Croft wrote: »
'The community' isn't upset about AoE caps at all. The <1% of the community that is upset is also the same <1% that keeps making threads like this in an attempt to make it look like something 'the community' is upset about."hey uhhh i think the community is upset about ae caps, maybe you should address it."
One of two translations:
1. I can't kill anyone in Cyrodil unless I'm part of a zerg ball.
Or
2. I don't play in Cyrodil, so I shouldn't be posting in a thread about it.
This is typical response from a typical troll and why this thread cant become effective. I solo pvp more then most and run in small groups yet i think removing the cap is a mistake. There are other effective ways of dealing with this situation.William Reignes
Magic Nightblade - Rogue Bomber
Creator of Thirsty Thief Build (Retired 1.5)0 -
Lowbei✭✭✭✭✭They already said 100x that the AoE caps in place were intentional from the start and only a few abilities were bugged. Just a handful of the same people keep denying it and making new threads about it. They are never going to remove the caps so deal with it.
They only thing they might consider is diminishing returns and even that would take optimization of several abilities and reworking, testing, etc
whats hilarious, is that never once did players ask them if the caps were intended or had existed. we stated clearly with a massive poll that we "did not want caps" and we received that "caps have always been in" statement as a response despite it not having anything to do with our uproar.
its at this point (end of month1) that most competitive pvpers and migrants from gw2 quit immediately, seeing that zos are clearly dodging the issue, which has been proven further over the last few months.Edited by Lowbei on July 22, 2014 8:01PM1 -
TheBucket✭✭✭✭They already said 100x that the AoE caps in place were intentional from the start and only a few abilities were bugged. Just a handful of the same people keep denying it and making new threads about it. They are never going to remove the caps so deal with it.
They only thing they might consider is diminishing returns and even that would take optimization of several abilities and reworking, testing, etc
whats hilarious, is that never once did players ask them if the caps were intended or had existed. we stated clearly with a massive poll that we "did not want caps" and we received that "caps have always been in" statement as a response despite it not having anything to do with our uproar.
its at this point (end of month1) that most competitive pvpers and migrants from gw2 quit immediately, seeing that zos are clearly dodging the issue, which has been proven further over the last few months.
No. When the poll thread was created they actually stated that caps were already in place and only a few abilities didnt have them which they were setting in line. The poll irrelevant because because it was subjective and only people who cared about no caps were a part of it.
Basically caps have always been in. Its the direction Zenimax choose or they wouldnt have developed it that way. Is it the right way to go about it? Maybe not, but doesn't change the facts.William Reignes
Magic Nightblade - Rogue Bomber
Creator of Thirsty Thief Build (Retired 1.5)0 -
TheBucket✭✭✭✭700k subscriptions and a poll that has 1000 votes is not going to sway a decision for a company. Bottom line....William Reignes
Magic Nightblade - Rogue Bomber
Creator of Thirsty Thief Build (Retired 1.5)0 -
Xsorus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭They already said 100x that the AoE caps in place were intentional from the start and only a few abilities were bugged. Just a handful of the same people keep denying it and making new threads about it. They are never going to remove the caps so deal with it.
They only thing they might consider is diminishing returns and even that would take optimization of several abilities and reworking, testing, etc
whats hilarious, is that never once did players ask them if the caps were intended or had existed. we stated clearly with a massive poll that we "did not want caps" and we received that "caps have always been in" statement as a response despite it not having anything to do with our uproar.
its at this point (end of month1) that most competitive pvpers and migrants from gw2 quit immediately, seeing that zos are clearly dodging the issue, which has been proven further over the last few months.
No. When the poll thread was created they actually stated that caps were already in place and only a few abilities didnt have them which they were setting in line. The poll irrelevant because because it was subjective and only people who cared about no caps were a part of it.
Basically caps have always been in. Its the direction Zenimax choose or they wouldnt have developed it that way. Is it the right way to go about it? Maybe not, but doesn't change the facts.
Actually they were asked flat out in beta if Caps existed, and they chose not to respond...He basically did not answer the question..
Since their tooltip info is horrible, along with their UI in general...Most players assumed no caps existed, since there was a lot of abilities that flat out didn't have caps. Those abilities happened to be the ones most players were using to wipe zergs.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXpX7JMwRXtczc5GTrIYRIw
ESO and GW2 PvP videos1 -
Bramir✭✭✭✭Lava_Croft wrote: »
'The community' isn't upset about AoE caps at all. The <1% of the community that is upset is also the same <1% that keeps making threads like this in an attempt to make it look like something 'the community' is upset about."hey uhhh i think the community is upset about ae caps, maybe you should address it."
One of two translations:
1. I can't kill anyone in Cyrodil unless I'm part of a zerg ball.
Or
2. I don't play in Cyrodil, so I shouldn't be posting in a thread about it.
This is typical response from a typical troll and why this thread cant become effective. I solo pvp more then most and run in small groups yet i think removing the cap is a mistake. There are other effective ways of dealing with this situation.
Sorry, but trolling a troll is only trolling when they troll.
0 -
Bramir✭✭✭✭Really? That's the complaint? You are dying to people who aren't aiming?
And the solution is you should be able to kill them all using a skill you don't have to aim....
Yes...you finally understand part of it at least.
The second part is incorrect. I expect to have to aim my attacks back at them...even ranged aoes require targetting and some awareness of what is going on.
0 -
c0rp✭✭✭✭✭
✭Can someone explain to me why a small group should be able to beat a large group?
Because it happens in the real world when a coordinated small group ambushes a larger, unprepared/less coordinated group? AoE caps PREVENT this from happening and only encourage mindless zerg balls in ESO pvp.
Edited by c0rp on July 22, 2014 8:19PMForce weapon swap to have priority over EVERYTHING. Close enough.
Make stamina builds even with magicka builds.
Disable abilities while holding block.
Give us a REASON to do dungeons more than once.
Remove PVP AoE CAP. It is ruining Cyrodiil.
Fix/Remove Forward Camps. They are ruining Cyrodiil.
Impenetrability needs to REDUCE CRIT DAMAGE. Not negate entire builds.
Werewolf is not equal to Vamps/Bats.0 -
Lowbei✭✭✭✭✭They already said 100x that the AoE caps in place were intentional from the start and only a few abilities were bugged. Just a handful of the same people keep denying it and making new threads about it. They are never going to remove the caps so deal with it.
They only thing they might consider is diminishing returns and even that would take optimization of several abilities and reworking, testing, etc
whats hilarious, is that never once did players ask them if the caps were intended or had existed. we stated clearly with a massive poll that we "did not want caps" and we received that "caps have always been in" statement as a response despite it not having anything to do with our uproar.
its at this point (end of month1) that most competitive pvpers and migrants from gw2 quit immediately, seeing that zos are clearly dodging the issue, which has been proven further over the last few months.
No. When the poll thread was created they actually stated that caps were already in place and only a few abilities didnt have them which they were setting in line. The poll irrelevant because because it was subjective and only people who cared about no caps were a part of it.
Basically caps have always been in. Its the direction Zenimax choose or they wouldnt have developed it that way. Is it the right way to go about it? Maybe not, but doesn't change the facts.
you obviously know nothing of polling if you think that 3.5k votes isnt enough to judge millions.
professional public polling centers use a sample group of about 1-2k to judge the opinions of millions, so 3.5k is a fine sample size.
also, the poll was not subjective, as anyone could vote on it who had an account, and the only way it would be so is if this was the "anti ae cap forum", which its clearly not labelled as such.
furthermore, IF zos valued the opinions of its players, they could easily implement a poll into the launcher like MANY other mmos, to thus ensure they get the opinions of "everyone".
lastly, zos was clearly asked during beta in "ask us anything" (lol, right?) about caps because at the time, everyone was quitting gw2. the question was clearly dodged and intentionally misdirected, thus leaving everyone shocked when it was suddenly revealed near the end of month1, resulting in the mass quitting of pvper accounts. if you cannot trust a company that has your CC info to be truthful with you...0 -
TheBucket✭✭✭✭They already said 100x that the AoE caps in place were intentional from the start and only a few abilities were bugged. Just a handful of the same people keep denying it and making new threads about it. They are never going to remove the caps so deal with it.
They only thing they might consider is diminishing returns and even that would take optimization of several abilities and reworking, testing, etc
whats hilarious, is that never once did players ask them if the caps were intended or had existed. we stated clearly with a massive poll that we "did not want caps" and we received that "caps have always been in" statement as a response despite it not having anything to do with our uproar.
its at this point (end of month1) that most competitive pvpers and migrants from gw2 quit immediately, seeing that zos are clearly dodging the issue, which has been proven further over the last few months.
No. When the poll thread was created they actually stated that caps were already in place and only a few abilities didnt have them which they were setting in line. The poll irrelevant because because it was subjective and only people who cared about no caps were a part of it.
Basically caps have always been in. Its the direction Zenimax choose or they wouldnt have developed it that way. Is it the right way to go about it? Maybe not, but doesn't change the facts.
you obviously know nothing of polling if you think that 3.5k votes isnt enough to judge millions.
professional public polling centers use a sample group of about 1-2k to judge the opinions of millions, so 3.5k is a fine sample size.
also, the poll was not subjective, as anyone could vote on it who had an account, and the only way it would be so is if this was the "anti ae cap forum", which its clearly not labelled as such.
furthermore, IF zos valued the opinions of its players, they could easily implement a poll into the launcher like MANY other mmos, to thus ensure they get the opinions of "everyone".
lastly, zos was clearly asked during beta in "ask us anything" (lol, right?) about caps because at the time, everyone was quitting gw2. the question was clearly dodged and intentionally misdirected, thus leaving everyone shocked when it was suddenly revealed near the end of month1, resulting in the mass quitting of pvper accounts. if you cannot trust a company that has your CC info to be truthful with you...
You know nothing period if you think 3k votes in 700k subs means anything. It was subjective. Stop being biased because you are against caps.William Reignes
Magic Nightblade - Rogue Bomber
Creator of Thirsty Thief Build (Retired 1.5)0 -
Lowbei✭✭✭✭✭its obvious that the facts i stated about national public polling centers using 1-2k samples to judge millions were too complex. in the future i will explain it with pictures perhaps? lol
furthermore i explained how it wasnt subjective and also gave an example of how they could do an "official" vote, despite the "official" account only forums (the place players are told to discuss issues) being a clear choice to the average player.
its obvious that you are either trolling or having trouble with english, so ill give you a pass lolEdited by Lowbei on July 22, 2014 8:46PM0 -
TheBucket✭✭✭✭its obvious that the facts i stated about national public polling centers using 1-2k samples to judge millions were too complex. in the future i will explain it with pictures perhaps? lol
furthermore i explained how it wasnt subjective and also gave an example of how they could do an "official" vote, despite the "official" account only forums (the place players are told to discuss issues) being a clear choice to the average player.
its obvious that you are either trolling or having trouble with english, so ill give you a pass lol
Hold on. Im going to state something as fact with no reference and say its to complex for you. One moment........William Reignes
Magic Nightblade - Rogue Bomber
Creator of Thirsty Thief Build (Retired 1.5)0 -
TheBucket✭✭✭✭Ever growing game has caps and public says ESO deceived them lol. Man...Yet im being called a trollWilliam Reignes
Magic Nightblade - Rogue Bomber
Creator of Thirsty Thief Build (Retired 1.5)0 -
Xsorus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Ever growing game has caps and public says ESO deceived them lol. Man...Yet im being called a troll
Not every game has caps
In fact the game this one was attempting to copy in terms of PvP, does not have Caps.
Not having Caps is why it was so successful, and why Games like GW2 were laughed at in terms of how bad its PvP was in WvW.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXpX7JMwRXtczc5GTrIYRIw
ESO and GW2 PvP videos0 -
TheBucket✭✭✭✭xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »Ever growing game has caps and public says ESO deceived them lol. Man...Yet im being called a troll
Not every game has caps
In fact the game this one was attempting to copy in terms of PvP, does not have Caps.
Not having Caps is why it was so successful, and why Games like GW2 were laughed at in terms of how bad its PvP was in WvW.
Key word was EVER, not every. I didnt say every game has caps
William Reignes
Magic Nightblade - Rogue Bomber
Creator of Thirsty Thief Build (Retired 1.5)0 -
Lowbei✭✭✭✭✭lol wait, are you claiming im wrong for not including a link to gallup polling procedures?
its not my fault that you dont understand how a poll works. its only something we use daily in news and politics in our country.
Edited by Lowbei on July 22, 2014 9:03PM0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUfSBKnUL4s