Maintenance for the week of October 13:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – October 13
• NA megaservers for maintenance – October 15, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – October 15, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – October 15, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/683901
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – October 13
• NA megaservers for maintenance – October 15, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – October 15, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – October 15, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/683901
Keeping zergs away from IC
-
bosmern_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭Am I alone in my thinking the only players around here trying to force their playstyle onto others are the zerglings themselves?
Your saying that in a post wanting there to be only solo/small groups in IC. There will be people who disagree and your saying that they are forcing their playstyle on others? on a thread that is trying to make only solo/small group in IC
I...I don't even...~Thallen~2 -
ToRelax✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭bosmern_ESO wrote: »Am I alone in my thinking the only players around here trying to force their playstyle onto others are the zerglings themselves?
Your saying that in a post wanting there to be only solo/small groups in IC. There will be people who disagree and your saying that they are forcing their playstyle on others? on a thread that is trying to make only solo/small group in IC
I...I don't even...
If I'd speak freely I'd probably get this thread closed, so I don't.
Just know that ZOS clearly said IC is for small groups and eventually solo players if they dare, not zergs.DAGON - ALTADOON - CHIM - GHARTOK
The Covenant is broken. The Enemy has won...
Elo'dryel - Sorc - AR 50 - Hopesfire - EP EU1 -
Rust_in_Peace✭✭✭✭✭I'll believe that IC will actually be small scale pvp when I see it.
You don't need to be grouped to run a zerg; Guild Wars 2 has a limit of 5 people per group and their version of Alliance war still has zerg blobs.
Still waiting on some kind of battleground type scenario to get interested about pvp again.0 -
RedTalon✭✭✭✭✭
✭May be best to keep them in all things consider, given everyone in a group gets there share of stones, so mihght be best to knock off a home keep when a zerg goes inside and get back to pvping.0 -
Jahosefat✭✭✭✭bosmern_ESO wrote: »Also how exactly is 24+ pvp garbage? "All you do is spam one button!!!"
So its ok for gankers to spam wrecking blow/snipe for entire fights? Everyone spams one ability, so dont say that only people in groups do.
"All you do is follow crown!!!"
All you do in small scale/solo is block cast spam abilities like molten whip, concealed weapon, etc.
You give so much to lol at, but my time is limited. Simple example you may comprehend: purge bots- great for large groups, arguably necessary, keeps everyone alive spamming one button- an important but less-than-engaging roll to fill.
However, in my group of 2-4 if I had one dude following me around spamming purge... I hope you see why that is silly.
Larger groups generally = simpler less engaging rolls. It is why people group, it makes things easier. Good small groups will generally be composed of builds where every member can heal/damage/cc- when one member is in trouble the others can heal/cc/burst to take pressure off.
You can run around in small groups/solo spamming one thing, you will just suck. You can run around in large zergs spamming one thing and rule the world.Joeshock- AD NA AB Thorn Chill Sorc New Eden Low Sec Roamer
Fight not with monsters lest ye become one4 -
G0ku✭✭✭✭Your exaggerations are limitless.
Nothing compared to the things you will read if they implement the new stuff the wrong way. And ZOS´ record of implementing things initially is not the best.
Don´t get me wrong, I´m looking forward to IC and would prefer small grouping - but doing it in a way where pver´s only chance to keep TV Stones is via quest boxes will breed so much hatred among the players that my words will appear harmless compared to then.
It´s on the PTS-folks to change it for the greater goods (if ZOS once listens to them).
- First AD EU Group to finish DSA VET -
AD Altmer V16 Templar Alliance Rank 30 - EU - DSA Conqueror (pre-nerf) flawless vMSA
AD Argonian V16 Dragonknight Alliance Rank 15
AD Bosmer V16 Nightblade Alliance Rank 16
AD Kahjiit V16 Sorcerer Alliance Rank 10
AD Dunmer V16 Dragonknight Alliance Rank 9
AD Altmer V16 Templar Alliance Rank 10 - flawless vMSA
DC Altmer V16 Sorcerer Alliance Rank 9 - flawless vMSA
AD Breton V16 Templar Alliance Rank 10
AD Altmer V16 Sorceress Alliance Rank 21
AD Kahjiit Warden
AD Altmer Nightblade0 -
Kronosphere✭✭✭✭bosmern_ESO wrote: »How about no single players in IC? you have to be in a group to get in.
No, thats not how it works. Just because you don't prefer how others play the game doesn't mean its wrong, not everyone has to play the same way as you. If someone wants to play solo because they prefer it, let them, they pay money to play this game (or will be for IC). If someone wants to play in a large group because they prefer it, let them, they pay money to play the game (Or for the DLC).
Who are you to say how others should play after someone spent money on it?
there is already a place for large zergs, this is not that place. your logic is weak.~House Indoril~
Submit to the three, the spirits and thy lords.3 -
Morvul✭✭✭✭✭as someone who always opposed this and similar ideas for "general cyrodiil", I thinkit might be an interesting idea for IC!2 -
Minnesinger✭✭✭✭✭
✭I don´t know how there is any means of preventing groups from using TS/ Vent/ Mumble. Of course, if every pvp counter happens in a instance similar to group dungeons there is a limit to players. Otherwise, I believe pvp being close to what it is now. Ganking, groups, zergs....A is for Atronach.
B is for Bungler's Bane.
C is for Comberry.0 -
FireCowCommando✭✭✭✭✭If ZoS wanted zergs out of IC then they need to give the players a reason. Everything i have seen so far says one thing: All the gear, loot, ect. you want is inside the city.
Whats the point of keep captures exactly? I understand the whole sewer access thing, but if all the players want inside the city the majority is likely to head straight in, leaving the rest of the map empty.
One of my gripes with PvP is how insanely boring it is to PvDoor the map. Even when being crowned as emperor its lack luster. Eventually you control the map, but its a grind. I know ZoS loves their grinds.
Please there has to be some sort of incentive for the players outside fighting over keeps to be there. With the majority of the population inside the city until they are pushed out, ALL cyrodill PvP is going to be PvDoor.
Without a doubt IC sounds like it has some good ideas, but theres also some pretty big problems outside of IC for PvP.Edited by FireCowCommando on July 19, 2015 10:20AM2 -
Ahzek✭✭✭✭✭
✭http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/173750/pvp-gvg-event-aetherius-eight-ep-eu-vs-daggerfall-army-dc-eu/p1
@bosmern_ESO this is quite a large thread on the subject you are trying to derail this thread on. Have fun with it
.
I hope you can bring new life to it as well since it was pretty hilarious at times.
Jo'Khaljor1 -
Sacadon✭✭✭✭✭I think it was ZOS's intention to make IC a small group zone, but there is still much we need to know about the IC's mechanics in order to see how much effort ZOS has invested so far in making small groups the norm and zergs the exception.
The PvE boss TV equal distribution mechanic favors smaller groups (assuming low spawn rate).
The chests are good to attract the solo players (even though groups can loot them too).
But other than the comment on earning AP and XP, we've yet to hear if ZOS plans to deincentivize groups larger than a certain size.
Given IC is a separate zone, this is a great opportunity to introduce different AP and XP mechanics that favor groups at least no larger than 12. Based on the size of those sewers, I think 4 is just about right.
Hopefully they'll expand on this before or at QuakeCon. I plan to be there for the Q&A and will seek additional clarity on this if we don't learn anything new before then.
Edit: Also, AFAIK, nothing prevents a zerg from steam rolling 1 or more players and taking their stones. This would be another thing to manage in order to de incentivize the zerg.
Edited by Sacadon on July 19, 2015 12:24PM1 -
eliisra✭✭✭✭✭
✭No to 4-man group restrictions. It would create a fotm 4+ NB's with cloak, max burst and ganking meta. Other class constellations wouldn't be as effective in that specific environment.
Also well, most of us have more than 3 friends, that we like to experience IC with.
But I also feel that multiple full raids standing in the central hot spot spamming Steel Tornado, would ruin IC in a matter of days.
Somewhere between 6 and 12 max group size, I'd prefer. But also add a massive currency penalty, based on number of allies in area, hitting the target or similar.
I mean we all know we'll see 50+ players running in the same direction to kill like 3 guys, than teabagging and and feeling empowered by that great achievement, regardless of allowed group size. If we want to get away from that, we need to address the reward system.
2 -
Jules✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭bosmern_ESO wrote: »@GreyHound501 then everyone would die once, spaw at the same place and continue as normal.
the only way to prevent zergs ruining IC is by taking away the incentive to zerg in IC.
The incentive to even go to IC is mostly TV stones (compared to cyro objectives ) and a bit of AP. Of course there are activities like the district control and the quests, but in the end it all seems like to be about the TV stones for personal charackter progression.
IF you make it so only groups of 4 can exist in IC only 4 people at most will benefit from each kill in the terms of TV stones, thus makeing larger groups inefficient for fighting other players, but they would still be able to team up on "tough" (lel) PvE bosses or to take a district however now every individual group has to work for its rewards.
@bosmern_ESO I am a buying customer to say that i want an IC environment without huge zergs because they would diminish my experience of it greatly.IF i truly have to explain to you how then you probably should stop reading now cause we will never come to an agreement except that we disagree.
Since I paid for the game i can make the very same claim as you and suggest/support ideas that would imporve my personal experience, as can every other person in this thread and on these forums.
You have to remember that ESO is not a single player game, it is a MMO. It's a MMO before a classic ES game, MMO's always support multiple/large groups of players playing together over solo. Just because you don't play with large groups means its wrong.
Again, If there is people who play in large groups who purchase IC they should be able to play with their groups in IC, even if you don't agree with it. There is a reason why there are Alliances and PvP was designed for Zerg v Zerg, not 1v1's (I don't know if you notice it or not, but there isn't an arena or anything that supports 1v1).
Hate zergs all you want, and people that play in them, ZoS isn't going to make updates just for a small vocal community of players.
I can easily say that solo players diminish my experience because they do little to helping my faction achieve victories, and that ZoS should make it so you have to be in a large group in IC. Don't be close ignorant or close-minded, This is a MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER game and not a single player I'm sorry to break this to you, but if you want a game that supports solo/small group PvP you might want to go look for another MMO.
Also stop trying to force your play-style onto others, not everyone wants to play the same as you.
I've disagreed with you vehemently (lulz) in other threads but here I think you're spot on. To cap IC @ 4 man's would be pretty discouraging to people who choose to play in large groups. ESPECIALLY since this is the only method of obtaining stones- which is the only method of obtaining new gear.
I understand people's frustrations with large groups (24). And I get that some people think we're all zerging monkeys with no soul or skill, who feed off pugs. People tie large groups directly to lagfest so its understandable that there is a negative outlook on them. But I think the main issue is that the majority want to feel like they have a chance against these groups. The current inability of the solo or small group player to combat the large group needs to be reworked in some manner, this is undeniable.
But large group combat is not inherently evil. It's also not full of weak zergling players with no skill. If you think this, you should probably consider listening in on a Decibel, Nexus, VE, or Havoc raid. There is much coordination, skill and thought that goes into running a successful large group.
On another note, the anger and frustration toward these groups because of lag needs to be redirected, because it is simply misguided. If you think I'm wrong, look at old youtube videos of the game in earlier stages. Large groups EVERYWHERE and yet no where near the lag issues we have today. These groups are not the root of this problem and to assume they are is naive. The servers are to blame, point blank. Some patches along the way have made the lag absolutely unbearable. YES, players can exacerbate the terrible server lag by spamming ultimates and stacking in groups of 60-100+ spamming problematic abilities. That is another story entirely, and is incredibly poor form.
But this game was designed for MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER, OPEN WORLD COMBAT. So everyone who QQ's about 24-man groups, the game does not support you. Sorry- but, logic outweighs your preferences. The max group amount is 24. Whether you prefer to play in 4,8,12,16,18 - or by yourself, all your decision. But none of that has as much weight as the fact that the game is literally designed to accept groups of 24. Now when people run 3,4 groups of 24 and coordinate all of these people in the same place, that's another story.
Whether the max group size should be reconsidered remains to be seen, and is a separate debate alltogethr. As it stands, this is what the game was designed to do. As @bosmern_ESO stated, it is simply unfair to cap at 4 man in IC. If you are looking for arena-style pvp, you are in the wrong MMO. There are plenty of others that are dedicated to that specifically. To cap group size at 4 for IC gates access to stones and gear behind being a successful small group player. If there were other ways to obtain them, perhaps. But there is not.5 -
bosmern_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭bosmern_ESO wrote: »Am I alone in my thinking the only players around here trying to force their playstyle onto others are the zerglings themselves?
Your saying that in a post wanting there to be only solo/small groups in IC. There will be people who disagree and your saying that they are forcing their playstyle on others? on a thread that is trying to make only solo/small group in IC
I...I don't even...
If I'd speak freely I'd probably get this thread closed, so I don't.
Just know that ZOS clearly said IC is for small groups and eventually solo players if they dare, not zergs.
ZoS has never once said that IC is not for zergs. ZoS has said that IC will be more supportive of small groups (and when they say that they mean the dungeons).
~Thallen~0 -
ToRelax✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭bosmern_ESO wrote: »bosmern_ESO wrote: »Am I alone in my thinking the only players around here trying to force their playstyle onto others are the zerglings themselves?
Your saying that in a post wanting there to be only solo/small groups in IC. There will be people who disagree and your saying that they are forcing their playstyle on others? on a thread that is trying to make only solo/small group in IC
I...I don't even...
If I'd speak freely I'd probably get this thread closed, so I don't.
Just know that ZOS clearly said IC is for small groups and eventually solo players if they dare, not zergs.
ZoS has never once said that IC is not for zergs. ZoS has said that IC will be more supportive of small groups (and when they say that they mean the dungeons).
Jessica Folsom said on Twitch chat zergs would not be effective as the rewards would be minimal in the IC.
Now from what happened in the past one would be naive to believe they'd manage to disincentivise zergballing, so players try to make suggestions to ensure success (as always).[...]
But this game was designed for MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER, OPEN WORLD COMBAT. So everyone who QQ's about 24-man groups, the game does not support you. Sorry- but, logic outweighs your preferences. The max group amount is 24. Whether you prefer to play in 4,8,12,16,18 - or by yourself, all your decision. But none of that has as much weight as the fact that the game is literally designed to accept groups of 24. Now when people run 3,4 groups of 24 and coordinate all of these people in the same place, that's another story.
[...]
Neither does massive multiplayer have anything to do with zerging, nor is the IC open world.DAGON - ALTADOON - CHIM - GHARTOK
The Covenant is broken. The Enemy has won...
Elo'dryel - Sorc - AR 50 - Hopesfire - EP EU3 -
Jules✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭[...]
But this game was designed for MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER, OPEN WORLD COMBAT. So everyone who QQ's about 24-man groups, the game does not support you. Sorry- but, logic outweighs your preferences. The max group amount is 24. Whether you prefer to play in 4,8,12,16,18 - or by yourself, all your decision. But none of that has as much weight as the fact that the game is literally designed to accept groups of 24. Now when people run 3,4 groups of 24 and coordinate all of these people in the same place, that's another story.
[...]
Neither does massive multiplayer have anything to do with zerging, nor is the IC open world.
Actually, that depends entirely on your definition of "zerging" which varies from person to person. If you believe that the only qualification for zerging is to play in a large (24) group, then yeah, the terms MASSIVE, MULTI and LARGE seem to coincide pretty harmoniously. Don't know how you figure those things are not compatible.
And IC may not technically be "open world" as we just found out it will be on a separate instance or something from actual cyrodiil. But it's also still not designated as arena/fixed numbers combat, so it's closer to an open world format than not. The point remains that one gameplay style (ie: 4 man/small man) should not be the only functional way to acquire stones/gear.Edited by Jules on July 19, 2015 3:23PM0 -
Joy_Division✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭bosmern_ESO wrote: »Am I alone in my thinking the only players around here trying to force their playstyle onto others are the zerglings themselves?
Your saying that in a post wanting there to be only solo/small groups in IC. There will be people who disagree and your saying that they are forcing their playstyle on others? on a thread that is trying to make only solo/small group in IC
I...I don't even...
If I'd speak freely I'd probably get this thread closed, so I don't.
Just know that ZOS clearly said IC is for small groups and eventually solo players if they dare, not zergs.
Not that I doubt this, I just happened to miss the whole "clearly" part. Can you link?Make Rush of Agony "Monsters only." People should not be consecutively crowd controlled in a PvP setting. Period.0 -
technohic✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Yeah 4 is too few. Heavily favors stealthy burst builds over tanker or more support roles. And like I said earlier, it would be a free run for any decent emporer. 12 would be a good number.0 -
Ahzek✭✭✭✭✭
✭Zerging and large scale combat are 2 entirely different things one is a tactic of sorts while the other is a given environment the combat takes place in.
Large scale PvP like ZOS advertised implies lots of players fighting for several objectives on a huge map simultaniously, while allowing for huge concentrations of players at a given objective.
Zerging is the way some players play their large scale combat. It usually simply refers to power through numbers with an overwhelming force charging the opposition heads on again and again to wear them down with their numerical advantage.
This is what most of theses groups that advertise with write "lfg /cookie/ihateEPforlyfe for inv" fall back to to surpass the opposition, but there are also guild groups that do the same.
For me that simply is not the gameply i want. When i want large scale combat i imagine the different forces using tactics and individual skill to defeat their opponents and there surely are certain guild groups that do just that ( none of wich im a member btw i play purely solo since basically forever because zenimax also advertised that as a viable play style).
The issue i have not neccessarily with zergs but with generally larger groups in IC is that they take away the risk from the individual player. As long as i am in such a large group there are only 2 things that are dangerous to me:
1. a similary sized group (the larger the harder)
2. a slightly smaller "bomb squad" mostly around 10 people (wich is already quite large for my personal taste) or so that simply aim to blast the large group with a combination of AoEs, surprise, manouverability, etc.
The individual player and actually small groups have no chance of competing and are often hunted down by those larger groups without a chance of fighing back.
In imperial city this becomes the real issue for me
There is just no way to avoid such large groups.
Stealth only gets you that far and with the narrow alleys, the restricted sewers, etc. there is no way to avoid a 20 man force blasting through the sewers and no where to run when the group has spotted you. some people chase for ages in this game ,even if it is for almost no benefit at all and in IC they would only have to chase very little until the fleeing player(s) are backed up against a group of NPCs or a wall. they cannot trespass with the force of the enemies rushing after them (you hopefully wont be able to just ignore NPC damage and be merrily on your way).
This way solo/small scale players simply will have no real chance to gain any decent amount of TV stones through actual PvP, because they always run the risk to be overrun by the big farm group that only exists so its players dont have to undergo any effort whatsoever in eraning their rewards (note im a bit bitter about this^^ ).
Sure leading a huge group of players is definetly a challenge @Jules, but what challenging is there for the standard player in that huge group ? Spam purge when some1 shouts PURGE! (or simply all the time), spam steeltornado/impluse everywhere you go ? or healing springs for that matter ? Press the ARRRR button when you are asked to do so ? or maybe
*read in desperate, mocking voice* manage your resources ?, that hasnt been an issue since months now and it wont get harder ... (thank you CS for all your gifts
).
I cant see the challenge and requirement for any skill at the game whatsoever in that, and that assumption holds true 95% of the time I fight a player i usually only see in a zerg. Maybe he knows how to hold the block button or is very ambitious with his healing maybe he even uses crushing shock instead of impulse, but unless he has brought some friends such a playersnever pose a threat and it doesnt matter that his alliance rank is over 9000.
(note: this is purely my anedoctal experience and holds no actual value on its own whatsoever, i know it can very well be that every other "large group player" is an incredibly skilled bada$$ that i simply havent fought solo before, but i highly doubt it)Edited by Ahzek on July 19, 2015 4:05PMJo'Khaljor1 -
ToRelax✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭[...]
But this game was designed for MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER, OPEN WORLD COMBAT. So everyone who QQ's about 24-man groups, the game does not support you. Sorry- but, logic outweighs your preferences. The max group amount is 24. Whether you prefer to play in 4,8,12,16,18 - or by yourself, all your decision. But none of that has as much weight as the fact that the game is literally designed to accept groups of 24. Now when people run 3,4 groups of 24 and coordinate all of these people in the same place, that's another story.
[...]
Neither does massive multiplayer have anything to do with zerging, nor is the IC open world.
Actually, that depends entirely on your definition of "zerging" which varies from person to person. If you believe that the only qualification for zerging is to play in a large (24) group, then yeah, the terms MASSIVE, MULTI and LARGE seem to coincide pretty harmoniously. Don't know how you figure those things are not compatible.
And IC may not technically be "open world" as we just found out it will be on a separate instance or something from actual cyrodiil. But it's also still not designated as arena/fixed numbers combat, so it's closer to an open world format than not. The point remains that one gameplay style (ie: 4 man/small man) should not be the only functional way to acquire stones/gear.
I really don't care what you call what you do, as long as you understand what I am talking about.
I never said MMORPGs or large scale PvP would be incompatible with zerging, but I clearly stated it does not have to fall together.
Besides, if you paid some attention they actually advertised with the fact that you can sell the gear obtainable with TV stones (but not the gear from the PvE dungeons). Are PvEers today forced to PvP because they want elite gear or what?
However, if zerging was possible and rewarding in the IC, then small groups would not.
PS:
We knew for a long time now that IC would be in a different zone...Joy_Division wrote: »bosmern_ESO wrote: »Am I alone in my thinking the only players around here trying to force their playstyle onto others are the zerglings themselves?
Your saying that in a post wanting there to be only solo/small groups in IC. There will be people who disagree and your saying that they are forcing their playstyle on others? on a thread that is trying to make only solo/small group in IC
I...I don't even...
If I'd speak freely I'd probably get this thread closed, so I don't.
Just know that ZOS clearly said IC is for small groups and eventually solo players if they dare, not zergs.
Not that I doubt this, I just happened to miss the whole "clearly" part. Can you link?
Would love to, but the "clearly" part was on Twitch Chat I think.Edited by ToRelax on July 19, 2015 6:33PMDAGON - ALTADOON - CHIM - GHARTOK
The Covenant is broken. The Enemy has won...
Elo'dryel - Sorc - AR 50 - Hopesfire - EP EU0 -
Jules✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭[...]
But this game was designed for MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER, OPEN WORLD COMBAT. So everyone who QQ's about 24-man groups, the game does not support you. Sorry- but, logic outweighs your preferences. The max group amount is 24. Whether you prefer to play in 4,8,12,16,18 - or by yourself, all your decision. But none of that has as much weight as the fact that the game is literally designed to accept groups of 24. Now when people run 3,4 groups of 24 and coordinate all of these people in the same place, that's another story.
[...]
Neither does massive multiplayer have anything to do with zerging, nor is the IC open world.
Actually, that depends entirely on your definition of "zerging" which varies from person to person. If you believe that the only qualification for zerging is to play in a large (24) group, then yeah, the terms MASSIVE, MULTI and LARGE seem to coincide pretty harmoniously. Don't know how you figure those things are not compatible.
And IC may not technically be "open world" as we just found out it will be on a separate instance or something from actual cyrodiil. But it's also still not designated as arena/fixed numbers combat, so it's closer to an open world format than not. The point remains that one gameplay style (ie: 4 man/small man) should not be the only functional way to acquire stones/gear.
I really don't care what you call what you do, as long as you understand what I am talking about.
I never said MMORPGs or large scale PvP would be incompatible with zerging, but I clearly stated it does not have to fall together.
Besides, if you paid some attention they actually advertised with the fact that you can sell the gear obtainable with TV stones (but not the gear from the PvE dungeons). Are PvEers today forced to PvP because they want elite gear or what?
However, if zerging was possible and rewarding in the IC, then small groups would not.
PS:
We knew for a long time now that IC would be in a different zone...
WOW THAT SALT. Whats got your panties in a bunch darling?
Just because we disagree on the limits of IC doesn't mean you need to reduce the conversation to - "I don't really care what you do, as long as you understand what I am talking about". For one, that's not how you effectively communicate and express ideas. So probz work on the social skills. For two, I explicitly said that I AGREE and UNDERSTAND the POV of a small man/solo player and think that they need more tools/skills to be able to put a dent in large groups. I just don't want THE ONLY CONTENT OF THE LAST YEAR to be so limited and favored to specific players. I think all players of all group size and build should be welcome to play as they want in IC.Edited by Jules on July 19, 2015 11:46PM3 -
ToRelax✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭[...]
But this game was designed for MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER, OPEN WORLD COMBAT. So everyone who QQ's about 24-man groups, the game does not support you. Sorry- but, logic outweighs your preferences. The max group amount is 24. Whether you prefer to play in 4,8,12,16,18 - or by yourself, all your decision. But none of that has as much weight as the fact that the game is literally designed to accept groups of 24. Now when people run 3,4 groups of 24 and coordinate all of these people in the same place, that's another story.
[...]
Neither does massive multiplayer have anything to do with zerging, nor is the IC open world.
Actually, that depends entirely on your definition of "zerging" which varies from person to person. If you believe that the only qualification for zerging is to play in a large (24) group, then yeah, the terms MASSIVE, MULTI and LARGE seem to coincide pretty harmoniously. Don't know how you figure those things are not compatible.
And IC may not technically be "open world" as we just found out it will be on a separate instance or something from actual cyrodiil. But it's also still not designated as arena/fixed numbers combat, so it's closer to an open world format than not. The point remains that one gameplay style (ie: 4 man/small man) should not be the only functional way to acquire stones/gear.
I really don't care what you call what you do, as long as you understand what I am talking about.
I never said MMORPGs or large scale PvP would be incompatible with zerging, but I clearly stated it does not have to fall together.
Besides, if you paid some attention they actually advertised with the fact that you can sell the gear obtainable with TV stones (but not the gear from the PvE dungeons). Are PvEers today forced to PvP because they want elite gear or what?
However, if zerging was possible and rewarding in the IC, then small groups would not.
PS:
We knew for a long time now that IC would be in a different zone...
WOW THAT SALT. Whats got your panties in a bunch darling?
Just because we disagree on the limits of IC doesn't mean you to reduce the conversation to - "I don't really care what you do, as long as you understand what I am talking about". For one, that's not how you effectively communicate and express ideas. So probz work on the social skills. For two, I explicitly said that I AGREE and UNDERSTAND the POV of a small man/solo player and think that they need more tools/skills to be able to put a dent in large groups. I just don't want THE ONLY CONTENT OF THE LAST YEAR to be so limited and favored to specific players. I think all players of all group size and build should be welcome to play as they want in IC.
I wrote "I really don't care what you call what you do, as long as you understand what I am talking about."
I am not upset about anything, no need to write an essay like that lol.
You hopefully realize the only PvP content that was playable the last year is tailored to promote "large organized groups", yes?
I understand your point, but I don't think it's fair at all.DAGON - ALTADOON - CHIM - GHARTOK
The Covenant is broken. The Enemy has won...
Elo'dryel - Sorc - AR 50 - Hopesfire - EP EU0 -
hammayolettuce✭✭✭✭✭
✭Doesn't matter. Once IC is released and the full raids start training through it and taking all of the PvE Lords precious stones the threads on the general section will blow up worse than they already are and zos will be forced to make changes.
You think PvP lags in the overworld? Wait until you have trash mobs around you an hordes of players spamming AoE all around just running through killing everything in their path to get everyone's stones.♥ Snü (Magicka DK) ♥ Thnu (Stamplar) ♥ Pizza for Breakfast (Magplar) ♥ Sparklefingers (Magicka Sorc) ♥♥ Bean and Cheese Burrito (Magicka DK) ♥ Snurrito (Stamplar) ♥DARFAL COVANT1 -
MrGigglypants✭✭✭Arguing this mmo was not meant for small team tactics and you should find another mmo is just beyond ignorant even worst is the individuals I'm the same post saying people shouldn't be forced to conform to play styles. Any successful mmo needs to have diversity in game modes i.e. 4v4 2v2 25v25 much like balance is achieved through multiple viable builds / various cookie cutters. Yes I said cookie cutters there will always be optimal styles of play but you can have more than one wow did this well from vanilla to wotlk. I believe ESO has a great staff and could achieve such a thing and are well on the way I.e. magicka and stamina builds both being argueably strong. The biggest point I want to emphasize is if they did make if into a 4v4 fest there is nothing wrong with that because you still have cyrodill if you want something else. I personally would love to see this game take a step in the competitive direction via arena type battles.1
-
technohic✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MrGigglypants wrote: »Arguing this mmo was not meant for small team tactics and you should find another mmo is just beyond ignorant even worst is the individuals I'm the same post saying people shouldn't be forced to conform to play styles. Any successful mmo needs to have diversity in game modes i.e. 4v4 2v2 25v25 much like balance is achieved through multiple viable builds / various cookie cutters. Yes I said cookie cutters there will always be optimal styles of play but you can have more than one wow did this well from vanilla to wotlk. I believe ESO has a great staff and could achieve such a thing and are well on the way I.e. magicka and stamina builds both being argueably strong. The biggest point I want to emphasize is if they did make if into a 4v4 fest there is nothing wrong with that because you still have cyrodill if you want something else. I personally would love to see this game take a step in the competitive direction via arena type battles.
No; it is too small and really starts to limit the venue to very specific class builds. Same can even be said for the other games that have warzones/battlefields and add in 4v4 arenas.
At any rate; there is a lot in between from a 24 man to 4 man. I think 8-12 still maintains the kind of spot for support type rolls yet is smaller scale.0 -
hammayolettuce✭✭✭✭✭
✭MrGigglypants wrote: »Arguing this mmo was not meant for small team tactics and you should find another mmo is just beyond ignorant even worst is the individuals I'm the same post saying people shouldn't be forced to conform to play styles. Any successful mmo needs to have diversity in game modes i.e. 4v4 2v2 25v25 much like balance is achieved through multiple viable builds / various cookie cutters. Yes I said cookie cutters there will always be optimal styles of play but you can have more than one wow did this well from vanilla to wotlk. I believe ESO has a great staff and could achieve such a thing and are well on the way I.e. magicka and stamina builds both being argueably strong. The biggest point I want to emphasize is if they did make if into a 4v4 fest there is nothing wrong with that because you still have cyrodill if you want something else. I personally would love to see this game take a step in the competitive direction via arena type battles.
No; it is too small and really starts to limit the venue to very specific class builds. Same can even be said for the other games that have warzones/battlefields and add in 4v4 arenas.
At any rate; there is a lot in between from a 24 man to 4 man. I think 8-12 still maintains the kind of spot for support type rolls yet is smaller scale.
Anything over 12 and you as a player dying begins to have no real affect on the groups DPS / Healing. There needs to be a smaller group limit within the IC and no matter what everyone argues it wont be long until ZOS makes the change within the IC because groups of 24 are running trains farming inside of it.♥ Snü (Magicka DK) ♥ Thnu (Stamplar) ♥ Pizza for Breakfast (Magplar) ♥ Sparklefingers (Magicka Sorc) ♥♥ Bean and Cheese Burrito (Magicka DK) ♥ Snurrito (Stamplar) ♥DARFAL COVANT1 -
Karamis_Vimardon✭✭✭✭There's already an incentive not to have larger groups: diminishing returns.
The stones are shared amongst the group, the more players the smaller your slice of the pie. You may very well be safe in a 10, 15, 20, 9001+ group, but you'll have jack shite to show for it.
No need to limit group sizes, the devs have done the work already.PC NA
Karamis Vimardon, DC Templar (Magplar)
Netara, DC Nightblade (Stamblade)
Karamis, DC Sorc (Magicka)
Hãderus, EP Templar (Healbot)
Mr Twinkle-Toes, DC DK (Tank)
game
noun: game;
plural noun: games
1. a form of competitive activity or sport played according to rules.
2. an activity that one engages in for amusement.0 -
manny254✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭markgd88nrb18_ESO wrote: »There's already an incentive not to have larger groups: diminishing returns.
The stones are shared amongst the group, the more players the smaller your slice of the pie. You may very well be safe in a 10, 15, 20, 9001+ group, but you'll have jack shite to show for it.
No need to limit group sizes, the devs have done the work already.
Except bad players will get there sh*t kicked in when and loose all there stones. So they will blob up because something is better then nothing.- Mojican4