Maintenance for the week of March 25:
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – March 28, 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)

Suggestion for the Ball Zerg issue...

Durham
Durham
✭✭✭✭✭
Assult ability sacrifice ... 4 sec root 5 area with a pulsing interupt for 4 secs. It is breakable. This would allow an oposing force to counter...

The Player dropping the abilty would be rooted unbreakable.. plus all the player's damage would decrease by 75% and his healing decreased by 50%....

This would force the ball to break.. For at least 5 to 6 secs due to rolling and confusion...
Edited by Durham on July 29, 2014 9:12PM
PVP DEADWAIT
PVP The Unguildables
  • Lowbei
    Lowbei
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    or just remove ae caps and cap ultimate gain.

  • Durham
    Durham
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Caps would cure it however... it would also mean a highly skill group could kill an entire zerg repeatedly ..This would lead to a loss in subscriptions.. They are far more casual players and lower skilled players then power gamers and high skilled players...
    PVP DEADWAIT
    PVP The Unguildables
  • Durham
    Durham
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I understand why they pit caps in .. I voted against it. However this issue can be fixed...
    PVP DEADWAIT
    PVP The Unguildables
  • Lowbei
    Lowbei
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Durham wrote: »
    Caps would cure it however... it would also mean a highly skill group could kill an entire zerg repeatedly ..This would lead to a loss in subscriptions.. They are far more casual players and lower skilled players then power gamers and high skilled players...

    thats how rvr works...

    the masses or zergers are meant to lose to skilled players.

    this is how it worked in daoc for many many years.

    they have 3 options:
    they either learn from it and stop zerging
    continue zerging because they dont mind failure
    or they quit the game.

  • Neferath
    Neferath
    ✭✭✭
    Well we should differentiate between zerging and "zerg-balls". While the first is part of every mass AvA and needed for all those less skilled pvp players out there who of course deserve to have fun too while having pvp action, the latter isn't.

    So the answer can't be to disencourage players from zerging at a whole (since you will loose many subscribers and therefore also a good part of the pvp population wich affects us all, even the uber skilled hardcore pvp'ers) but to punish zerg-ball abusers (people who try to keep 10+ players standing on each other in order to avoid any AoE dmg).

    Therfore the whole story is kind of tricky.

    Getting rid of the AoE cap, for sure would be a step in the right direction, but while doing so, you'll also have to make sure that "legit" zerging still stays a valid way to play the pvp part of this game.

  • Lowbei
    Lowbei
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    the ONLY difference between zerging and zergballing is distance.

    zerging is going nowhere, because like you said, even less skilled players need to be able to accomplish something and have fun.

    once ae caps are gone and they become scared of clumping, the zergballing will go away, but the zerging will always continue.
  • Durham
    Durham
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Lowbei wrote: »
    Durham wrote: »
    Caps would cure it however... it would also mean a highly skill group could kill an entire zerg repeatedly ..This would lead to a loss in subscriptions.. They are far more casual players and lower skilled players then power gamers and high skilled players...

    thats how rvr works...

    the masses or zergers are meant to lose to skilled players.

    this is how it worked in daoc for many many years.

    they have 3 options:
    they either learn from it and stop zerging
    continue zerging because they dont mind failure
    or they quit the game.

    Yes and you will lose subscribers in mass... its business choice ... i understand what you are saying and agree....
    PVP DEADWAIT
    PVP The Unguildables
  • Durham
    Durham
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    That is why i was suggesting something....
    PVP DEADWAIT
    PVP The Unguildables
  • Lowbei
    Lowbei
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    companies who attempt to cater to the masses, never have quality pvp.

    thats why daoc did so well. it didnt hand hold, it had consequences for your actions, resulting in a higher skill level and thus better pvp.

    assuming that all zergers will quit if the skill cap is increased, is incorrect.

    see CU / MJs founders principles for how to build a competitive pvp environment.
  • Durham
    Durham
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    DAoC you countered no caps with interupts/CC ... there is no AOE interupts..DAoC was a game of interupts, CC, /assist ... loved DAoC keep in mind i agree with no caps but i also think it would hurt population...
    PVP DEADWAIT
    PVP The Unguildables
  • Xsorus
    Xsorus
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Most Zergers don't stack up, so removing caps wouldn't actually hurt the population.

    It would however remove Zerg Balling ...
  • Durham
    Durham
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    They stack going through choke points...
    PVP DEADWAIT
    PVP The Unguildables
  • Durham
    Durham
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I still remember in DAoC in the early days before TOA casters holding a room against massive numbers....Great Farming :)
    PVP DEADWAIT
    PVP The Unguildables
  • Xsorus
    Xsorus
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Durham wrote: »
    They stack going through choke points...

    That should result in death then..it should not be rewarded...
  • Lowbei
    Lowbei
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    since you have the ability in this game to knock a second hole in the wall if you need (a fairly massive hole imo) the statement of "they stack going thru choke points" sounds like they used improper tactics.
  • Durham
    Durham
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Bridges was what I was thinking....
    PVP DEADWAIT
    PVP The Unguildables
  • frosth.darkomenb16_ESO
    frosth.darkomenb16_ESO
    ✭✭✭✭
    There are tools to pierce chokepoints, especially in the Alliance skill lines.
    It just needs coordination and learning the game, which is good for the long term appeal.

    No matter how counter intuitive it sounds, catering to the masses is not a viable business decision.
    If you look at the top 10 mmo by revenue, many of them are niches. Look at Eve.
    Even wow has been losing subs steadily since it started catering and is now trying to turn things around.
    http://www.superdataresearch.com/blog/us-digital-games-market/

    What keeps people subbed is engaging gameplay and a high skill ceiling to grow into.
  • Haewk
    Haewk
    ✭✭✭
    No matter how counter intuitive it sounds, catering to the masses is not a viable business decision.
    If you look at the top 10 mmo by revenue, many of them are niches. Look at Eve.
    Even wow has been losing subs steadily since it started catering and is now trying to turn things around.
    http://www.superdataresearch.com/blog/us-digital-games-market/

    What keeps people subbed is engaging gameplay and a high skill ceiling to grow into.

    Hilarious. EvE has 3% market share. WoW has 36% market share. Yes, ESO should definitely follow the EvE model /boggle

    And how do you jump to the conclusion that "catering to the masses" is behind the loss of subscriptions to WoW? Which "catering" that the masses demanded led to this decline?

    When WoW started they were successful because they identified the problems other MMOs had and solved those issues or at least made it easier for the players.

    Don't want leveling to take years? Do it in WoW in months.
    Don't want to fight for dungeon spawns? Do it in WoW instances.
    Don't want to PvP? Join a WoW PvE server.
    Want to PvP? Join a WoW PvP server.
    Don't want to group? Level solo in WoW.

    Yes, not listening to what players want is the way to go /eyeroll
  • Haewk
    Haewk
    ✭✭✭
    Lowbei wrote: »
    companies who attempt to cater to the masses, never have quality pvp.

    thats why daoc did so well. it didnt hand hold, it had consequences for your actions, resulting in a higher skill level and thus better pvp.

    assuming that all zergers will quit if the skill cap is increased, is incorrect.

    see CU / MJs founders principles for how to build a competitive pvp environment.

    CU is still more than a year away from release, I don't think you can hold them up as a shiny example when they haven't delivered anything yet.

    Also, their principles completely eliminates ESO as ESO is not a RvR game through and through which is one of their principles. So pointing us to their principles as an example of how to create a competitive PvP environment is pointless.
  • frosth.darkomenb16_ESO
    frosth.darkomenb16_ESO
    ✭✭✭✭
    Haewk wrote: »
    No matter how counter intuitive it sounds, catering to the masses is not a viable business decision.
    If you look at the top 10 mmo by revenue, many of them are niches. Look at Eve.
    Even wow has been losing subs steadily since it started catering and is now trying to turn things around.
    http://www.superdataresearch.com/blog/us-digital-games-market/

    What keeps people subbed is engaging gameplay and a high skill ceiling to grow into.

    Hilarious. EvE has 3% market share. WoW has 36% market share. Yes, ESO should definitely follow the EvE model /boggle

    And how do you jump to the conclusion that "catering to the masses" is behind the loss of subscriptions to WoW? Which "catering" that the masses demanded led to this decline?

    When WoW started they were successful because they identified the problems other MMOs had and solved those issues or at least made it easier for the players.

    Don't want leveling to take years? Do it in WoW in months.
    Don't want to fight for dungeon spawns? Do it in WoW instances.
    Don't want to PvP? Join a WoW PvE server.
    Want to PvP? Join a WoW PvP server.
    Don't want to group? Level solo in WoW.

    Yes, not listening to what players want is the way to go /eyeroll

    You are clueless.

    Yes, ESO should follow eve's model, every game in the world should follow Eve's model. Eve is 500k subscription strong and has been rising continuously for over 10 years.
    If you consider that the 6th game in the mmo world is a small niche and not a good exemple, then you seriously need to rethink how you do logic.

    Wow is an outlier, it is a freak accident and does not count as a norm. Even wow can't live up to wow's standard.
    It expanded up to the point where it started giving out welfare epics, implement group finders,instant travel to instances and instant leveling.
    It has the biggest offering with 10 years worth of content, and always adding more, and yet manages to lose subscribers. Let that sink in.

    Even the wow devs know they are failing.
    Next expansion is a freaking love letter to hardcore players, saying that they are sorry, they miss them and want to get back with them.
    Even part of the alpha team is getting put back into gear to save what the interns messed up.

    And all those things you listed are part of the problem.
    The core issue being that wow is no longer a virtual world with social hooks but a disjointed array of tidbits of content that can be found individually for free and at a better quality elsewhere.

    There is this false notion that "accessibility" is what player want, and it is indeed what a lot are asking for, but what players need is engaging experiences.
    We, as a community, have no clue what we want or need. Look at these forums, there are people defending the aoe cap.

    Litstening to the playerbase for feedback is one thing, but obeying it and catering to the lowest common denominator is suicide.
Sign In or Register to comment.