Thornblade[NA]

Tintinabula · August 2014

90% of the time if one of those zergers stray too far from the pack they really aren't that good. So..in a group of ten zergers you'll have one really good player who can hold their own.

I like to catch the strays..occasionally I'll bite off more than I can chew but not often.

quakedawg_ESO · August 2014

Tintinabula wrote: »

90% of the time if one of those zergers stray too far from the pack they really aren't that good. So..in a group of ten zergers you'll have one really good player who can hold their own.

I like to catch the strays..occasionally I'll bite off more than I can chew but not often.

95% of the time you'd be the first to die within a group of 10. That really isn't making a point how good someone is 1 on 1 if they aren't spec'd for it.

Edit: yeah, 100% sounded mean.

quakedawg_ESO · August 2014

How about that Thornblade huh! Zing!

Tintinabula · August 2014

wouldn't it make sense to "spec" and use skills based on 1 V 1? I mean..My 1 V 1 hot bar doesn't change when I'm in a group or in a dungeon. To spec ONLY for a group scenario seems to gimp you (to me)...there are times you're gonna be alone..too far away from your group to get those heals or extra dps. So 1 V 1 should be your foundation. (IMHO)

Xsorus · August 2014

Tintinabula wrote: »

wouldn't it make sense to "spec" and use skills based on 1 V 1? I mean..My 1 V 1 hot bar doesn't change when I'm in a group or in a dungeon. To spec ONLY for a group scenario seems to gimp you (to me)...there are times you're gonna be alone..too far away from your group to get those heals or extra dps. So 1 V 1 should be your foundation. (IMHO)

Not even sure how their group build wouldn't work in a 1v1 in the first place, not like builds are dramatically different

quakedawg_ESO · August 2014

If you spend the majority of your time with your group you probably have no need for that pew pew build. Why waste an entire bar if you rarely use it? Now, if you find yourself running across the country (a lot) to catch up then you might be wise to swap into a 1v1 build until you regroup. Many players don't take the time and they become easy prey.

Now, if you allowed them a couple minutes to swap into a 1v1 build you might find things more challenging. I'm sure that is not going to happen.

Harnesh · August 2014

I know for myself I use diferent set ups for solo, small group and large group. As the number of players increase I go much more into a support role, always enough dps. But I'm sure there are lots who run their same setup as well.

Renuo · August 2014

So much *** waggling going here. Just play the way you want. I personally hate following a large group and don't like zerging people down (i.e. Winning only due to number ratio).

Having said that you need the zerg, you need the organised groups and you need the disruptive small group or solo and these are all valid styles of play.

quakedawg_ESO · August 2014

Harnesh wrote: »

I know for myself I use diferent set ups for solo, small group and large group. As the number of players increase I go much more into a support role, always enough dps. But I'm sure there are lots who run their same setup as well.

I ran two support bars for a while. It was quite challenging when I did have to run around solo ...

Some people don't want to be bothered with swapping out *shrug*

Xsorus · August 2014

Harnesh wrote: »

I know for myself I use diferent set ups for solo, small group and large group. As the number of players increase I go much more into a support role, always enough dps. But I'm sure there are lots who run their same setup as well.

Now this I can understand, running a more support setup while in a group. So I'll agree on that being sucky solo

k1llorbek1lled · August 2014

LonePirate wrote: »

As an EP player, I honestly do not know how we are not a distant third in this campaign instead of the very close third we are right now. We absolutely suck at both offense and defense. DC walked all over us during their recent march to their latest emperorship as people ignored calls to bolster our defenses at Alessia. I was ashamed of EP tonight.

Because there is 1-2 EP guilds carrying the campaign for them, they weren't on, and it all went bad.

Harnesh · August 2014

quakedawg_ESO wrote: »

Harnesh wrote: »

I know for myself I use diferent set ups for solo, small group and large group. As the number of players increase I go much more into a support role, always enough dps. But I'm sure there are lots who run their same setup as well.

I ran two support bars for a while. It was quite challenging when I did have to run around solo ...

Some people don't want to be bothered with swapping out *shrug*

lol yea it can be tuff if the only dps you have are heavy/light attack.

Harnesh · August 2014

Got to looking at the set up I use on my DK when I'm in full support mode and realized it was pretty much a warden from DAoC some healing, bubble, damage add and fairly tanky

Xsorus · August 2014

Harnesh wrote: »

Got to looking at the set up I use on my DK when I'm in full support mode and realized it was pretty much a warden from DAoC some healing, bubble, damage add and fairly tanky

hehe, the setup I run is similar to a Reaver in DAOC

Well...except for the whole Bow thing.

Harnesh · August 2014

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Harnesh wrote: »

Got to looking at the set up I use on my DK when I'm in full support mode and realized it was pretty much a warden from DAoC some healing, bubble, damage add and fairly tanky

hehe, the setup I run is similar to a Reaver in DAOC

Well...except for the whole Bow thing.

Can't believe that never really dawned on me before untill you just said that DK lava whip=Reaver flexible weapon line.

Xsorus · August 2014

Harnesh wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Harnesh wrote: »

Got to looking at the set up I use on my DK when I'm in full support mode and realized it was pretty much a warden from DAoC some healing, bubble, damage add and fairly tanky

hehe, the setup I run is similar to a Reaver in DAOC

Well...except for the whole Bow thing.

Can't believe that never really dawned on me before untill you just said that DK lava whip=Reaver flexible weapon line.

never dawned on me either, till i showed a guildie my new video who doesn't play ESO, and he's like "So you're a reaver?"

Blazzin-Ace · August 2014

Orange Army or bust huh?

Teargrants · August 2014

Columba wrote: »

I think soloer and small group players are terrible because they lack the intellect to coordinate large #s.

Dude, this wins as the most BS statement of the day I've seen, hands down.

I've run in both 24 & 5 man groups, and what you say simply comes off as ridiculously ignorant. Both large groups and small groups need intelligent players to be successful. In fact, the small man groups require more intelligence per person than the large blob stacking group. Why? The key is in the differences in how each one functions.

A large blob only really requires intelligent leadership from one person - the leader. Everyone else uses an addon to point a big arrow at the crown so they just have to run around where the arrow points and play Simon says for when to use skills, when to use ults, when to use potions, ect. If the group has plays where they split into subgroups, then it requires intelligence from each sub-group leader as well ideally.

The main thing is the leader needs to be smart enough to make split second decisions - but the rest of the blob doesn't because the leader is managing their hotbars as an extension of his own and literally telling them what skills to use, who to target, ect. The most important aspect that determines the large blob's success or failure is the planning stage where they decide what loadout to use for the group. For instance, how many of each class, what ratio or healers per person, what will the skill rotation be and so on. This pre battle planning determines whether the blob dies or not when they go in Cyrodiil.

On the other hand a small man of say, 5 people, requires not only a good lead but also intelligence and initiative in every single member. Each person needs to be able to judge what to do in combat for themselves, because the 5 man isn't functioning as a single blob with a handful of rotations that they go through by rote. Each person needs to be able to gauge when to engage in combat, when to drop combat, and ideally be able to survive on their own if need be. Otherwise if just 1 or 2 people go down against a sizable enemy, the rest would be screwed.

And no, this isn't me just theory crafting BS. Having run in the blob group in the past, and running in a 5 man now, it takes a hell of a lot more thought and initiative to run in a small man compared to the follow the leader playstyle of a blob group. It doesn't mean that each individual in the blob is bad per se, just that their skills aren't pushed as far as if they were in a small man.

Xsorus · August 2014

Kirsika wrote: »

Columba wrote: »

I think soloer and small group players are terrible because they lack the intellect to coordinate large #s.

Dude, this wins as the most BS statement of the day I've seen, hands down.

I've run in both 24 & 5 man groups, and what you say simply comes off as ridiculously ignorant. Both large groups and small groups need intelligent players to be successful. In fact, the small man groups require more intelligence per person than the large blob stacking group. Why? The key is in the differences in how each one functions.

A large blob only really requires intelligent leadership from one person - the leader. Everyone else uses an addon to point a big arrow at the crown so they just have to run around where the arrow points and play Simon says for when to use skills, when to use ults, when to use potions, ect. If the group has plays where they split into subgroups, then it requires intelligence from each sub-group leader as well ideally.

The main thing is the leader needs to be smart enough to make split second decisions - but the rest of the blob doesn't because the leader is managing their hotbars as an extension of his own and literally telling them what skills to use, who to target, ect. The most important aspect that determines the large blob's success or failure is the planning stage where they decide what loadout to use for the group. For instance, how many of each class, what ratio or healers per person, what will the skill rotation be and so on. This pre battle planning determines whether the blob dies or not when they go in Cyrodiil.

On the other hand a small man of say, 5 people, requires not only a good lead but also intelligence and initiative in every single member. Each person needs to be able to judge what to do in combat for themselves, because the 5 man isn't functioning as a single blob with a handful of rotations that they go through by rote. Each person needs to be able to gauge when to engage in combat, when to drop combat, and ideally be able to survive on their own if need be. Otherwise if just 1 or 2 people go down against a sizable enemy, the rest would be screwed.

And no, this isn't me just theory crafting BS. Having run in the blob group in the past, and running in a 5 man now, it takes a hell of a lot more thought and initiative to run in a small man compared to the follow the leader playstyle of a blob group. It doesn't mean that each individual in the blob is bad per se, just that their skills aren't pushed as far as if they were in a small man.

You realize you wrote a very long post about something he doesn't actually believe right?

Teargrants · August 2014

It's ok, I'm sure there's lots of pugs who don't have experience w/ how blobs & small mans operate. Hopefully I can help educate some of them.

IKilled007 · August 2014

What up, Thornbladers? Some epic battles so far and some close scores. This seems like a pretty balanced campaign. The last two days have introduced me to the best AD players I've faced so far.

quakedawg_ESO · August 2014

Kirsika wrote: »

I've run in both 24 & 5 man groups, and what you say simply comes off as ridiculously ignorant. Both large groups and small groups need intelligent players to be successful. In fact, the small man groups require more intelligence per person than the large blob stacking group. Why? The key is in the differences in how each one functions.

A large blob only really requires intelligent leadership from one person - the leader. Everyone else uses an addon to point a big arrow at the crown so they just have to run around where the arrow points and play Simon says for when to use skills, when to use ults, when to use potions, ect. If the group has plays where they split into subgroups, then it requires intelligence from each sub-group leader as well ideally.

The main thing is the leader needs to be smart enough to make split second decisions - but the rest of the blob doesn't because the leader is managing their hotbars as an extension of his own and literally telling them what skills to use, who to target, ect. The most important aspect that determines the large blob's success or failure is the planning stage where they decide what loadout to use for the group. For instance, how many of each class, what ratio or healers per person, what will the skill rotation be and so on. This pre battle planning determines whether the blob dies or not when they go in Cyrodiil.

On the other hand a small man of say, 5 people, requires not only a good lead but also intelligence and initiative in every single member. Each person needs to be able to judge what to do in combat for themselves, because the 5 man isn't functioning as a single blob with a handful of rotations that they go through by rote. Each person needs to be able to gauge when to engage in combat, when to drop combat, and ideally be able to survive on their own if need be. Otherwise if just 1 or 2 people go down against a sizable enemy, the rest would be screwed.

And no, this isn't me just theory crafting BS. Having run in the blob group in the past, and running in a 5 man now, it takes a hell of a lot more thought and initiative to run in a small man compared to the follow the leader playstyle of a blob group. It doesn't mean that each individual in the blob is bad per se, just that their skills aren't pushed as far as if they were in a small man.

I agree with portions of this. Many larger groups may run this way but I know a few that are far more organized and disciplined. Having also run in both, in a solid guild group every player knows what they need to do without being told. Each player knows when to engage and who to engage. They all know when to fire off said skill(s) and suck down pots without any hand holding. The leader just needs to worry about putting his team in position to attack be it stealth or whatever. After a while even this goes without saying. Chatter is at a minimum and most of it involve intel reports. The built in crown icon works just fine for keeping the large group together (although it bugs out 50% of the time).

I do agree that most large groups will often break down if certain parts no longer exist. They are not as self sufficient as a 4-8 man if [snip] hits the fan. Some of these large groups are built to take on massive groups (at least 2-3x their size) and walk away from it. You eliminate the foundation and the house will fall. With that said, I've also seen small man groups crumble after you kill 1-2 of the better players as well (knowing which players is the fun part!). I see more players in these small (self proclaimed skilled) groups with their run skill maxed out.

Roaming in smaller groups can be a blast for sure but nothing gets my blood flowing more than knowing 60+ enemies are around the corner and I'm positioned to ruin their day. Until my 4-8 man group can pull this off I'll mainly stick with the 16-24 man. Maybe eliminating the cap will be the right step in this direction.

Arenas are welcomed so these small groups can have their fun.

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Cursing & Profanity]

Dleatherus · August 2014

@quakedawg_ESO‌

nicely worded post

awesome sig - certainly applies to a few of the contributors to this thread so had to laugh

D.

Columba · August 2014

Kirsika wrote: »

Columba wrote: »

I think soloer and small group players are terrible because they lack the intellect to coordinate large #s.

Dude, this wins as the most BS statement of the day I've seen, hands down.

I've run in both 24 & 5 man groups, and what you say simply comes off as ridiculously ignorant. Both large groups and small groups need intelligent players to be successful. In fact, the small man groups require more intelligence per person than the large blob stacking group. Why? The key is in the differences in how each one functions.

A large blob only really requires intelligent leadership from one person - the leader. Everyone else uses an addon to point a big arrow at the crown so they just have to run around where the arrow points and play Simon says for when to use skills, when to use ults, when to use potions, ect. If the group has plays where they split into subgroups, then it requires intelligence from each sub-group leader as well ideally.

The main thing is the leader needs to be smart enough to make split second decisions - but the rest of the blob doesn't because the leader is managing their hotbars as an extension of his own and literally telling them what skills to use, who to target, ect. The most important aspect that determines the large blob's success or failure is the planning stage where they decide what loadout to use for the group. For instance, how many of each class, what ratio or healers per person, what will the skill rotation be and so on. This pre battle planning determines whether the blob dies or not when they go in Cyrodiil.

On the other hand a small man of say, 5 people, requires not only a good lead but also intelligence and initiative in every single member. Each person needs to be able to judge what to do in combat for themselves, because the 5 man isn't functioning as a single blob with a handful of rotations that they go through by rote. Each person needs to be able to gauge when to engage in combat, when to drop combat, and ideally be able to survive on their own if need be. Otherwise if just 1 or 2 people go down against a sizable enemy, the rest would be screwed.

And no, this isn't me just theory crafting BS. Having run in the blob group in the past, and running in a 5 man now, it takes a hell of a lot more thought and initiative to run in a small man compared to the follow the leader playstyle of a blob group. It doesn't mean that each individual in the blob is bad per se, just that their skills aren't pushed as far as if they were in a small man.

HAHAHAHAHA. i was making a point about how subjective comments are inherently impossible to supprt.

serenenightmare · August 2014

LonePirate wrote: »

As an EP player, I honestly do not know how we are not a distant third in this campaign instead of the very close third we are right now. We absolutely suck at both offense and defense. DC walked all over us during their recent march to their latest emperorship as people ignored calls to bolster our defenses at Alessia. I was ashamed of EP tonight.

Stop taking my Dragon Claw please

But in all seriousness, EP likes to hit Warden, Rayles, and Glade, mostly get wiped or if DC isn't paying attention, take at least one keep out of numerous tries.

That seems like the norm for the last couple of days. EP trying to take DC's home keeps while AD is pushing emperor keeps.

Dleatherus · August 2014

EP likes them DC scrolls is all

D.

serenenightmare · August 2014

Dleatherus wrote: »

EP likes them DC scrolls is all

D.

A little too much if you ask me. They have yet to grab it though, so can't complain about the AP and fights.

Dleatherus · August 2014

i have a feeling part of this is about the fact that a 24 man group can split into 6 4-man groups but a certain 4-man group can't grow into a 24 man one

i doubt that our friends could find enough folks to tolerate being in group chat and voice comms with them for any sustainable length of time given the size of some of the egos involved and total lack of tolerance for anything other than their own line of play (which is a very fun part of the game btw - i often run in 4 man groups)

got that link for us yet?

D.

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Inappropriate Content]

frwinters_ESO · August 2014

IcyDeadPeople wrote: »

Anyone else finding the frame rate to be a little worse than Wabbajack?

The game seems to be only playable if I avoid large battles inside keeps and stick to exterior areas on the outskirts.

My game is actually running better in Cyrodil with this new campaign and I was on Wabbajack. No FPS issues or major lag, though the server stability is still in question.

Lowbei · August 2014

the lag seems better for me. now its just a stability thing, likely caused by zergballs