The issues related to logging in to the European PC/Mac megaserver have been resolved at this time. If you continue to experience difficulties at login, please restart your client. Thank you for your patience!
Is this what you meant by "small scale pvp"?
MrGrimey
✭✭✭✭✭
I can't imagine that Zos intended the DLC that they spent over a year on to be played like this. There is no challenge in running in a 20+ man group and just stomping everything in your way. It's frustrating because I really enjoy the combat mechanics and gameplay, but IC has degraded into an aoe spam Zerg party.
Just a small Zerg, the sewers are even worse
Just a small Zerg, the sewers are even worse
8
-
DigitalShibby✭✭✭✭✭
✭No matter what there will always be zergs. I played in IC for over 4 hours straight in a 6 man group getting in great small scale pvp battles on the surface and in the sewers. There is no shame in retreating / running to avoid being zerged to death.3 -
MrGrimey✭✭✭✭✭I forgot to also mention some changes that I feel unintentionally promoted zerging:
- the amount of, difficulty, and health of mobs in and under IC, many players want to group up so they can hurry and farm content. They also interfere and ruin intense fights, and hit harder than any player attack. Zerging makes these elite level mobs a non issue as a Zerg can burn them down in seconds, while small groups take much longer to burn them down, thus hindering small groups and promoting Zergs.
- low damage, while I'm not against, makes it very easy for fights to drag out until the whole Zerg squad can come for back up. Also, damage is low to the point where sometime you NEED multiple people to help score the kill. Again, I'm not against the new low damage, just pointing out a side effect from the change
Edited by MrGrimey on September 18, 2015 2:06AM3 -
leepalmer95✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭DigitalShibby wrote: »No matter what there will always be zergs. I played in IC for over 4 hours straight in a 6 man group getting in great small scale pvp battles on the surface and in the sewers. There is no shame in retreating / running to avoid being zerged to death.
There could be sme mechanics to try and reduce zergs though,
if x amount of the same faction are in a area a faction coloured skull appears on map and moves with the zerg?
The closer you get to a faction home base in sewers the weaker or more debuff's you get? for example -10% dmg if your halfway into another factions sewer zone and -30% if your literally outside their base?
Just a few mechanics combined with the fact you get hardly any stones while zerging will reduce them immensely.PS4 EU DC
Current CP : 756+
I have every character level 50, both a magicka and stamina version.
RIP my effort to get 5x v16 characters...1 -
cjthibs✭✭✭✭✭
✭PC was like this right after the release of IC too.
It will calm down. There will still be zergs, of course, but it will calm down some.2 -
Yolokin_Swagonborn✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Most hardcore PvP'ers wanted arena/battlegrounds/duels added to the game. This mashup of PvP/PvE is trying to appeal to everyone again.1 -
Qyrk✭✭✭✭✭
✭This is normal post launch but it actually will not be the case a few weeks after. People will start to realise zerging is not efficient if you want to get TV stones.
This will subside.2 -
MrGrimey✭✭✭✭✭Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »Most hardcore PvP'ers wanted arena/battlegrounds/duels added to the game. This mashup of PvP/PvE is trying to appeal to everyone again.
I feel like ZOS needs to swallow their pride and give small scale PVPers Arenas/dueling already. With no rules, it's impossible to limit Zergs.
I had such high hopes for this DLC, but it does a great job at disappointing serious PVPers and PvEers alike3 -
cjthibs✭✭✭✭✭
✭Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »Most hardcore PvP'ers wanted arena/battlegrounds/duels added to the game. This mashup of PvP/PvE is trying to appeal to everyone again.
I feel like ZOS needs to swallow their pride and give small scale PVPers Arenas/dueling already. With no rules, it's impossible to limit Zergs.
I had such high hopes for this DLC, but it does a great job at disappointing serious PVPers and PvEers alike
Just because you don't enjoy it right at this moment doesn't mean you won't later.
And just because you don't enjoy it doesn't mean no one does. I happen to have a lot of fun in Imperial City.
Zergs frustrate me, yes, but it's not 24/7 zergs.0 -
Huggalump✭✭✭✭There are, actually, some mechanics in place to discourage zergs. Tel Var stones get split, so those huge zergs are actually a pretty inefficient way of getting Tel Var stones. Once people realize this and grow a pair, zergs will probably shrink.
Unless I'm wrong about the mechanics. I've never actually tried rolling with a big zerg because i'd rather gouge my eyes out with an ice cream scooper.0 -
Saddiq✭✭✭This is normal post launch but it actually will not be the case a few weeks after. People will start to realise zerging is not efficient if you want to get TV stones.
This will subside.
Hasn't subsided yet on PC, not even remotely. Nor is there any reason it will. People will respond to the diminishing returns on TV stones not by leaving zergs, but instead by neglecting shields, heals, and buffs for each other and maximizing DPS in order to beat their zerg-mates in a dps-race to get in on the TV stones.
While it will not be any time soon, ZOS has formally stated they intended IC to be small-scale PVP and they are working on disincentives for those wishing to zerg. But the solution is long-term, not short-term (also straight from their mouth in the last ESO Live episode).0 -
MrGrimey✭✭✭✭✭Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »Most hardcore PvP'ers wanted arena/battlegrounds/duels added to the game. This mashup of PvP/PvE is trying to appeal to everyone again.
I feel like ZOS needs to swallow their pride and give small scale PVPers Arenas/dueling already. With no rules, it's impossible to limit Zergs.
I had such high hopes for this DLC, but it does a great job at disappointing serious PVPers and PvEers alike
Just because you don't enjoy it right at this moment doesn't mean you won't later.
And just because you don't enjoy it doesn't mean no one does. I happen to have a lot of fun in Imperial City.
Zergs frustrate me, yes, but it's not 24/7 zergs.
Well, I never said that I'm speaking for everyone, and never said that nobody enjoys the DLC, I'm sure there are a few that actually like zerging. I do feel however, that the majority of serious PVPers don't enjoy Zerg play, that's mainly the point of my post.
Besides, I feel cyrodiil is perfectly fine to Zerg in, it fits the theme. There are towers that need to be rushed and siege weapons to combat Zergs. In IC, there is literally no counter to Zergs... Other than another bigger Zerg. I don't think that what ZOS intended for IC1 -
dlepi24✭✭✭✭There are, actually, some mechanics in place to discourage zergs. Tel Var stones get split, so those huge zergs are actually a pretty inefficient way of getting Tel Var stones. Once people realize this and grow a pair, zergs will probably shrink.
Unless I'm wrong about the mechanics. I've never actually tried rolling with a big zerg because i'd rather gouge my eyes out with an ice cream scooper.
The problem is half these people feel like running in a group of 20 getting minimal stones is still more than running by themselves and having them taken by another player. It is frustrating to be playing by yourself or 1 or 2 others only to be zerged down on by 20+ spamming snares and roots so they can split your 1k stones and each get hardly anything.2 -
no.... the caved into the "don't lock access to IC" complainers. the complainers didn't want IC locked if the necessary keeps weren't held by their faction. "population X is too small" or "it will be dead in IC" or "i won't buy it in protest"..... stuff like that. they didn't listen to the people complaining about the block changes.... but ya know.... cash grab....
enjoy the questionably modified content.......I will work. I will save. I will sacrifice. I will endure. I will fight cheerfully and do my utmost, as if the whole issue of the struggle depended on me alone.
Martin A. Treptow
1894-19181 -
EQBallzz✭✭✭✭✭
✭Many of us predicted this outcome. I think people are deluded if they think this will subside in any meaningful way. The reality is that a significant number of people would rather do the less risky method (even if earning fewer stones) than the riskier method that might net more stones (sometimes). Slow consistent stone earnings + easy boss kills (more stones) + less risk of death (few losses) > huge stone earnings potential but at much greater risk of total loss and much less ability to kill bosses effectively.
Even if a majority of players don't do this all it takes is a large enough minority of players to ruin it for everyone else. It's just sort of baffling that ZOS didn't predict this outcome. It's not exactly unforeseen or unexpected behavior.0 -
MrGrimey✭✭✭✭✭ahstin2001nub18_ESO wrote: »no.... the caved into the "don't lock access to IC" complainers. the complainers didn't want IC locked if the necessary keeps weren't held by their faction. "population X is too small" or "it will be dead in IC" or "i won't buy it in protest"..... stuff like that. they didn't listen to the people complaining about the block changes.... but ya know.... cash grab....
enjoy the questionably modified content.......
That wouldn't stop zerging, also it would further limit pvp in IC since if 1 faction controls access, who would you fight in IC?0 -
sagitter✭✭✭✭✭ahstin2001nub18_ESO wrote: »no.... the caved into the "don't lock access to IC" complainers. the complainers didn't want IC locked if the necessary keeps weren't held by their faction. "population X is too small" or "it will be dead in IC" or "i won't buy it in protest"..... stuff like that. they didn't listen to the people complaining about the block changes.... but ya know.... cash grab....
enjoy the questionably modified content.......
That wouldn't stop zerging, also it would further limit pvp in IC since if 1 faction controls access, who would you fight in IC?
It would not limit the acces to 1 faction, because the main keeps are easy to take, and are near temples, so theoretically all 3 faction could have the access. Ad i said months ago, this mechanic would have been good spreading players. It's not a random mechanic, it's a mechanic invented with Daoc 13 years ago. And i forgot to say, that now Cyro activity is dead, and that mechanic would bring some action back to pvp again inCyr.Edited by sagitter on September 18, 2015 3:23AM1 -
ahstin2001nub18_ESO wrote: »no.... the caved into the "don't lock access to IC" complainers. the complainers didn't want IC locked if the necessary keeps weren't held by their faction. "population X is too small" or "it will be dead in IC" or "i won't buy it in protest"..... stuff like that. they didn't listen to the people complaining about the block changes.... but ya know.... cash grab....
enjoy the questionably modified content.......
That wouldn't stop zerging, also it would further limit pvp in IC since if 1 faction controls access, who would you fight in IC?
you shoulda took more time to read up on the place...
no it wouldn't have stopped the zerging, i was answering more the "small scale" question, but if your faction didn't control the necessary keeps, you had no access. 2 factions could have access at the same time; thats who you fight. there would be no guarantee that any faction not defending the posts could stay in IC (in case you don't know, cyrodiil is the place with the keeps outside of IC). there for, in order to get access, you had to have the keeps; to keep access you had to at some point get out and defend them. this would have spread the PVP population across a larger space, keeping the zergs smaller in IC (not eliminate it mind you) and keep cyrodiil relevant.
im betting they wanted more initial sales, so they dropped that idea. there will be a lock-out server coming up im sure, once they reach the peak of sales.
i tried finding the official PTS talks, but honestly im not wasting my time on something you could do yourself. i think it was 6 keeps total for IC access.Edited by ahstin2001nub18_ESO on September 18, 2015 3:24AMI will work. I will save. I will sacrifice. I will endure. I will fight cheerfully and do my utmost, as if the whole issue of the struggle depended on me alone.
Martin A. Treptow
1894-19180 -
MrGrimey✭✭✭✭✭ahstin2001nub18_ESO wrote: »ahstin2001nub18_ESO wrote: »no.... the caved into the "don't lock access to IC" complainers. the complainers didn't want IC locked if the necessary keeps weren't held by their faction. "population X is too small" or "it will be dead in IC" or "i won't buy it in protest"..... stuff like that. they didn't listen to the people complaining about the block changes.... but ya know.... cash grab....
enjoy the questionably modified content.......
That wouldn't stop zerging, also it would further limit pvp in IC since if 1 faction controls access, who would you fight in IC?
you shoulda took more time to read up on the place...
no it wouldn't have stopped the zerging, i was answering more the "small scale" question, but if your faction didn't control the necessary keeps, you had no access. 2 factions could have access at the same time; thats who you fight. there would be no guarantee that any faction not defending the posts could stay in IC (in case you don't know, cyrodiil is the place with the keeps outside of IC). there for, in order to get access, you had to have the keeps; to keep access you had to at some point get out and defend them. this would have spread the PVP population across a larger space, keeping the zergs smaller in IC (not eliminate it mind you) and keep cyrodiil relevant.
im betting they wanted more initial sales, so they dropped that idea. there will be a lock-out server coming up im sure, once they reach the peak of sales.
i tried finding the official PTS talks, but honestly im not wasting my time on something you could do yourself. i think it was 6 keeps total for IC access.
So you write all that to agree with me?... It would limit pvp in IC, 1 faction has the potential of controlling access to IC. I don't want a ghost town in IC, just to limit the Zergs.
Back on topic...0 -
ahstin2001nub18_ESO wrote: »ahstin2001nub18_ESO wrote: »no.... the caved into the "don't lock access to IC" complainers. the complainers didn't want IC locked if the necessary keeps weren't held by their faction. "population X is too small" or "it will be dead in IC" or "i won't buy it in protest"..... stuff like that. they didn't listen to the people complaining about the block changes.... but ya know.... cash grab....
enjoy the questionably modified content.......
That wouldn't stop zerging, also it would further limit pvp in IC since if 1 faction controls access, who would you fight in IC?
you shoulda took more time to read up on the place...
no it wouldn't have stopped the zerging, i was answering more the "small scale" question, but if your faction didn't control the necessary keeps, you had no access. 2 factions could have access at the same time; thats who you fight. there would be no guarantee that any faction not defending the posts could stay in IC (in case you don't know, cyrodiil is the place with the keeps outside of IC). there for, in order to get access, you had to have the keeps; to keep access you had to at some point get out and defend them. this would have spread the PVP population across a larger space, keeping the zergs smaller in IC (not eliminate it mind you) and keep cyrodiil relevant.
im betting they wanted more initial sales, so they dropped that idea. there will be a lock-out server coming up im sure, once they reach the peak of sales.
i tried finding the official PTS talks, but honestly im not wasting my time on something you could do yourself. i think it was 6 keeps total for IC access.
So you write all that to agree with me?... It would limit pvp in IC, 1 faction has the potential of controlling access to IC. I don't want a ghost town in IC, just to limit the Zergs.
Back on topic...
no you are wrong, it wouldn't be a ghost town. one faction wouldn't control the whole city. you will never get rid of "zergs". this is not what they meant by "small scale" combat
back on topic? well dip stick NO THIS IS NOT WHAT THEY INITIALLY PLANNED!!!!!!I will work. I will save. I will sacrifice. I will endure. I will fight cheerfully and do my utmost, as if the whole issue of the struggle depended on me alone.
Martin A. Treptow
1894-19181 -
milesrodneymcneely2_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭Seriously, ZOS.
Dueling and arenas should have been in before launch.
Dew wit all ready.
3 -
Aunatar✭✭✭milesrodneymcneely2_ESO wrote: »Seriously, ZOS.
Dueling and arenas should have been in before launch.
Dew wit all ready.
People would realize whih classes are good and which are bad for pvp.. bad choice for lazy zeni :P@Aunatar
V16 Sorcerer - Aunatar
V16 DK - Aunatarans (Currently main)
V16 DK - Aunatar Evereth
V16 DK - Aunataran
V16 NB - Aunatars
V4 Templar - Lysindel
Lvl 30 NB - Vile Aunataroni De Pipino
Free spot, looking for suggestions1 -
Farorin✭✭✭✭✭leepalmer95 wrote: »DigitalShibby wrote: »No matter what there will always be zergs. I played in IC for over 4 hours straight in a 6 man group getting in great small scale pvp battles on the surface and in the sewers. There is no shame in retreating / running to avoid being zerged to death.
There could be sme mechanics to try and reduce zergs though,
if x amount of the same faction are in a area a faction coloured skull appears on map and moves with the zerg?
The closer you get to a faction home base in sewers the weaker or more debuff's you get? for example -10% dmg if your halfway into another factions sewer zone and -30% if your literally outside their base?
Just a few mechanics combined with the fact you get hardly any stones while zerging will reduce them immensely.
The bolded idea I like, the other idea I strongly, strongly dislike. Why should people be penalized for exploring near other factions? Exploration should be encouraged, not discouraged.0 -
Farorin✭✭✭✭✭There are a lot of people saying that in time people will realize zergs aren't the answer as they get less TV stones, etc.
The fact is, on PC, there are still plenty zergs, most people zerg for safety, not efficiency, zergs are still good for farming mats, and are also sought after by almost all crappy players who are for some reason, scared of dying in a video game, or who take it as a personal insult when killed in a PVP zone.
So unless there are some REAL changes, not little fluff ideas like "Oh hey, maybe make it so they get less stones to discourage zergs?", then we will be stuck with zergs forever.3 -
Thecapeo✭✭✭I know that theoretically it's less effective to run in zergs but as a practical matter you actually get decent stones per hour with little risk. I haven't tried it but from talking to people in a couple guilds I'm in they were averaging about 1.5K per hour. Not to mention filling their inventory with mats and trophies a couple times per hour. You can probably do better than that with a good small group but turn a corner into a zerg and all your hard work is gone. Or you spend half your time banking because the risk is too high.
I don't know how you can get around this. Even if they penalized groups based on size even more you'd still get bunches of smaller groups running together I'd think. You have to do something to fundamentally change the risk reward formula.0 -
PhatGrimReaper✭✭✭✭✭I find a group 6-8 good players is just right balance between speed, power and loot. Initially we were running 12-16 man groups through the sewers to combat the other large groups, but that isn't really needed now. Most of the remaining 16+ man groups in the sewers are less deadly players cooperating for mutual protection.
8 person, organized, max level, skilled group 'vs' 16 person, mixed level, average skill pug..... Winner is.....?
9 times out of 10 the smaller, more skilled group will come out on top.
There will always be exceptions, but for the most part, I would be more worried about the smaller, but more organized guild groups than the larger, mindless pug blob.Fat Grim Reaper - (m)Dragon Knight AR28
F G R Junior - Templar AR26
This One Had Name Changed - Nightblade AR19
Fat Grim Streaker - Sorcerer AR15
M12-GM - Guardians of the Twelve-GM - Crown Store Heroes - ETU
RÀGE - R.I.P0 -
Sausage✭✭✭✭✭
✭You do realize that IC was just launched so everybody is there. I agree with above poster that 8 man seems to be good for IC.
Edited by Sausage on September 18, 2015 5:45AM0 -
NGP✭✭✭This map is small thus it is meant for zergs. Outside Cyrodiil you could have your small scale fight everywhere. Or you can join your alliance zerg force.
Or do you think they should grant you the power to 1v10 only cos you prefer to stay in small group?0 -
SC0TY999✭✭✭✭This is the result of destroying 1vX
Small groups of highly organised players with good knowledge of this game used to able to wipe the stacked up groups like this, then they nerfed everything so the only sure way to win now is with safety in numbers.
The large group mentality these days is 24+ man groups with which, 18 of these spam Steel Tornado the other 6 heal.
What ZOS should've done is give small scale organised PvP groups an effective way of dealing with these zergs i.e. Proxy Det needs to hit these big groups a lot harder then it currently does, this would force these big groups to only stack when totally necessary i.e. when storming a keep or healing through high damage DoTs (Siege Weapons) etc...
While we're on the subject Steel Tornado needs a nerf it's being abused by these 24 man raids.
These groups used to be Impulse Spamming Monkeys, that got nerfed!
Now it's become Steel Tornado Spamming Monkeys.
0 -
Turelus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Unless you introduce a hard cap on the number of players able to join an instance (battle grounds) you will never stop zerging.
Also as someone who leads full 24 player groups in IC, I don't do it to "zerg" I do it because I have a guild of almost 100 PvP players who want to play with their guildmates and have no content to do in Cyrodiil any more.
Imposing weaknesses and penalties on large groups will only make them larger to overcome that weakness, no matter how much you try eventually numbers will overcome anything.
There are plenty of small 1v1, or 1vX fights to be had in IC.@Turelus - EU PC Megaserver
"Don't count on others for help. In the end each of us is in this alone. The survivors are those who know how to look out for themselves."1 -
NGP✭✭✭Unless you introduce a hard cap on the number of players able to join an instance (battle grounds) you will never stop zerging.
Also as someone who leads full 24 player groups in IC, I don't do it to "zerg" I do it because I have a guild of almost 100 PvP players who want to play with their guildmates and have no content to do in Cyrodiil any more.
Imposing weaknesses and penalties on large groups will only make them larger to overcome that weakness, no matter how much you try eventually numbers will overcome anything.
There are plenty of small 1v1, or 1vX fights to be had in IC.
As it should be.0