Update 50 is now available for testing on the PTS! You can read the latest patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/categories/pts
The New Keep capture strategy
-
bitaken✭✭✭✭✭ezareth_ESO wrote: »skwornub18_ESO wrote: »Brandeospeedwagon wrote: »
Really? I've found DK's, Sorcs, Temps, and NB's who can tank large groups for quite awhile. DPS is prob a lot closer than you think.skwornub18_ESO wrote: »Brandeospeedwagon wrote: »
Ya they're certainly within reason at this point. Every class is pretty much necessary for a group. NB's can still use some more love tho.skwornub18_ESO wrote: »xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »The fact that people now a days are arguing that a Death Penalty is bad because it makes dying mean something is a little sad.
I mean..I can't even say its the WoW generation at this point....
I will agree with the death penalty when most of us can agree the classes are at least reasonably balanced.
I strongly disagree the classes are no where even close to balanced, classes are not need in equal numbers and they definitely are not even close in survivability nor ability to dps
and I have seen DK's pull far away in tanking large groups over every other class. DKs by far are the most survivable.
DPS is definitely not even close but those conversations are not for here.
While I appreciate your feedback I would like to keep the thread on topic. If you would like to discuss class balance I would suggest you start a new thread on it.
This thread should be about a way to fix the "drop 50 people o a flag and spin it so fast we cap the keep" strategy being employed - BY ALL FACTIONS - and how it is bad for the health of the game.
I like the idea of making flags NOT flip if more than 3 defenders are on the flag...quite a bit.
Yeah they have said that 6 people is the max number of people that count towards flipping a flag, but in my experience if this is true the the speed at 6 people is exponential over 1 person. It wouldn't surprise me if this is bugged because I've seen flags flip ridiculously fast.
Still the only way I can see a counter to flag-zerging is a no-flip while actively defended rule. I think 3 people will be suitable to prevent people from just sending in one guy at a time to stall while waiting for reinforcements. If 3 people are on a flag it is still being actively contested IMO.
If they have said that I don't believe them. I had 14 defenders taking zero damage - and 50 enemy attacking the flag - and they flipped it - and we died to guards. The players did basically no damage - and because they were so many - they took little damage - and just stood there in negates and banners and flipped the flag.
Yes we made our fair share of AP - but the problem is a combination of - Camps (with no rez sickness) + AOE Caps + The way flags flip. I think the AOE Caps are here to stay sadly, so we need to find another solution, and it needs to be presented as a solution and not a whine or complaint to the dev team to look at.
Either Rez sickness (some combination of reduced damage, health and magicka for duration) of 30 seconds OR a flag flip mechanic rule that is much harder than it is now to flip - would work in my opinion.
PvP Lead Officer for Einherjar
Member of Einherjar and associated guilds since 2001
A multi Gaming community of players.1 -
Arkath✭✭✭My biggest problem with this issue is the lack of ability response when large conflicts take place. I get that people are going to pile the majority of their population into one massive force at times. That's frustrating to deal with, but we should at least be able to make a reasonable attempt to fight a group that size. But when the server (or software, as it may be) can't handle it...that's rubbish.
Brute forcing flags is bad enough - "lols we'll stand on the flag in turtle mode, can't be killed, and the flag will flip no matter what" - and that should be addressed. But if ZOS wants to keep those of us that are left in Cyrodiil, they've got to improve the code, or whatever the problem is. From my perspective, it's becoming progressively worse. Abilities not going off for several seconds, rubber banding, doors and siege unusable. That's a problem. I know it isn't new, but I think everyone's patience is running low on this matter.
Personally, I implore ZOS to consider shifting resources from pushing new content, raising level caps, etc, to fixing problems that are all but game breaking for many of us.Edited by Arkath on September 15, 2014 1:24AMDC Sorc
Einherjar [EHJ]1 -
capcody✭✭✭im down with the idea of team death-match dolemens. and bring back guard placeable npcs. i miss droping mages and watching them streak into pack of players and droping there aoe damage and wiping groups.. go my minions.3 -
SeltzerDuke✭✭✭
Yeah, I'm a little confused about what causes the flag to flip for good - I had assumed that all player defenders would need to be wiped, but a couple of times lately there were a few of us still on the flag (had been there from the start, not just rushing in too late) and it flipped anyway, and of course once the NPCs reset to the other faction that's the end of us. It must have been happening all along, of course, but these instances really caught my notice.ezareth_ESO wrote: »ER and NM were doing this to my guild back on volendrung months ago. You don't need to kill anything to take a keep just clump up on the flag and zerg it down. We'd kill half but the other half left would finish capping and the keep is theirs.
They really just need to slow the flag flipping down or at very least not allow it to flip when 3 or more defenders are still on the flag.
If even one player is still near the flag, whether sitting on oil, actively fighting, or just /danceredguard-ing, it shouldn't flip IMHO. I mean, it's a formality at that point for the zerg to wipe the player but you never know if it could buy enough time for reinforcements on the perimeter to reach the flags. I'm also a bit biased because my build atm is based on survivability (3500-3700 health and a ton of damage mitigation set bonuses/synergies) and soaking up a lot of attacks to drain attackers' resources while allies show up. :P0 -
Voodoo✭✭✭✭hmmm I have not PvP'd in this game yep but from the OP I wonder if lowering the size of the AvAvA battle and putting in player collision would help curb some of these tactics.
Apparently ZOS stated that you could have player collision or large pvp battles but not both.
Perhaps shrinking them, and adding collision would not only reduce lag but also hinder player stacking somewhat?0 -
Ezareth✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭SeltzerDuke wrote: »
Yeah, I'm a little confused about what causes the flag to flip for good - I had assumed that all player defenders would need to be wiped, but a couple of times lately there were a few of us still on the flag (had been there from the start, not just rushing in too late) and it flipped anyway, and of course once the NPCs reset to the other faction that's the end of us. It must have been happening all along, of course, but these instances really caught my notice.ezareth_ESO wrote: »ER and NM were doing this to my guild back on volendrung months ago. You don't need to kill anything to take a keep just clump up on the flag and zerg it down. We'd kill half but the other half left would finish capping and the keep is theirs.
They really just need to slow the flag flipping down or at very least not allow it to flip when 3 or more defenders are still on the flag.
If even one player is still near the flag, whether sitting on oil, actively fighting, or just /danceredguard-ing, it shouldn't flip IMHO. I mean, it's a formality at that point for the zerg to wipe the player but you never know if it could buy enough time for reinforcements on the perimeter to reach the flags. I'm also a bit biased because my build atm is based on survivability (3500-3700 health and a ton of damage mitigation set bonuses/synergies) and soaking up a lot of attacks to drain attackers' resources while allies show up. :P
The way a flag flips is by subtracting defending players from attacking players. If 2 attackers are on a flag and 1 defender (PC only, I think NPCs count as 2 or more "Defenders"), then the flag will flip to the attackers as if 1 attacker is on the flag and no defenders are present.
Permanently banned from the forums for displaying dissent: ESO - The Year Behind
Too Much Bolt Escape - banned for "hacking the game to create movement not otherwise permitted by in game mechanics."
Ezareth VR16 AD Sorc - Rank 36 - Axe NA
Ezareth-Ali VR16 DC NB - Rank 20 - Chillrend NA
Ezareth PvP on Youtube1 -
WarrioroftheWind_ESO✭✭✭✭
the guards had no business being v5 on a non-vet camp in the first place but Zeni didn't feel different in their infinite logic and we see how THAT ended up.
Not entirely sure how they could handle captures....unless they change respawn process for keep guards? I remember back in the day we had to secure the corners and kill off honorguards to make sure guards wouldn't repop. Now if there's a big enough zerg they just bust the door down and bumrush the flag and guards don't do squat if the zerg is big enough. Now you could TRY to be tactical and take out guards, but that only works if there's no PC defenders throwing a wrench in the monkey. 12 people shouldn't have trouble taking a keep but when said keep has guards and 12 enemy PC's...0 -
Garion✭✭✭✭✭
✭I agree with the sentiments of those previously in reference to the flipping of flags. My problem is twofold.
- If you are one person and are managing to hold 30+ at bay (which I have done a few times recently, with the help of oil and ultis). Despite being in the vicinity of the flag, the flag will change regardless. This will often be the case if there are three of you vs many. This should absolutely not happen and the flag should only change completely should there be no one alive (from the defending alliance) in the flag room.
- If you are a large group, the flags change incredibly fast. If you are a small group, it can take an age to have the flag change. I personally think this should be inverted. I know this is kind of a weird concept, but in my mind if you have the superior numbers it should take longer for the flag to change to give the defenders more time to actually mount a defence. That, or make the time standardised whether you are 1 person or 100.
In reference to the OP, unfortunately the pro skill trains will continue until such time as Zenimax reviews and implements a revised version of the AOE cap which could be quite a long time. Even then, I fear that this playstyle is so ingrained on those who are unable to play effectively outside of a zergball they will persist regardless and still remain somewhat effective (for want of a better word) at taking keeps particularly against the less organised pugs. In these situations, when you are facing a zerg ball, it is quite important you defend the breach - be it the inner or the outer - rather than the flag - wherever possible. I find that often people are inclined to rush straight to the second flag room without even trying to make things a little harder at the breach. With the right group composition and skill set it is of course possible to deal with the zergballs at the flag, but these opportunities are few and far between and so breach defence is far easier if you are disciplined enough to pull it off.
These groups are at their most vulnerable when moving, they don't have a ton of healing springs filling the entire room and their AOE is more spread out and less concentrated. In these situations, and if you are not yourself in a very large group, you would do best to lay down as many snares as possible on the breach, a ton of oil and a hellfire of ultimates raining down on their heads. You will not necessarily kill them all, but you will likely get some and if nothing else you will have likely spread them out or hampered their efforts to get in, thus making them more vulnerable and more easy to deal with. They survive only because they exploit the AOE cap. If you can make them scatter they fall very quickly as their individual skill (bar a few notable exceptions) is often lacklustre.
My point is, once they are on the flag there is often very little you can do unless you are in another zergball (which I would not encourage) or a group specifically equipped to counter this kind of play - and I find those are hard to come by. That is not to say you shouldn't try of course, but I'd say if you are facing a ridiculously huge train then defending the breach is the only chance you have of stopping these people getting in.Lastobeth - VR16 Sorc - PvP Rank 41 (AD)
Lastoblyat - VR16 Templar - PvP Rank 14 (AD)
Ninja Pete - VR16 NB - PvP Rank 10 (AD)
Labo the Banana Slayer - VR14 Sorc - PvP Rank 12 (EP)
Member of Banana Squad | Officer of Arena0 -
Nidwin✭✭✭xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »The fact that people now a days are arguing that a Death Penalty is bad because it makes dying mean something is a little sad.
I mean..I can't even say its the WoW generation at this point....
Warhammer vet here so for your WoW generation comment, ...
Death penalty is horrible as it hits the already outnumbered/outgunned side the hardest. I think we all want the opposite effect, don't we?
FC are great as it has the potential to keep fights going on for a while till one of the sides break. Was actually a pleasant surprise this week-end to discover those FC in Cyrodill. I've been away from RvR for quite some time (6+ months). I quit RvR back then as I hated to spent 50% of my time Horse racing in Cyrodill for keep/Tower/resource fights that only lasted for a minimal time/fight.
AOE caps are a must as TESO skills aren't group oriented. Remove them and you can close Cyrodill once and forever, except for exploit AOE dumping farmers but at some point they won't have anyone to farm as everyone would have moved on.
I also suggest if you don't like or enjoy long, unbalanced and dynamic "larger" scale keep fights to move on and find another game to play. Plenty of sPvP games out there for you.Nidwinqq Templar (healzzz) United Warhammer Vets
Nidwinqq RR100 Magus till the end, R.I.P. Badlands3 -
Braidas✭✭✭✭✭
Not necessarily.
Death penalty is horrible as it hits the already outnumbered/outgunned side the hardest. I think we all want the opposite effect, don't we?xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »The fact that people now a days are arguing that a Death Penalty is bad because it makes dying mean something is a little sad.
I mean..I can't even say its the WoW generation at this point....
What?
TESO skills aren't group oriented.xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »The fact that people now a days are arguing that a Death Penalty is bad because it makes dying mean something is a little sad.
I mean..I can't even say its the WoW generation at this point....
...this a serious post?
0 -
Nidwin✭✭✭Brandeospeedwagon wrote: »
Not necessarily.
Death penalty is horrible as it hits the already outnumbered/outgunned side the hardest. I think we all want the opposite effect, don't we?xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »The fact that people now a days are arguing that a Death Penalty is bad because it makes dying mean something is a little sad.
I mean..I can't even say its the WoW generation at this point....
What?
TESO skills aren't group oriented.xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »The fact that people now a days are arguing that a Death Penalty is bad because it makes dying mean something is a little sad.
I mean..I can't even say its the WoW generation at this point....
...this a serious post?
Troll or trying to be funny?
Just asking as you never know. ;-)
What I meant is that "skills" aren't group oriented because they don't affect only your group. (heals, buffs, cleanses, ...)
In TESO they opted for a faction wide skill system making AOE caps a must to avoid some very nasty side effects.
Also AOE caps avoid having multi-boxers wiping entire warbands on their own, but that's another aspect.Nidwinqq Templar (healzzz) United Warhammer Vets
Nidwinqq RR100 Magus till the end, R.I.P. Badlands2 -
bitaken✭✭✭✭✭Brandeospeedwagon wrote: »
Not necessarily.
Death penalty is horrible as it hits the already outnumbered/outgunned side the hardest. I think we all want the opposite effect, don't we?xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »The fact that people now a days are arguing that a Death Penalty is bad because it makes dying mean something is a little sad.
I mean..I can't even say its the WoW generation at this point....
What?
TESO skills aren't group oriented.xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »The fact that people now a days are arguing that a Death Penalty is bad because it makes dying mean something is a little sad.
I mean..I can't even say its the WoW generation at this point....
...this a serious post?
Troll or trying to be funny?
Just asking as you never know. ;-)
What I meant is that "skills" aren't group oriented because they don't affect only your group. (heals, buffs, cleanses, ...)
In TESO they opted for a faction wide skill system making AOE caps a must to avoid some very nasty side effects.
Also AOE caps avoid having multi-boxers wiping entire warbands on their own, but that's another aspect.
While the AE cap hurts the lesser populated faction, I am willing to cave on that being something they will not take away.
However, the best groups kick out so many synergy based abilities there are times you can click your synergy button and kill kill kill without having to use a single button on your bar. I know, because I have done it. Some of the synergies are "Can't miss" and some are not so great - but they are all valuable. The fact that good groups use those abilities - instead of some of the more common AE abilities - sorcs laying down liquid lightning and having three people click on the synergy is ALWAYS better than sorcs spamming impulse btw - make it so group oriented that it is the smaller groups using these abilities I would like to see "buffed" so that those groups can defend keeps against the massive zergs on flags that we are seeing lately.
However, a death penalty of some sort for using a forward camp absolutely does seem to be the easiest way to make them useful - but at the same time - have a cost for dying. Use a camp - 30 seconds of 50% damage, health and magicka - that seems completely fair to me as it will usually take 15 seconds to get back to the fight in any case. So once you get to the fight we are talking about 15 seconds of half utility. Is it really that much?
FWIW - I have never seen a multi boxer in this game. I do believe the required scripting would be against this game's TOS.Edited by bitaken on September 15, 2014 12:11PMPvP Lead Officer for Einherjar
Member of Einherjar and associated guilds since 2001
A multi Gaming community of players.0 -
Braidas✭✭✭✭✭
So you only played in beta? Please refrain from posting until you actually learn the game.
I've been away from RvR for quite some time (6+ months)xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »The fact that people now a days are arguing that a Death Penalty is bad because it makes dying mean something is a little sad.
I mean..I can't even say its the WoW generation at this point....
0 -
Nala_✭✭✭✭I don't like the way things are heading. I prefer a skill oriented - teamwork oriented - game. Right now the keep capture strategy is basically - get your whole faction on the flag and spam AE. In the last two iterations of this I have witnessed - the ability lag and bugged out abilities have cost us keeps.
It appears that the "stack everyone on flag" strategy employed by some guilds has struck a note of success in that all that meat - Plus the AOE cap - makes defending a keep with a smaller force just not possible. We stack oils and ultis and kill at least half - but the other half are costing too many resources - and the half that died are pouring right back into the keep with the way the forward camps work and no death penalty.
Is this the way the game is going? Whoever has more people wins? I know it has been heading this way but it appears that it's all about numbers now in keep sieges. No matter how many oils - or anti personnel siege - or sorcerers ripping out negates (which has been difficult with the streak lag and sometimes actually bouncing backwards, and will be impossible with the upcoming gutting of the ability to stop zergs) we can't do enough damage fast enough to 50+ players all stacking on a flag. We may wipe them out once or twice but eventually with no death penalty they wear us down.
Something needs to change. I'm not sure what it is at this point. The AOE cap is part of the problem - forward camps and no death penalty are a part of the problem - server lag is a big part of the problem - and population balances are part of the problem. I do not believe there is an "easy fix" and have no proposal for what a fix may be. However, this is not a "fun experience" where the team with more people auto win. There needs to be some possible solution that allows for the lower population to have a chance to defend keeps from a vastly superior force in numbers only.
welcome to 3 months ago when EGL started doing this, just because AD started doing it now doesn't mean its 'new'2 -
Xallus✭✭✭skwornub18_ESO wrote: »I agree there should be a death penalty, something simple like 1 minute reduced stats and unable to use siege. As far as player collision, I think it would only work if only opposite factions collide with you, as collision with your own faction opens up a giant door for trolls.
I keep seeing this from a few and I hope this NEVER happens.
Seriously a death penalty is the worst idea. Why is anyone suggesting a game mechanic that stops you from playing for 30 to 60 seconds? I pay to play not be stuck in a "you cannot play lockout." We need to encourage more active play not less, any idea that recommends stopping play should be a non starter as a fix.
We just need FC's fixed to stop death porting, that will go a long way to solve the issues without a death "stop playing for a minute" penalty. Given how easy it is to die in this game plus the excessive amount of CC that already stops you from playing we do not need a hard 1 minute lockout on death.
I'm not saying a res sickness like in wow where you're worthless, just less efficient than normal. And I'm DC, we're generally outnumbered, and endless camp spawn is our only chance vs double faction sieges. I like to think we have better tactics and we would actually do better on defenses if there were some sort of short term debuff for camp res, vs our endless camp spawning enemies.
As for blood-gating, idk what side of the fence i'm on. On one hand blood-gating gives lower pops the ability to quickly defend against significantly larger groups that would otherwise flip a keep instantly. On the other hand it allows large zergs the opportunity to flip multiple places quickly. Getting rid of it kind of screws low pops that would otherwise have a chance at defending against larger forces 50/50ing keeps. And the numbers game is already a complaint, I think it would get much worse without blood-gates. Also, troll camps would be much more difficult to use up.
All things being equal, including populations, getting rid of blood-gating would be kind of irrelevant since it would equally change the game for everyone. And honestly, perhaps for the worse. Since if a faction wants to hold their keeps they would need a decent anti-siege force sitting at every keep of interest to ensure there's enough defense to hold until reinforcements arrive. Which means lots of people sitting around getting bored. Boredom would be the emotion of winners and the death of a game.0 -
Merlin13KAGL✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭skwornub18_ESO wrote: »...
I still think a 30 second res sickness would be enough of a penalty for the defense / offensive recovery window and make things a lot more interesting in keep battles. I don't think camps need to go away - but they are too instant back to fight as it is.
Ugh NO please, let's not stop people from playing, instead why don't we make camps much more easy to destroy and limit the re-spawn to the camp radius on the map.
@bitaken, you mean the one that happens anyway because you don't rez to full stats, like you were supposed to be able to several patches ago?
Just because you don't like the way something is doesn't necessarily make it wrong...
Earn it.
IRL'ing for a while for assorted reasons, in forum, and in game.I am neither warm, nor fuzzy...
Probably has checkbox on Customer Service profile that say High Aggro, 99% immunity to BS0 -
Nidwin✭✭✭@bitaken
I fully understand your point of view but it just doesn't work in practice.
1) If there wasn't an AOE cap it would hurt the lesser population even more. What you're thinking is that without AOE cap the lesser population would be able to hit a larger amount of players and get more kills. But it goes both ways and the only thing the dominating side has to do is stack Templar healing to become unbeatable. That's something the lesser population just can't do or handle.
With AOE caps a smaller, but better organized group/zerg can actually have a chance and impact.
2) If death penalties are too harsh, people will avoid fights they can't win, except hardcore folks of course. If they're what you suggest they'll just become an annoyance. If we, Templars, had a real 100ft rez skill on a 10seconds cooldown that would avoid a death penalty on resurection, may be, but how it's now I'm against any kind of death penalty in RvR.Nidwinqq Templar (healzzz) United Warhammer Vets
Nidwinqq RR100 Magus till the end, R.I.P. Badlands2 -
In this instance I think it's where Developers need to consider player collision or different mechanics, to stop people just plain stacking/blobbing. I don't think it's currently possible to incorporate collision on a permanent basis but there could be new methods of defending breaches/capture points narrow areas etc.
There could be some kind of formations for players to try it could be incorporated as a traitline for skill points or something similar, where players have to line up in in ranks and use a new synergy like "form up" etc and player collision is turned on in that area only. An example of this would be gate gets breached players all line up in ranks in the breach say 3 ranks deep 7 people wide and use a synergy "form up" which creates a collision area where enemy players cant cross unless over their dead bodies or if the defenders break formation as such.
This would promote new strategies faster thinking and a new variety of methods opposed to a meta PvP game (which i'm not saying it is.) Just an idea or solution which could be taken into account or interesting to read and others to build upon and give their input.Gaius Castricius, House Of Castricii0 -
Braidas✭✭✭✭✭
BoL is not an AoE, it's a specific 3-target heal. Like I said, please learn the game before you post.@bitaken
I fully understand your point of view but it just doesn't work in practice.
1) If there wasn't an AOE cap it would hurt the lesser population even more. What you're thinking is that without AOE cap the lesser population would be able to hit a larger amount of players and get more kills. But it goes both ways and the only thing the dominating side has to do is stack Templar healing to become unbeatable. That's something the lesser population just can't do or handle.
With AOE caps a smaller, but better organized group/zerg can actually have a chance and impact.
2) If death penalties are too harsh, people will avoid fights they can't win, except hardcore folks of course. If they're what you suggest they'll just become an annoyance. If we, Templars, had a real 100ft rez skill on a 10seconds cooldown that would avoid a death penalty on resurection, may be, but how it's now I'm against any kind of death penalty in RvR.
Removing AoE caps entirely is probably not the best b/c the zergs will get rocked even harder and organized groups will just run through them, upping it to 9 or something is more appropiate imo.
0 -
Merlin13KAGL✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭I'm not saying a res sickness like in wow where you're worthless, just less efficient than normal. And I'm DC, we're generally outnumbered, and endless camp spawn is our only chance vs double faction sieges. I like to think we have better tactics and we would actually do better on defenses if there were some sort of short term debuff for camp res, vs our endless camp spawning enemies.
As for blood-gating, idk what side of the fence i'm on. On one hand blood-gating gives lower pops the ability to quickly defend against significantly larger groups that would otherwise flip a keep instantly. On the other hand it allows large zergs the opportunity to flip multiple places quickly. Getting rid of it kind of screws low pops that would otherwise have a chance at defending against larger forces 50/50ing keeps. And the numbers game is already a complaint, I think it would get much worse without blood-gates. Also, troll camps would be much more difficult to use up.
All things being equal, including populations, getting rid of blood-gating would be kind of irrelevant since it would equally change the game for everyone. And honestly, perhaps for the worse. Since if a faction wants to hold their keeps they would need a decent anti-siege force sitting at every keep of interest to ensure there's enough defense to hold until reinforcements arrive. Which means lots of people sitting around getting bored. Boredom would be the emotion of winners and the death of a game.
@Xallus, you're either in the vicinity or your not.
Limit the rez range. Your reward for dying shouldn't be that you get to jump halfway across the map. A check in place to see that you actually tried to defend yourself would make it different. When suiciding just to port, makes actual transit useless for both sides.
I'd even be okay with limited portals being opened by mages under the Support tree.
Your mage would have to be onsite and would be vulnerable during the portal summon. You could then bring, say, max of 20 people through before the portal was closed. Same mage/group couldn't reopen another portal for a cooldown period.
At the same time, you should be able to respawn at your own keep (the one you were defending) up until the point it is no longer yours (without a FC).
If they haven't broken through the walls, the integrity is not yet compromised.
At the same time, I think there should be at least a skill/AI setting that would call all hands to defend. A little irritating when the front door honor guard just stands there validating parking when all hell's breaking loose on the inside.
Just because you don't like the way something is doesn't necessarily make it wrong...
Earn it.
IRL'ing for a while for assorted reasons, in forum, and in game.I am neither warm, nor fuzzy...
Probably has checkbox on Customer Service profile that say High Aggro, 99% immunity to BS0 -
Desdemonte wrote: »
That's how AD finally got Emp last night on Thorn.....
So sick of the finger pointing - EP did this, AD did that, DC does this, etc. Get off your self righteous kick on which faction smells more rotten because we are ALL working within the confines and mechanics of the game Zos has given us. I have seen EP employ numerous mass player tactics since arriving to Thornblade after the bulk of you bailed on Chillrend. Moreover MOST if not ALL organized guilds can't control hordes of solo players who swarm to where they think the action is - ALL factions flock to the big battle. Whether it be Fare, Glade, Farr, BRK or Ash. Not seeing ANY relevance whatsoever of your comment to the OP - just bitterness
Edited by jkirchner71ub17_ESO2 on September 15, 2014 12:57PMMAIN
Aldmeri Dominion
Torroch, VR14 Orc DK Rank 22, Officer in Maelstrom
Once again looking for an organized PvP guild to join - viva la Venatus
NON-PvP Alts
Ebonheart Pact
Torach, VR12 Orc Sorcerer, GM House of the Tamriel Ten
Torrach, VR8 Orc Templar, House of the Tamriel Ten (older brother of Torach)3 -
Mitharus✭✭✭Merlin13KAGL wrote: »@bitaken, you mean the one that happens anyway because you don't rez to full stats, like you were supposed to be able to several patches ago?
That's only with a Soul Gem (which shouldn't be the case). I'm guessing because it doesn't take any Cyro bonuses into account initially... But I've never played the numbers game to see what I'm res'ing at.
Anyway, whenever I res at an FC/Keep/etc... I'm at full stats.(1)
-M
Edit:
At least, the UI Mod shows my stats as full... Lets put it that way.Edited by Mitharus on September 15, 2014 1:01PM0 -
Xallus✭✭✭@Merlin13KAGL
What I'm pointing out is that during major population disadvantages such as the most common... locked AD vs 2 bar EP and 1 bar DC during Oceanic, AD could hit 3 keeps at the same time, 50/50, burst them all simultaneously, and take all or at least 2 of them without blood ports. With blood ports DC in that scenario would potentially be able to push off 1 or 2 of the sieges, of course all 3 is unlikely. Elimination of blood ports would ruin low pops. I agree that the fundamentals of blood porting are ridiculous, as are the population differences.0 -
@Merlin13KAGL
What I'm pointing out is that during major population disadvantages such as the most common... locked AD vs 2 bar EP and 1 bar DC during Oceanic, AD could hit 3 keeps at the same time, 50/50, burst them all simultaneously, and take all or at least 2 of them without blood ports. With blood ports DC in that scenario would potentially be able to push off 1 or 2 of the sieges, of course all 3 is unlikely. Elimination of blood ports would ruin low pops. I agree that the fundamentals of blood porting are ridiculous, as are the population differences.
Once again alliance finger pointing. I have seen ALL factions push keeps when they have the population advantage. Stop with the stupid finger pointing as it contributes NOTHING to the OP. ALL factions smell funny if we dig enough into how they work on the battlefield depending on whose perspective it is from. I can easily point fingers at DC and EP for shady tactics but I won't because I know for each questionable tactic I see QUALITY gameplay from my opponents.Edited by jkirchner71ub17_ESO2 on September 15, 2014 1:04PMMAIN
Aldmeri Dominion
Torroch, VR14 Orc DK Rank 22, Officer in Maelstrom
Once again looking for an organized PvP guild to join - viva la Venatus
NON-PvP Alts
Ebonheart Pact
Torach, VR12 Orc Sorcerer, GM House of the Tamriel Ten
Torrach, VR8 Orc Templar, House of the Tamriel Ten (older brother of Torach)0 -
Lava_Croft✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭
Death in ESO is a lot like death in Super Mario.xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »The fact that people now a days are arguing that a Death Penalty is bad because it makes dying mean something is a little sad.
I mean..I can't even say its the WoW generation at this point....
1 -
Nidwin✭✭✭Brandeospeedwagon wrote: »BoL is not an AoE, it's a specific 3-target heal. Like I said, please learn the game before you post.
Please, learn to read, to assimilate what you read and try to fully understand what you just have read.
Just saying.
It's about stacking heals, not about BoL not being AOE. BoL being a 3-target heal makes it even worse if AOE caps are removed. It's the side that can afford the most amount of healers that will always win any fight.
Anyway,
I'm out of this. It's just pointless it seems.Nidwinqq Templar (healzzz) United Warhammer Vets
Nidwinqq RR100 Magus till the end, R.I.P. Badlands1 -
Braidas✭✭✭✭✭
You've clearly never heard of negate, or healing debuffs of any sort. Pls go, you've no idea what you're talking about.Brandeospeedwagon wrote: »BoL is not an AoE, it's a specific 3-target heal. Like I said, please learn the game before you post.
Please, learn to read, to assimilate what you read and try to fully understand what you just have read.
Just saying.
It's about stacking heals, not about BoL not being AOE. BoL being a 3-target heal makes it even worse if AOE caps are removed. It's the side that can afford the most amount of healers that will always win any fight.
Anyway,
I'm out of this. It's just pointless it seems.
0 -
Pixysticks✭✭✭✭✭Brandeospeedwagon wrote: »
You've clearly never heard of negate, or healing debuffs of any sort. Pls go, you've no idea what you're talking about.Brandeospeedwagon wrote: »BoL is not an AoE, it's a specific 3-target heal. Like I said, please learn the game before you post.
Please, learn to read, to assimilate what you read and try to fully understand what you just have read.
Just saying.
It's about stacking heals, not about BoL not being AOE. BoL being a 3-target heal makes it even worse if AOE caps are removed. It's the side that can afford the most amount of healers that will always win any fight.
Anyway,
I'm out of this. It's just pointless it seems.
--^Alacrity
Retired 05/04/15.1 -
Ilven✭the biggest problem of Cyrodiil are the continuous use of impulse, the addition of friendly fire may limit the use of tactics based simply on being grouped and spam AoE5
