Please Make PvP Fun Again

Columba · November 2014

no one said zergs need to go. I have nothing against zergs. I hated the ability of impulse spammers to hurl themselves at a fight, die rinse, and repeat. I am glad that I see fewer impulse spamming groups now.

Xsorus · November 2014

Lava_Croft wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Lava_Croft wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Everytime some [snip] muffin in a impulse group claims he's not zerging when he's running with a crap ton of people I can't help but laugh.

I'll give people the benefit of the doubt in this game, and say you can run 12 and it not be a zerg...Simply because the trials are 12 mans...If you're running past that though, you're bloody zerging and you claiming your not because your organized is hilariously stupid. If you ran 16 man organized group in DAOC, you were bloody zerging....

Organization has nothing to do with Zerging. You can be a 100 Man Organized group, and guess what.. you're bloody zerging.

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

Sounds like you never played StarCraft and therefore have absolutely no clue what exactly is the Zerg and what the term 'zerging' stands for.

The Zerg excel in throwing massive amounts of low quality, expendable units at the enemy. If you run in an organized group of 100 high quality players, you are not running in a zerg. Just because a group is large does not automagically make them a zerg.

What does make a zerg is having a superior number of *** players and overpowering the enemy with that. Quantity, not quality. Or maybe better said, quality through quantity!

A. I've played Starcraft
B. If you don't know what Zerging actually means as an MMO term, don't post about it and make yourself look foolish.

Zerging was co-opted long ago in MMO's to describe one thing, A Massive Enemy force. It has nothing to do with Low quality expendable players in MMOs.

So this has been your lesson of today in MMO terminology.

To help you out, I'll link you to the top 3 Google results for the query "mmo terminology zerg":

Urban Dictionary:

Nowadays term zerg is used in mmo games to describe force consisted of large group of lower level players (often with only basic equipment) who use numbers rather then strategy to defeat the enemy, therefore requiring no skill. This tactics is commonly known as zerging

Techopedia

Zerg is a slang term for a group of low-level gamers who depend on overwhelming numbers to achieve victory, rather than relying on technique or strategy. The term is most often used in the context of online role-playing and strategy games, but it also applies to multiplayer first-person shooters.

internetslang.com

Defeat enemy by outnumbering rather than strategy or skill

Boom?

And yet, the term was originally used at first during DAOC (where it was co-opted from StarCraft) to describe using a large enemy force. The skill of the player was never consider at all when saying someone was zerging. For example...If you ran two 8mans in DAOC together, You were zerging, no matter what your skill level was, Everyone would laugh at you for doing it as well. Here is another example, Running an 8 man stealth group in DAOC, That was considered zerging, and again...had nothing to do with skill level

by the way, from urban dictionary (which is an awful source, but whatever)

Originally a playable race of characters in the online Video game “StarCraft”; this term is now commonly used by the online gaming community.

To assure ones victory using overwhelming numbers.

To greatly outnumber the enemy, and swarm them.

To trivialize en encounter using mass numbers of allies rather then skill
Everyone target the boss, and zerg it.

That guild zerged us.

Those guys are a bunch of zerglings.

Wreuntzylla · November 2014

Zerg has always meant numbers. DAoC, Warhammer, AO, etc. etc.

Numbers are a crutch. I somehow doubt that skilled players would band together in large numbers. Or maybe the issue here is the definition of skilled.

Aoe_Barbecue · November 2014

The term zerg is mostly used as an arbitrary insult when one perceives that the determining factor in their loss was numbers. In light of that, I like a term that's been passed around: "zerg goggles". When many groups lose a fight, which was for the most part evenly numbered, their mind's eye imagines a lot more people were there than there actually was, all while underestimating their own forces' numbers.

Let's not pretend there is an actual definition of MMO zerging. Brb 4 people kill a lone ganker. YOU FKN ZERGED ME BRO LOL GIT GOOD L2P zOMGBBQ. In this game, where numbers are massively scaled up compared to the first and second generation of MMO's, 12 - 16 people is hardly a "zerg".

Xsorus · November 2014

Aoe_Barbecue wrote: »

The term zerg is mostly used as an arbitrary insult when one perceives that the determining factor in their loss was numbers. In light of that, I like a term that's been passed around: "zerg goggles". When many groups lose a fight, which was for the most part evenly numbered, their mind's eye imagines a lot more people were there than there actually was, all while underestimating their own forces' numbers.

Let's not pretend there is an actual definition of MMO zerging. Brb 4 people kill a lone ganker. YOU FKN ZERGED ME BRO LOL GIT GOOD L2P zOMGBBQ. In this game, where numbers are massively scaled up compared to the first and second generation of MMO's, 12 - 16 people is hardly a "zerg".

That depends, 12-16 Stealthers would be a massive zerg in DAOC terms. In this game in terms of group action, 12 people I don't think it'd be much of a zerg since the trials like I said are 12. 16 though, you're pushing into zerging territory.

Xsorus · November 2014

Wreuntzylla wrote: »

Zerg has always meant numbers. DAoC, Warhammer, AO, etc. etc.

Numbers are a crutch. I somehow doubt that skilled players would band together in large numbers. Or maybe the issue here is the definition of skilled.

You'd be surprised, though you start running with large numbers long enough you become pretty unskilled when not with those numbers

Rylana · November 2014

I find the term zerg as used in ESO has the following definition:

"An OPFOR that causes your death, regardless of size or make-up, or skill level. Must always be arbitrarily exaggerated and reported to zone to save face and personal honor"

Aoe_Barbecue · November 2014

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Aoe_Barbecue wrote: »

The term zerg is mostly used as an arbitrary insult when one perceives that the determining factor in their loss was numbers. In light of that, I like a term that's been passed around: "zerg goggles". When many groups lose a fight, which was for the most part evenly numbered, their mind's eye imagines a lot more people were there than there actually was, all while underestimating their own forces' numbers.

Let's not pretend there is an actual definition of MMO zerging. Brb 4 people kill a lone ganker. YOU FKN ZERGED ME BRO LOL GIT GOOD L2P zOMGBBQ. In this game, where numbers are massively scaled up compared to the first and second generation of MMO's, 12 - 16 people is hardly a "zerg".

That depends, 12-16 Stealthers would be a massive zerg in DAOC terms. In this game in terms of group action, 12 people I don't think it'd be much of a zerg since the trials like I said are 12. 16 though, you're pushing into zerging territory.

I am curious how four individuals more than twelve constitutes a serious incursion into "zerg" territory. I mean, there's obviously a difference between 12 and 48. But 12 and 16? That's four whole dudes. Would 12 vs 18 thus be a non-zerg versus a zerg or tenuous zerg?

The term zerg has a really lose category. I don't even start saying "zerg" until I realize I can't possibly count how many people are on my screen. (Admittedly, I often run out of toes.)

Galalin · November 2014

I may be aging myself here but i believe the term zerg in gaming started with warcraft the original version for those that remember games before mmos

Your dk scrub

Rylana · November 2014

Galalin wrote: »

I may be aging myself here but i believe the term zerg in gaming started with warcraft the original version for those that remember games before mmos

Your dk scrub

Started in Starcraft, a race literally named the Zerg. Zergling rush became Zerg rush.

Galalin · November 2014

Rylana wrote: »

Galalin wrote: »

I may be aging myself here but i believe the term zerg in gaming started with warcraft the original version for those that remember games before mmos

Your dk scrub

Started in Starcraft, a race literally named the Zerg. Zergling rush became Zerg rush.

Official use i would agree but i think i remember the term being used as slang in warcraft. Although at my age it is possible i am confused

Lava_Croft · November 2014

Galalin wrote: »

Rylana wrote: »

Galalin wrote: »

I may be aging myself here but i believe the term zerg in gaming started with warcraft the original version for those that remember games before mmos

Your dk scrub

Started in Starcraft, a race literally named the Zerg. Zergling rush became Zerg rush.

Official use i would agree but i think i remember the term being used as slang in warcraft. Although at my age it is possible i am confused

The days of Warcraft and Warcraft 2 had absolutely no mention of Zerg. Maybe you are thinking about Warcraft 3, which was released some time after Starcraft.

Gooey · November 2014

Oh, no PvP breaking issues were fixed.., Great.

Durham · November 2014

Columba wrote: »

Aoe_Barbecue wrote: »

Columba wrote: »

Pvp MUCH MUCH better without fcs. no more people hurling themselves with impulse at others. great change.

You are consistently narrow minded regarding PvP. All things which support your play style in specific are labeled good. All things which do not support your play style are caricatured for lack of actual discussion. The PvP has been subjectively worse since the initial FC removal.

Of course, there are other issues, such as AoE dps suffering consistent nerfs and target limitation, which was mitigated in part by the sharpened bug. Now with that fixed, even more emphasis is placed on zergballing and guild groups have even less options to deal with them. (Not hating on bug fixes at all.) It's the only way to get enough firepower to kill other big groups. I think the developers have a severe lack of big picture vision. Or, they don't play their game.

Lol, so what? Of course i support my play style. I disagree with your assessment. For MANY of us, the pvp has only gotten better. I am sorry that the pulse spammers are upset. I am not going to defend anything that supports pulse spamming, sorry. I think it's horrible for the game. many people agree with me.

I agree ..

Columba · November 2014

Pvp was a BLAST tonigh on Thorne. No fcs and a blast.

Cody · November 2014

the FC issue does make death have actual meaning, but at what cost?

they did not need to be removed, they just needed changing. ZOS needs to bring them back in.

i dont approve of mindless zergs and supposed "pros" fearlessly charging 20+ people, when they know they will just be right back in the fight with an FC, but the game is designed with FCs playing a huge role.

They need to come back, but modified to stop these ridiculous lagblobs-.err... i mean zergs.

Varicite · November 2014

Cody wrote: »

the game is designed with FCs playing a huge role.

No, it's not.

It's designed w/ transit lines playing a huge role. FCs were an afterthought.

Xsorus · November 2014

Aoe_Barbecue wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Aoe_Barbecue wrote: »

The term zerg is mostly used as an arbitrary insult when one perceives that the determining factor in their loss was numbers. In light of that, I like a term that's been passed around: "zerg goggles". When many groups lose a fight, which was for the most part evenly numbered, their mind's eye imagines a lot more people were there than there actually was, all while underestimating their own forces' numbers.

Let's not pretend there is an actual definition of MMO zerging. Brb 4 people kill a lone ganker. YOU FKN ZERGED ME BRO LOL GIT GOOD L2P zOMGBBQ. In this game, where numbers are massively scaled up compared to the first and second generation of MMO's, 12 - 16 people is hardly a "zerg".

That depends, 12-16 Stealthers would be a massive zerg in DAOC terms. In this game in terms of group action, 12 people I don't think it'd be much of a zerg since the trials like I said are 12. 16 though, you're pushing into zerging territory.

I am curious how four individuals more than twelve constitutes a serious incursion into "zerg" territory. I mean, there's obviously a difference between 12 and 48. But 12 and 16? That's four whole dudes. Would 12 vs 18 thus be a non-zerg versus a zerg or tenuous zerg?

The term zerg has a really lose category. I don't even start saying "zerg" until I realize I can't possibly count how many people are on my screen. (Admittedly, I often run out of toes.)

The same way 16 vs 8 was Zerging in daoc. Numbers were used to win the fight.

Redlag · November 2014

Lets face it. ESo is even carebear to WoW. That has open world Pvp all along. The devs of eso cant even comprehend hardcore. They might even being hiding from it.

Koensol · November 2014

Redlag wrote: »

Lets face it. ESo is even carebear to WoW. That has open world Pvp all along. The devs of eso cant even comprehend hardcore. They might even being hiding from it.

wow has OPTIONAL open world pvp. As in a seperate server. Nothing hardcore about that. This game cannot do that, because of the megaserver. Hence cyrodiil.

Aoe_Barbecue · November 2014

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Aoe_Barbecue wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Aoe_Barbecue wrote: »

The term zerg is mostly used as an arbitrary insult when one perceives that the determining factor in their loss was numbers. In light of that, I like a term that's been passed around: "zerg goggles". When many groups lose a fight, which was for the most part evenly numbered, their mind's eye imagines a lot more people were there than there actually was, all while underestimating their own forces' numbers.

Let's not pretend there is an actual definition of MMO zerging. Brb 4 people kill a lone ganker. YOU FKN ZERGED ME BRO LOL GIT GOOD L2P zOMGBBQ. In this game, where numbers are massively scaled up compared to the first and second generation of MMO's, 12 - 16 people is hardly a "zerg".

That depends, 12-16 Stealthers would be a massive zerg in DAOC terms. In this game in terms of group action, 12 people I don't think it'd be much of a zerg since the trials like I said are 12. 16 though, you're pushing into zerging territory.

I am curious how four individuals more than twelve constitutes a serious incursion into "zerg" territory. I mean, there's obviously a difference between 12 and 48. But 12 and 16? That's four whole dudes. Would 12 vs 18 thus be a non-zerg versus a zerg or tenuous zerg?

The term zerg has a really lose category. I don't even start saying "zerg" until I realize I can't possibly count how many people are on my screen. (Admittedly, I often run out of toes.)

The same way 16 vs 8 was Zerging in daoc. Numbers were used to win the fight.

So, given the right circumstances, 4 people can zerg?

JaJaLuka · November 2014

BOMBS!!!!

Gooey · November 2014

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Aoe_Barbecue wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Aoe_Barbecue wrote: »

The term zerg is mostly used as an arbitrary insult when one perceives that the determining factor in their loss was numbers. In light of that, I like a term that's been passed around: "zerg goggles". When many groups lose a fight, which was for the most part evenly numbered, their mind's eye imagines a lot more people were there than there actually was, all while underestimating their own forces' numbers.

Let's not pretend there is an actual definition of MMO zerging. Brb 4 people kill a lone ganker. YOU FKN ZERGED ME BRO LOL GIT GOOD L2P zOMGBBQ. In this game, where numbers are massively scaled up compared to the first and second generation of MMO's, 12 - 16 people is hardly a "zerg".

That depends, 12-16 Stealthers would be a massive zerg in DAOC terms. In this game in terms of group action, 12 people I don't think it'd be much of a zerg since the trials like I said are 12. 16 though, you're pushing into zerging territory.

I am curious how four individuals more than twelve constitutes a serious incursion into "zerg" territory. I mean, there's obviously a difference between 12 and 48. But 12 and 16? That's four whole dudes. Would 12 vs 18 thus be a non-zerg versus a zerg or tenuous zerg?

The term zerg has a really lose category. I don't even start saying "zerg" until I realize I can't possibly count how many people are on my screen. (Admittedly, I often run out of toes.)

The same way 16 vs 8 was Zerging in daoc. Numbers were used to win the fight.

Does this mean a group of 2 people are zerging because they fought 1 person?

Gumpnstein · November 2014

Aoe_Barbecue wrote: »

I like the fact that death has consequences now. But people are playing like gigantic kidboxes, if one gets the euphemism. I think a more elegant solution could have been implemented. For example, ZoS could have implemented faction-specific FC cooldown timers on resources and keeps or given increasing spawn cooldown timers to those spawning on the camps. They could also make it so that camps placed outside of objectives, i.e. keeps and its surrounding resources, would degrade very quickly to mitigate trollcamping.

I think whoever is responsible for Cyrodiil AvA mechanics is not very creative. I think whoever is responsible for skill balance is a zergling stamina character too.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler‌ @ZOS_TristanK‌

You see the problem is that the trolls themselves, like yourself, are in here giving out freaking advice. How about people like you stop with the BS in game, and we wouldn't even be having this conversation. I believe the last time we chatted in forums you were bragging about trolling, the same night that everyone was complaining about troll camps, and which were likely dropped by your group. What a joke.

Aoe_Barbecue · November 2014

Gumpnstein wrote: »

Aoe_Barbecue wrote: »

I like the fact that death has consequences now. But people are playing like gigantic kidboxes, if one gets the euphemism. I think a more elegant solution could have been implemented. For example, ZoS could have implemented faction-specific FC cooldown timers on resources and keeps or given increasing spawn cooldown timers to those spawning on the camps. They could also make it so that camps placed outside of objectives, i.e. keeps and its surrounding resources, would degrade very quickly to mitigate trollcamping.

I think whoever is responsible for Cyrodiil AvA mechanics is not very creative. I think whoever is responsible for skill balance is a zergling stamina character too.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler‌ @ZOS_TristanK‌

You see the problem is that the trolls themselves, like yourself, are in here giving out freaking advice. How about people like you stop with the BS in game, and we wouldn't even be having this conversation. I believe the last time we chatted in forums you were bragging about trolling, the same night that everyone was complaining about troll camps, and which were likely dropped by your group. What a joke.

Sometimes, a person is so dense, so cognitively deficient, that those of better lucidity can only mock. This post is case in point. You offer nothing other than "yeah well I don't like you so shut up harumph harumph harumph."

You also have nothing other than hearsay about us supposedly troll camping. We have not and we do not. It's funny how quickly lemmings hop aboard the short bus however. When we were in Haderus farming and looking for lag free pvp, still came the rage tells, "stop troll camping you guys suck ermergerrrd." And these people were in Thornblade. Top kek

But don't think I am telling you to stop. Your anger arouses me.

Columba · November 2014

Thou art aroused? Which in itself is arousing.

Vizier · November 2014

Aoe_Barbecue wrote: »

You may not like AoE bombing. But most of the people that engage in it do, and it happened to be far more relevant to PvP metagame than other playstyles. Every game with large scale PvP will have this nuance. The AoE dps meta just changed. Now it's a numbers game only.

Well... Now it's not so important to the PvP metagame and I'm glad of it. Impulse trains with FC's cheapened PvP for pretty much everyone else. In the end I'm sorry it's less fun for you but I'm not sorry about the AOE nerf and banishment of FC's. The game is better off for it.

Aoe_Barbecue · November 2014

Vizier wrote: »

Aoe_Barbecue wrote: »

You may not like AoE bombing. But most of the people that engage in it do, and it happened to be far more relevant to PvP metagame than other playstyles. Every game with large scale PvP will have this nuance. The AoE dps meta just changed. Now it's a numbers game only.

Well... Now it's not so important to the PvP metagame and I'm glad of it. Impulse trains with FC's cheapened PvP for pretty much everyone else. In the end I'm sorry it's less fun for you but I'm not sorry about the AOE nerf and banishment of FC's. The game is better off for it.

AoE's diminished effectiveness is not reducing AoE or even making it more rare. It's reinforcing the zergball metagame if anything. No FC's is a good change. No arguments there.

Columba · November 2014

I don't see nearly as many pulse spammers as I did 2 weeks ago.

Varicite · November 2014

Aoe_Barbecue wrote: »

Vizier wrote: »

Aoe_Barbecue wrote: »

You may not like AoE bombing. But most of the people that engage in it do, and it happened to be far more relevant to PvP metagame than other playstyles. Every game with large scale PvP will have this nuance. The AoE dps meta just changed. Now it's a numbers game only.

Well... Now it's not so important to the PvP metagame and I'm glad of it. Impulse trains with FC's cheapened PvP for pretty much everyone else. In the end I'm sorry it's less fun for you but I'm not sorry about the AOE nerf and banishment of FC's. The game is better off for it.

AoE's diminished effectiveness is not reducing AoE or even making it more rare. It's reinforcing the zergball metagame if anything. No FC's is a good change. No arguments there.

Will be interesting to see the effect of the zergbuster un-purgable AoE explosion they're talking about implementing.

You're right that those running in AoE groups are just running them tighter than before, but once a few hard-hitting explosions (that spread to those it hits, iirc) get tossed onto players running in those tight groups, they can either spread out or die horribly.

I'm hoping it's the latter, personally. : P