Put an end to ZERGS!

FENGRUSH · October 2015

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

They only end quickly if you put all your eggs in one basket and get blown away. That type of gameplay should be discouraged if anything (due to the fact its killing performance if nothing else). But today it is encouraged in multiple ways.

I think it's the opposite. They only end quickly when you're not stacked up tight.

Why reward groups that spread out? Why have a group if you're not grouped up? Stacking tight is a feat in itself and shouldn't be punished for being able to condense/expand on command.

Stacking isnt really a feat, youre just piling on a guy and focusing on following him more than whats around you.

The crown looks around and makes decisions. This works because of the design of a ball group. It is not a feat whatsoever. Today groups that split up a bit will die quicker than one stacked up if that one stacked up cannot heal and take the damage. Stacking altogether should be done in moderation when <X> players need heals/ raids buff they would come together to do so then break apart to combat / avoid being focused by heavy AOE/ult burst.

Nobody needs to coordinate like that today, its just single track - same thing all the time.

Tightrope walking is just walking in a straight line too, right?

PS. the good guilds actually do expand and contract when necessary, this just goes to show how incompetent you are for voicing the competitive PVP guilds real issues.

Haha, FENGRUSH is incompetant for voicing competitive PVP guilds real issues? Try putting that one up in a poll.

Its fine to disagree with my last post, but unfortunately theres so little reason to do so in the games design you pretty much cant even prove it to be wrong.

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

They only end quickly if you put all your eggs in one basket and get blown away. That type of gameplay should be discouraged if anything (due to the fact its killing performance if nothing else). But today it is encouraged in multiple ways.

Stacking tight is a feat in itself

Just going to quote this one again for emphasis. This is what Im arguing with. Its clear youre in love with the ball group meta and will be vitriolic to anyone who opposes your method of PvP. I have no problems if thats how people want to play, just as they shouldnt have a problem if I want to 1vX or 4vX. But they shouldnt have a problem with the way Im playing.

I dont advocate the 'easy fixes' to ball groups that some people post where we just ramp up damage against people that are grouped. I advocate for actual equality - where ball groups dont get artificial mitigation. This isnt helping the game or the players to make it fun or interesting. The groups it helps the most are people those that stick with the crown while they PvP.

I loved solo'ing/1vX until I changed factions and made a Magicka DK, but that's a separate issue. No one has an issue with that. Sure when nothing is going on it's easy to stack crown, but there's more to it than just cuddling up beside someone. And that's what I'm refuting.

You're talking as if you just stack on crown and spam an ability, not taking into account the where, when, and why part of the 5 W's. and that is a big issue if you're going to be representing the PVP population. Quit over-generalizing everything, and I won't have any issues with you being our voice. You're damn good for mechanics, but have sub-par knowledge of large combat situationalization (no, that's not a real word.)

Ultimately it doesnt matter how oversimplified I may make it or how complex you may make it - those are our opinions on it. People often come at me with 'why dont you do it' - my reasons are there pretty much, I just dont like it for what I feel it is. But despite all of that, Im really just here to put forward what the deal is with caps and whats wrong with Cyro.

I hold my tongue more than I would on stream or more than I used to. Its not really for me, its for all the people that agree something needs to get done and to promote some kind of change. If something doesnt get rolling for change soon, Cyro will get significantly worse. Its not a threat or some grabass statement, its a reality that theres a lot of options people will veer to in the near future for other games and Orsinium is the only thing coming between now and end of year for content. We dont need content update in Cyro to provide 1) hope and 2) change. Literally, asking #ZOSE to be our obama.

Jules · October 2015

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Stacking altogether should be done in moderation when <X> players need heals/ raids buff they would come together to do so then break apart to combat / avoid being focused by heavy AOE/ult burst.

This is the meta I want to see in large group pvp. I think it would be the most challenging and the most fun.

However, Fengrush, this does happen in today's Cyrodiil. Admittedly, it is situational. But I do see K-Hole, SHJT, Haxus, and maybe even Rage use this tactic and it makes for interesting fights.

_Chaos · October 2015

FENGRUSH wrote: »

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

They only end quickly if you put all your eggs in one basket and get blown away. That type of gameplay should be discouraged if anything (due to the fact its killing performance if nothing else). But today it is encouraged in multiple ways.

I think it's the opposite. They only end quickly when you're not stacked up tight.

Why reward groups that spread out? Why have a group if you're not grouped up? Stacking tight is a feat in itself and shouldn't be punished for being able to condense/expand on command.

Stacking isnt really a feat, youre just piling on a guy and focusing on following him more than whats around you.

The crown looks around and makes decisions. This works because of the design of a ball group. It is not a feat whatsoever. Today groups that split up a bit will die quicker than one stacked up if that one stacked up cannot heal and take the damage. Stacking altogether should be done in moderation when <X> players need heals/ raids buff they would come together to do so then break apart to combat / avoid being focused by heavy AOE/ult burst.

Nobody needs to coordinate like that today, its just single track - same thing all the time.

Tightrope walking is just walking in a straight line too, right?

PS. the good guilds actually do expand and contract when necessary, this just goes to show how incompetent you are for voicing the competitive PVP guilds real issues.

Haha, FENGRUSH is incompetant for voicing competitive PVP guilds real issues? Try putting that one up in a poll.

Its fine to disagree with my last post, but unfortunately theres so little reason to do so in the games design you pretty much cant even prove it to be wrong.

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

They only end quickly if you put all your eggs in one basket and get blown away. That type of gameplay should be discouraged if anything (due to the fact its killing performance if nothing else). But today it is encouraged in multiple ways.

Stacking tight is a feat in itself

Just going to quote this one again for emphasis. This is what Im arguing with. Its clear youre in love with the ball group meta and will be vitriolic to anyone who opposes your method of PvP. I have no problems if thats how people want to play, just as they shouldnt have a problem if I want to 1vX or 4vX. But they shouldnt have a problem with the way Im playing.

I dont advocate the 'easy fixes' to ball groups that some people post where we just ramp up damage against people that are grouped. I advocate for actual equality - where ball groups dont get artificial mitigation. This isnt helping the game or the players to make it fun or interesting. The groups it helps the most are people those that stick with the crown while they PvP.

I loved solo'ing/1vX until I changed factions and made a Magicka DK, but that's a separate issue. No one has an issue with that. Sure when nothing is going on it's easy to stack crown, but there's more to it than just cuddling up beside someone. And that's what I'm refuting.

You're talking as if you just stack on crown and spam an ability, not taking into account the where, when, and why part of the 5 W's. and that is a big issue if you're going to be representing the PVP population. Quit over-generalizing everything, and I won't have any issues with you being our voice. You're damn good for mechanics, but have sub-par knowledge of large combat situationalization (no, that's not a real word.)

Ultimately it doesnt matter how oversimplified I may make it or how complex you may make it - those are our opinions on it. People often come at me with 'why dont you do it' - my reasons are there pretty much, I just dont like it for what I feel it is. But despite all of that, Im really just here to put forward what the deal is with caps and whats wrong with Cyro.

I hold my tongue more than I would on stream or more than I used to. Its not really for me, its for all the people that agree something needs to get done and to promote some kind of change. If something doesnt get rolling for change soon, Cyro will get significantly worse. Its not a threat or some grabass statement, its a reality that theres a lot of options people will veer to in the near future for other games and Orsinium is the only thing coming between now and end of year for content. We dont need content update in Cyro to provide 1) hope and 2) change. Literally, asking #ZOSE to be our obama.

The funniest part is we're both 100% for cap removal, and that something needs to be done to keep Cyrodiil alive. But pickin' on organized guilds for running a tight group isn't the way to go about it my friend. To fix these complex issues opinions need to be more than just generalized, they too need to be complex, and iterated to the public only after knowledge is retained on that particular issue.

vamp_emily · October 2015

Want to know what the real problem is? ( and it's not zergs )

Players are the problem.

Here is just an example why I think players are the issue: ( non-vet pvp )

I logged in and seen we were out numbered by allot of EP players, it was instant death if you tried to fight them head on. So what I did was prepped ash, ales, bleakers, and chal all to 53 percent. I told everyone in live chat which walls and what i did.

My goal was to take Ash, but the problem was EP was defending it. My plan was to sneak over to bleakers, and try and take it back, then hurry over to chal and hit it hard, forcing EP to defend at Chal. While this is going on, flag Ales and start working on our goal which was prepare Ash for the takeover.

Well I let everyone know what my plan was and the response was "oh thats too complicated lets just attack Ash".

When I got to Ash they were hitting the wrong wall, not the one I told them several times in chat that I had prepped.

Players are the problem, they want everything now, they don't want to think to much. I don't think this is a problem in Vet Campaigns but in Non-Vet we are lucky we have a few people repairing walls. Most the time our walls are so beat up anyone can flag a keep and take it over quickly.

I personally like zergs, It is very challenging at times when you have a large group of players attacking your keep ( makes you think a little ). Yes sometimes it is overwhelming and most times you will lose, but for me it is fun.

I think the solution to PvP is to give players what they have been crying about, "1v1", instead of nerfing everything because someone can't win a fight.

Muizer · October 2015

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Stacking altogether should be done in moderation when <X> players need heals/ raids buff they would come together to do so then break apart to combat / avoid being focused by heavy AOE/ult burst.

There is nothing wrong with strength in numbers per se. In the pre-modern era of our own history it mattered a great deal in pitched battles and sieges. Only in the modern era does something like what you describe become reality. Of course, trench warfare also became a reality then.... ZoS themselves have set off this mirror of an arms race by introducing the "bigger bomb" to make up for smaller numbers. It's the wrong path. For a game where people are fighting over castles with swords and shields anyway.

Derra · October 2015

prootch wrote: »

They will not have it harder against organized groups...

They will die instant just the same against organised aoe warbands... the situation would only improve eventually for small groups against unorganized pugs. So it would not solve the issue of organized multi warbands zergs (these organized aoe warbands which are causing real lag issues on eu servers now... when they die, the lag dies... while we don't face lag with 50 pu vs warband).

Since the introduction of aoe caps we´ve had many situations where we would engage a large stacked grp on horses or idling infront of a keep.
The only saving grace in those situations were aoe caps (we´d drop 3 to 6 people while the rest survives due to dmg reduction). 1.6 was better in that regard as dmg was just very high in general and multiple dawnbreakers would just melt about everything.

You don´t die instantly against large grps now. You just can´t kill them even if they´re outplayed.

altemriel · October 2015

I somehow have to agree with both sides of this issue, but maybe I have to incline to one side:

- it pretty much sucks, when I walk in the imperial city severs, even with a smaller group and then suddenly from a corner comes a group of 20 - 30 enemy players and kill us all. It would be really great to be able to just walk trough the imperial city lightly, gain a lot of experience in small scale fighting arenas or small group encounters.....this should be maybe created in some other DLC, other locations, where only small fights would be present

- but, in cyrodiil, to the contrary, it is civil war, and not a small local conflict, but a great civil war (watch the Three fates trailer, when the elf wizardes unwillingly cracks the keep wall, how many warriors are there present!!).

what do the people expect it to look like? small groups? organized battle arenas? nope! but a nightmare difficulty hard stuff war going on there guys!! you better accept that and think it one more time over, before posting more post about how difficult zerg encounters are!!

it is a huge war going on there!! you better deal with it or leave that location...

Merlight · October 2015

vamp_emily wrote: »

I think the solution to PvP is to give players what they have been crying about, "1v1", instead of nerfing everything because someone can't win a fight.

You completely missed the topic, which I doubt you even read, because 1v1 has nothing to do with it.

G0ku · October 2015

Derra wrote: »

The only saving grace in those situations were aoe caps (we´d drop 3 to 6 people while the rest survives due to dmg reduction). 1.6 was better in that regard as dmg was just very high in general and multiple dawnbreakers would just melt about everything.

Yea, nobody wants the time back when using a broken mechanic to fire the damage including dot all at once by animation cancelling it. You used that "saving grace" on anyone you would meet, no matter their numbers. Things like that did contributed to the fact many of my guildies won´t join small scale pvp, you know. That´s the zerglings you complain about now.

Generally speaking:
Don´t underestimate the consequences of cheese and grief, many people got pushed into zergs by that.

Darnathian · October 2015

ToRelax wrote: »

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

They only end quickly if you put all your eggs in one basket and get blown away. That type of gameplay should be discouraged if anything (due to the fact its killing performance if nothing else). But today it is encouraged in multiple ways.

I think it's the opposite. They only end quickly when you're not stacked up tight.

Why reward groups that spread out? Why have a group if you're not grouped up? Stacking tight is a feat in itself and shouldn't be punished for being able to condense/expand on command.

Because many players don't like that playstyle. It's okay if some do and use it, they just shouldn't be rewarded, because that forces others to either do the same or leave the scene.

Nor should they be punished. Dont remove one artificial inserted cap that favors large warbands (i like that word), only to insert others that favor small groups that some in this thread are calling for. Remove AoE Cap and Prox Det period. Not scale siege damage or prox det as some are saying.

Just remove those and let everyone fend for themselves. Whether that be small or large groups. Pick you own fate. You want to hang out with 24 people, or 4 people and a bunch of people watching your stream so be it.

Neither style is wrong.

Whats the point though. This is a huge topic that needs to be acknowledged. Great points from everyone in all these threads and the only responses from the real enemy has been this thread has been moved or please dont call each other names.

UNREAL ZOS............

Darnathian · October 2015

FENGRUSH wrote: »

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

They only end quickly if you put all your eggs in one basket and get blown away. That type of gameplay should be discouraged if anything (due to the fact its killing performance if nothing else). But today it is encouraged in multiple ways.

I think it's the opposite. They only end quickly when you're not stacked up tight.

Why reward groups that spread out? Why have a group if you're not grouped up? Stacking tight is a feat in itself and shouldn't be punished for being able to condense/expand on command.

Stacking isnt really a feat, youre just piling on a guy and focusing on following him more than whats around you.

The crown looks around and makes decisions. This works because of the design of a ball group. It is not a feat whatsoever. Today groups that split up a bit will die quicker than one stacked up if that one stacked up cannot heal and take the damage. Stacking altogether should be done in moderation when <X> players need heals/ raids buff they would come together to do so then break apart to combat / avoid being focused by heavy AOE/ult burst.

Nobody needs to coordinate like that today, its just single track - same thing all the time.

Tightrope walking is just walking in a straight line too, right?

PS. the good guilds actually do expand and contract when necessary, this just goes to show how incompetent you are for voicing the competitive PVP guilds real issues.

Haha, FENGRUSH is incompetant for voicing competitive PVP guilds real issues? Try putting that one up in a poll.

Its fine to disagree with my last post, but unfortunately theres so little reason to do so in the games design you pretty much cant even prove it to be wrong.

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

They only end quickly if you put all your eggs in one basket and get blown away. That type of gameplay should be discouraged if anything (due to the fact its killing performance if nothing else). But today it is encouraged in multiple ways.

Stacking tight is a feat in itself

Just going to quote this one again for emphasis. This is what Im arguing with. Its clear youre in love with the ball group meta and will be vitriolic to anyone who opposes your method of PvP. I have no problems if thats how people want to play, just as they shouldnt have a problem if I want to 1vX or 4vX. But they shouldnt have a problem with the way Im playing.

I dont advocate the 'easy fixes' to ball groups that some people post where we just ramp up damage against people that are grouped. I advocate for actual equality - where ball groups dont get artificial mitigation. This isnt helping the game or the players to make it fun or interesting. The groups it helps the most are people those that stick with the crown while they PvP.

I loved solo'ing/1vX until I changed factions and made a Magicka DK, but that's a separate issue. No one has an issue with that. Sure when nothing is going on it's easy to stack crown, but there's more to it than just cuddling up beside someone. And that's what I'm refuting.

You're talking as if you just stack on crown and spam an ability, not taking into account the where, when, and why part of the 5 W's. and that is a big issue if you're going to be representing the PVP population. Quit over-generalizing everything, and I won't have any issues with you being our voice. You're damn good for mechanics, but have sub-par knowledge of large combat situationalization (no, that's not a real word.)

Ultimately it doesnt matter how oversimplified I may make it or how complex you may make it - those are our opinions on it. People often come at me with 'why dont you do it' - my reasons are there pretty much, I just dont like it for what I feel it is. But despite all of that, Im really just here to put forward what the deal is with caps and whats wrong with Cyro.

I hold my tongue more than I would on stream or more than I used to. Its not really for me, its for all the people that agree something needs to get done and to promote some kind of change. If something doesnt get rolling for change soon, Cyro will get significantly worse. Its not a threat or some grabass statement, its a reality that theres a lot of options people will veer to in the near future for other games and Orsinium is the only thing coming between now and end of year for content. We dont need content update in Cyro to provide 1) hope and 2) change. Literally, asking #ZOSE to be our obama.

They are being Obama.

Ignoring everyone when they say overwhelmingly that something is a bad idea (Obamacare vs Necro'd AoE Cap thread), and making something worse with every passing day (our economy vs Cyrodil performance). lol

Muizer · October 2015

altemriel wrote: »

I somehow have to agree with both sides of this issue, but maybe I have to incline to one side:

- it pretty much sucks, when I walk in the imperial city severs, even with a smaller group and then suddenly from a corner comes a group of 20 - 30 enemy players and kill us all. It would be really great to be able to just walk trough the imperial city lightly, gain a lot of experience in small scale fighting arenas or small group encounters.....this should be maybe created in some other DLC, other locations, where only small fights would be present

- but, in cyrodiil, to the contrary, it is civil war, and not a small local conflict, but a great civil war (watch the Three fates trailer, when the elf wizardes unwillingly cracks the keep wall, how many warriors are there present!!).

what do the people expect it to look like? small groups? organized battle arenas? nope! but a nightmare difficulty hard stuff war going on there guys!! you better accept that and think it one more time over, before posting more post about how difficult zerg encounters are!!

it is a huge war going on there!! you better deal with it or leave that location...

You got it. The problem with zergs is not that they are big or powerful. There is nothing wrong with having strength in numbers. The problem is that as an individual or small group you cannot get away from a zerg because as a group they move as fast and flexible as an individual. When a zerg comes into view, you have about as much chance of escape as a blade of grass against a swarm of locusts. That is the problem that needs addressing before anything else.

Now, about this AoE cap argument. It's a decent one in itself, but............the people suggesting that lifting it will remedy zergs are apparently of the opinion that it should be possible for a few people to AoE blast a zerg to death. I don't know about you, but I find that a terrible prospect. AoE's just should not be that powerful ever. On the contrary. To make PvP AvA interesting, single target abilities should rule the battlefield. Then you might get engagements more similar to what we were promised, which is basically medieval warfare with some magic thrown in.

Maulkin · October 2015

Darnathian wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

They only end quickly if you put all your eggs in one basket and get blown away. That type of gameplay should be discouraged if anything (due to the fact its killing performance if nothing else). But today it is encouraged in multiple ways.

I think it's the opposite. They only end quickly when you're not stacked up tight.

Why reward groups that spread out? Why have a group if you're not grouped up? Stacking tight is a feat in itself and shouldn't be punished for being able to condense/expand on command.

Stacking isnt really a feat, youre just piling on a guy and focusing on following him more than whats around you.

The crown looks around and makes decisions. This works because of the design of a ball group. It is not a feat whatsoever. Today groups that split up a bit will die quicker than one stacked up if that one stacked up cannot heal and take the damage. Stacking altogether should be done in moderation when <X> players need heals/ raids buff they would come together to do so then break apart to combat / avoid being focused by heavy AOE/ult burst.

Nobody needs to coordinate like that today, its just single track - same thing all the time.

Tightrope walking is just walking in a straight line too, right?

PS. the good guilds actually do expand and contract when necessary, this just goes to show how incompetent you are for voicing the competitive PVP guilds real issues.

Haha, FENGRUSH is incompetant for voicing competitive PVP guilds real issues? Try putting that one up in a poll.

Its fine to disagree with my last post, but unfortunately theres so little reason to do so in the games design you pretty much cant even prove it to be wrong.

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

They only end quickly if you put all your eggs in one basket and get blown away. That type of gameplay should be discouraged if anything (due to the fact its killing performance if nothing else). But today it is encouraged in multiple ways.

Stacking tight is a feat in itself

Just going to quote this one again for emphasis. This is what Im arguing with. Its clear youre in love with the ball group meta and will be vitriolic to anyone who opposes your method of PvP. I have no problems if thats how people want to play, just as they shouldnt have a problem if I want to 1vX or 4vX. But they shouldnt have a problem with the way Im playing.

I dont advocate the 'easy fixes' to ball groups that some people post where we just ramp up damage against people that are grouped. I advocate for actual equality - where ball groups dont get artificial mitigation. This isnt helping the game or the players to make it fun or interesting. The groups it helps the most are people those that stick with the crown while they PvP.

I loved solo'ing/1vX until I changed factions and made a Magicka DK, but that's a separate issue. No one has an issue with that. Sure when nothing is going on it's easy to stack crown, but there's more to it than just cuddling up beside someone. And that's what I'm refuting.

You're talking as if you just stack on crown and spam an ability, not taking into account the where, when, and why part of the 5 W's. and that is a big issue if you're going to be representing the PVP population. Quit over-generalizing everything, and I won't have any issues with you being our voice. You're damn good for mechanics, but have sub-par knowledge of large combat situationalization (no, that's not a real word.)

Ultimately it doesnt matter how oversimplified I may make it or how complex you may make it - those are our opinions on it. People often come at me with 'why dont you do it' - my reasons are there pretty much, I just dont like it for what I feel it is. But despite all of that, Im really just here to put forward what the deal is with caps and whats wrong with Cyro.

I hold my tongue more than I would on stream or more than I used to. Its not really for me, its for all the people that agree something needs to get done and to promote some kind of change. If something doesnt get rolling for change soon, Cyro will get significantly worse. Its not a threat or some grabass statement, its a reality that theres a lot of options people will veer to in the near future for other games and Orsinium is the only thing coming between now and end of year for content. We dont need content update in Cyro to provide 1) hope and 2) change. Literally, asking #ZOSE to be our obama.

They are being Obama.

Ignoring everyone when they say overwhelmingly that something is a bad idea (Obamacare vs Necro'd AoE Cap thread), and making something worse with every passing day (our economy vs Cyrodil performance). lol

The irony is that speaking as an outsider, a European, Obama seems pretty legendary to the majority of us for what he's trying to achieve (if not what he's achieved). By comparison previous and potential next Presidents seem... well... mentally challenged to put it politely.

We are literally scratching our collective heads in bemusement how there are so many people on that side of the pond that are fighting against public healthcare and against gun control. Like, we really really struggle to wrap our heads around it. It simply does not compute.

But this is a gaming forum and I'm digressing into politics now...

prootch · October 2015

Muizer wrote: »

Now, about this AoE cap argument. It's a decent one in itself, but............the people suggesting that lifting it will remedy zergs are apparently of the opinion that it should be possible for a few people to AoE blast a zerg to death. I don't know about you, but I find that a terrible prospect. AoE's just should not be that powerful ever. On the contrary. To make PvP AvA interesting, single target abilities should rule the battlefield. Then you might get engagements more similar to what we were promised, which is basically medieval warfare with some magic thrown in.

Exactly... what would prevent zergs to mass aoe with damage decap ? still wondering...

Korah_Eaglecry · October 2015

RatedChaotic wrote: »

5 vs 5 defending/attacking a keep doesn't sound fun to me. When its zerg vs zerg. Now thats where the fun is. Just my thoughts.

Exactly. When I get to the walls of my Keep to defend against the players attacking. I want to see a large group out there. Whenever I see a handful of enemy players I cant help but think...This is a diversion the actual fight is somewhere else. I came to this game for the large scale PvP.

All of these players demanding changes to the game to benefit smaller groups over larger ones completely miss the point of Cyrodiil. And instead of asking and waiting for ZOS to get around to small arenas they look to take gameplay away from other PvPers that actually enjoy the large scale PvP.

I, myself, was actually hoping to see the Imperial City have some sort of PvP Arena where small groups could get their PvP fix. I was absolutely disappointed to see it as a PvP/PvE mix. When that moron came onto ESO Live and giggled about ganking I couldnt help but shake my head. The last thing this game needed was a gank fest where it was either hide in the shadows or group up and steamroll a tight hallway.

Now the kiddies that thought they were getting Small Scale PvP in IC have decided that if they cant have what they want then theyre going to try and hijack Large Scale. I'd feel sorry for the Small Scale PvPers if they werent trying to hijack the PvP that I personally enjoy.

Makkir · October 2015

I wouldn't even go so far as to reintroduce AOE caps and all the other suggestions in here. I would adjust the purge skill and then just make siege actually effective against zergs.

The real problem I see with this right now is a blob can stack at front door with a ram and not be concerned with the 10 oils being dumped on them.

Don't discourage people from blobbing, let them. Just make siege effective against them. Then you won't have to mess with toning skills or worrying about how that would affect your PvE crowd.

Sharee · October 2015

Change inevitable detonation into the specialized anti-zerg tool it was meant to be:

- does no damage to less than six targets
- does normal (current) damage to groups of six
- for every player beyond six caught in the explosion radius, the damage is increased by X% against all targets
- has no cap on number of targets it can affect

X% should be a value high enough(up to 100% if needed) to force a stacked group of players to scatter within 4 seconds or die.
Cyrodiil should be about masses of players - just not all of them standing on a dime.

k2blader · October 2015

Did not skim the whole thread but the first few comments #2, 3, and 4 make me have a bit more hope there are generally reasonable people playing this game.

[edit]
And no, the game is not balanced 1v1. Don't be silly now, lol. Much depends on build and CPs. If folks are gonna say, "Well your build is wrong," then they're basically encouraging cookie cutter builds, which they like to claim they are against.

Satiar · October 2015

Sharee wrote: »

Change inevitable detonation into the specialized anti-zerg tool it was meant to be:

- does no damage to less than six targets
- does normal (current) damage to groups of six
- for every player beyond six caught in the explosion radius, the damage is increased by X% against all targets
- has no cap on number of targets it can affect

X% should be a value high enough(up to 100% if needed) to force a stacked group of players to scatter within 4 seconds or die.
Cyrodiil should be about masses of players - just not all of them standing on a dime.

Out of curiosity, how do you expect a group of say, 12 people to survive against 2-3x their numbers like this? The only way a group of 12+ or even 20+ is going to kill a zerg 2-3x their numbers is by stacking to obtain superior DPS and heals than the disorganized zerg. Buffing prox det to this extent makes zergs pretty much invincible, no one can coordinate enough focused aoe damage to kill them in that scenario.

altemriel · October 2015

Muizer wrote: »

altemriel wrote: »

I somehow have to agree with both sides of this issue, but maybe I have to incline to one side:

- it pretty much sucks, when I walk in the imperial city severs, even with a smaller group and then suddenly from a corner comes a group of 20 - 30 enemy players and kill us all. It would be really great to be able to just walk trough the imperial city lightly, gain a lot of experience in small scale fighting arenas or small group encounters.....this should be maybe created in some other DLC, other locations, where only small fights would be present

- but, in cyrodiil, to the contrary, it is civil war, and not a small local conflict, but a great civil war (watch the Three fates trailer, when the elf wizardes unwillingly cracks the keep wall, how many warriors are there present!!).

what do the people expect it to look like? small groups? organized battle arenas? nope! but a nightmare difficulty hard stuff war going on there guys!! you better accept that and think it one more time over, before posting more post about how difficult zerg encounters are!!

it is a huge war going on there!! you better deal with it or leave that location...

You got it. The problem with zergs is not that they are big or powerful. There is nothing wrong with having strength in numbers. The problem is that as an individual or small group you cannot get away from a zerg because as a group they move as fast and flexible as an individual. When a zerg comes into view, you have about as much chance of escape as a blade of grass against a swarm of locusts. That is the problem that needs addressing before anything else.

Now, about this AoE cap argument. It's a decent one in itself, but............the people suggesting that lifting it will remedy zergs are apparently of the opinion that it should be possible for a few people to AoE blast a zerg to death. I don't know about you, but I find that a terrible prospect. AoE's just should not be that powerful ever. On the contrary. To make PvP AvA interesting, single target abilities should rule the battlefield. Then you might get engagements more similar to what we were promised, which is basically medieval warfare with some magic thrown in.

aha, I understand your point now. hmm, thinking how to solve that....maybe there can be a buff for the player, when running away from the direction of a zerg, there can be a movement speed buff, that would increase the escape possibility. some "panic movement speed increase". I think that could do it.

And the AOE cap, or some possility for one player to kill the whole zerg swarm, I dont like that idea. if nothing than even from a logical reason, that would not be good, it is just not possible for one person to kill such a large group. and implementing some penalties for large groups agains one player, that would also not ok in my opinion. the advantage of a big group should stay as it is.

Sharee · October 2015

Satiar wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Change inevitable detonation into the specialized anti-zerg tool it was meant to be:

- does no damage to less than six targets
- does normal (current) damage to groups of six
- for every player beyond six caught in the explosion radius, the damage is increased by X% against all targets
- has no cap on number of targets it can affect

X% should be a value high enough(up to 100% if needed) to force a stacked group of players to scatter within 4 seconds or die.
Cyrodiil should be about masses of players - just not all of them standing on a dime.

Out of curiosity, how do you expect a group of say, 12 people to survive against 2-3x their numbers like this? The only way a group of 12+ or even 20+ is going to kill a zerg 2-3x their numbers is by stacking to obtain superior DPS and heals than the disorganized zerg. Buffing prox det to this extent makes zergs pretty much invincible, no one can coordinate enough focused aoe damage to kill them in that scenario.

In the current implementation, it is your group of 12 that is pretty much invincible to anything but a similar group of 12 doing the same thing. Current cyrodiil is "either make a blob, or go home". That's exactly what needs to be changed.

If you are better players and better organized, you should be able to beat superior numbers even without resorting to making your whole group stand on a dime. Organized =/= blobbing.

Your group of 12 should not be able to roll through zergs 2-3x your numbers unless you are significantly more skilled than they are, as opposed to, we are a blob, and they are not, thus we win. Blobbing should not be the sole deciding factor in who wins and who does not. Currently, it is. They may be just as skilled as you, they may be just as organized as you - if you blob, and they don't, they lose. That's just wrong.

altemriel · October 2015

Sharee wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Your group of 12 should not be able to roll through zergs 2-3x your numbers unless you are significantly more skilled than they are, as opposed to, we are a blob, and they are not, thus we win.

I agree

_Chaos · October 2015

Sharee wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Change inevitable detonation into the specialized anti-zerg tool it was meant to be:

- does no damage to less than six targets
- does normal (current) damage to groups of six
- for every player beyond six caught in the explosion radius, the damage is increased by X% against all targets
- has no cap on number of targets it can affect

X% should be a value high enough(up to 100% if needed) to force a stacked group of players to scatter within 4 seconds or die.
Cyrodiil should be about masses of players - just not all of them standing on a dime.

Out of curiosity, how do you expect a group of say, 12 people to survive against 2-3x their numbers like this? The only way a group of 12+ or even 20+ is going to kill a zerg 2-3x their numbers is by stacking to obtain superior DPS and heals than the disorganized zerg. Buffing prox det to this extent makes zergs pretty much invincible, no one can coordinate enough focused aoe damage to kill them in that scenario.

In the current implementation, it is your group of 12 that is pretty much invincible to anything but a similar group of 12 doing the same thing. Current cyrodiil is "either make a blob, or go home". That's exactly what needs to be changed.

If you are better players and better organized, you should be able to beat superior numbers even without resorting to making your whole group stand on a dime. Organized =/= blobbing.

Your group of 12 should not be able to roll through zergs 2-3x your numbers unless you are significantly more skilled than they are, as opposed to, we are a blob, and they are not, thus we win. Blobbing should not be the sole deciding factor in who wins and who does not. Currently, it is. They may be just as skilled as you, they may be just as organized as you - if you blob, and they don't, they lose. That's just wrong.

You sir, are so far off the mark it's not even funny. Stacked groups are stacked because they have L2P'd and know that when not stacked, you get wiped by huge numbers. This rule of thumb has gone to a new extreme with the revamped battle spirit buff and people hitting like wet noodles. The reason 12 of them could wipe 2x-3x their numbers is not solely due to the fact that they are stacked up, focusing all damage and healing. But because they're built to hit hard, slot support skills, and have the right rotations to output 3x the damage as those players getting steamrolled.

Blobbing is only an issue for zergs and the unorganized, they're still easily wipe-able to (good)guilds, and not nearly as immortal as most think. Adapt to your environment.

Organized = Stacking on a dime, expanding on a call, rinse & repeat

If you want to run around in a zerg type battle because you have zero situational awareness, that's cool too. Just don't blame anyone but yourselves.

MountainHound · October 2015

ZigaZuzek wrote: »

Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »

You seriously arent trying to compare real world issues of militaries to in game where the primary goal is fun are you?

Well being overrun 24 vs 1 is not exactly fun either. And zergs also cause major lag.

Did you try moving out of the way? I am assuming not and that you tried to take on 24 people at once.

ToRelax · October 2015

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Change inevitable detonation into the specialized anti-zerg tool it was meant to be:

- does no damage to less than six targets
- does normal (current) damage to groups of six
- for every player beyond six caught in the explosion radius, the damage is increased by X% against all targets
- has no cap on number of targets it can affect

X% should be a value high enough(up to 100% if needed) to force a stacked group of players to scatter within 4 seconds or die.
Cyrodiil should be about masses of players - just not all of them standing on a dime.

Out of curiosity, how do you expect a group of say, 12 people to survive against 2-3x their numbers like this? The only way a group of 12+ or even 20+ is going to kill a zerg 2-3x their numbers is by stacking to obtain superior DPS and heals than the disorganized zerg. Buffing prox det to this extent makes zergs pretty much invincible, no one can coordinate enough focused aoe damage to kill them in that scenario.

In the current implementation, it is your group of 12 that is pretty much invincible to anything but a similar group of 12 doing the same thing. Current cyrodiil is "either make a blob, or go home". That's exactly what needs to be changed.

If you are better players and better organized, you should be able to beat superior numbers even without resorting to making your whole group stand on a dime. Organized =/= blobbing.

Your group of 12 should not be able to roll through zergs 2-3x your numbers unless you are significantly more skilled than they are, as opposed to, we are a blob, and they are not, thus we win. Blobbing should not be the sole deciding factor in who wins and who does not. Currently, it is. They may be just as skilled as you, they may be just as organized as you - if you blob, and they don't, they lose. That's just wrong.

You sir, are so far off the mark it's not even funny. Stacked groups are stacked because they have L2P'd and know that when not stacked, you get wiped by huge numbers. This rule of thumb has gone to a new extreme with the revamped battle spirit buff and people hitting like wet noodles. The reason 12 of them could wipe 2x-3x their numbers is solely due to the fact that they are stacked up, because now their focusing all damage and healing.

Blobbing is only an issue for zergs and the unorganized, they're still easily wipe-able to (good)guilds, and not nearly as immortal as most think. Adapt to your environment.

Organized = Stacking on a dime, expanding on a call, rinse & repeat

If you want to run around in a zerg type battle because you have zero situational awareness, that's cool too. Just don't blame anyone but yourselves.

The only time a good small group would have to stack up in a fight pre 1.6 was when a larger enemy force did that, so you had to stack up in order to stack your own AoE. Spread out forces could always be fought spread out.

Edit: This was not even true for WoE, wich was about the only competitive ranged AoE damage, so you could use it from short range outside the blob.

MountainHound · October 2015

Sharee wrote: »

How about this: as you start being outnumbered in a fight, your group (or just yourself if you are solo) gains extra damage resistance. The resistance will be proportional to how much outnumbered you are, and will cap out at some value.

Examples:
1v1 = no extra resistance
1v2 = 20% extra resistance
1v3 = 35% extra resistance
1v4 = 50% extra resistance, and caps there
1v10 = 50% extra resistance

5v10 = 20% extra resistance
9v10 = 2% extra resistance

etc. The actual values are just examples of course and can be adjusted up or down.

This would help being outnumbered to a certain extent, while not affecting even matchups.

So 4 people fighting 1 should get nerfed?

1 v10, the 10 people should win, that is logic.

Darnathian · October 2015

ToRelax wrote: »

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Change inevitable detonation into the specialized anti-zerg tool it was meant to be:

- does no damage to less than six targets
- does normal (current) damage to groups of six
- for every player beyond six caught in the explosion radius, the damage is increased by X% against all targets
- has no cap on number of targets it can affect

X% should be a value high enough(up to 100% if needed) to force a stacked group of players to scatter within 4 seconds or die.
Cyrodiil should be about masses of players - just not all of them standing on a dime.

Out of curiosity, how do you expect a group of say, 12 people to survive against 2-3x their numbers like this? The only way a group of 12+ or even 20+ is going to kill a zerg 2-3x their numbers is by stacking to obtain superior DPS and heals than the disorganized zerg. Buffing prox det to this extent makes zergs pretty much invincible, no one can coordinate enough focused aoe damage to kill them in that scenario.

In the current implementation, it is your group of 12 that is pretty much invincible to anything but a similar group of 12 doing the same thing. Current cyrodiil is "either make a blob, or go home". That's exactly what needs to be changed.

If you are better players and better organized, you should be able to beat superior numbers even without resorting to making your whole group stand on a dime. Organized =/= blobbing.

Your group of 12 should not be able to roll through zergs 2-3x your numbers unless you are significantly more skilled than they are, as opposed to, we are a blob, and they are not, thus we win. Blobbing should not be the sole deciding factor in who wins and who does not. Currently, it is. They may be just as skilled as you, they may be just as organized as you - if you blob, and they don't, they lose. That's just wrong.

You sir, are so far off the mark it's not even funny. Stacked groups are stacked because they have L2P'd and know that when not stacked, you get wiped by huge numbers. This rule of thumb has gone to a new extreme with the revamped battle spirit buff and people hitting like wet noodles. The reason 12 of them could wipe 2x-3x their numbers is solely due to the fact that they are stacked up, because now their focusing all damage and healing.

Blobbing is only an issue for zergs and the unorganized, they're still easily wipe-able to (good)guilds, and not nearly as immortal as most think. Adapt to your environment.

Organized = Stacking on a dime, expanding on a call, rinse & repeat

If you want to run around in a zerg type battle because you have zero situational awareness, that's cool too. Just don't blame anyone but yourselves.

The only time a good small group would have to stack up in a fight pre 1.6 was when a larger enemy force did that, so you had to stack up in order to stack your own AoE. Spread out forces could always be fought spread out.

Edit: This was not even true for WoE, wich was about the only competitive ranged AoE damage, so you could use it from short range outside the blob.

Ah two wrongs making it right. Now I get it. Stupid mom. Didn't teach me anything. Lol

Using the tools that Zos gave you. But it's okay for small groups. Don't be hypocritical.

ToRelax · October 2015

Darnathian wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Change inevitable detonation into the specialized anti-zerg tool it was meant to be:

- does no damage to less than six targets
- does normal (current) damage to groups of six
- for every player beyond six caught in the explosion radius, the damage is increased by X% against all targets
- has no cap on number of targets it can affect

X% should be a value high enough(up to 100% if needed) to force a stacked group of players to scatter within 4 seconds or die.
Cyrodiil should be about masses of players - just not all of them standing on a dime.

Out of curiosity, how do you expect a group of say, 12 people to survive against 2-3x their numbers like this? The only way a group of 12+ or even 20+ is going to kill a zerg 2-3x their numbers is by stacking to obtain superior DPS and heals than the disorganized zerg. Buffing prox det to this extent makes zergs pretty much invincible, no one can coordinate enough focused aoe damage to kill them in that scenario.

In the current implementation, it is your group of 12 that is pretty much invincible to anything but a similar group of 12 doing the same thing. Current cyrodiil is "either make a blob, or go home". That's exactly what needs to be changed.

If you are better players and better organized, you should be able to beat superior numbers even without resorting to making your whole group stand on a dime. Organized =/= blobbing.

Your group of 12 should not be able to roll through zergs 2-3x your numbers unless you are significantly more skilled than they are, as opposed to, we are a blob, and they are not, thus we win. Blobbing should not be the sole deciding factor in who wins and who does not. Currently, it is. They may be just as skilled as you, they may be just as organized as you - if you blob, and they don't, they lose. That's just wrong.

You sir, are so far off the mark it's not even funny. Stacked groups are stacked because they have L2P'd and know that when not stacked, you get wiped by huge numbers. This rule of thumb has gone to a new extreme with the revamped battle spirit buff and people hitting like wet noodles. The reason 12 of them could wipe 2x-3x their numbers is solely due to the fact that they are stacked up, because now their focusing all damage and healing.

Blobbing is only an issue for zergs and the unorganized, they're still easily wipe-able to (good)guilds, and not nearly as immortal as most think. Adapt to your environment.

Organized = Stacking on a dime, expanding on a call, rinse & repeat

If you want to run around in a zerg type battle because you have zero situational awareness, that's cool too. Just don't blame anyone but yourselves.

The only time a good small group would have to stack up in a fight pre 1.6 was when a larger enemy force did that, so you had to stack up in order to stack your own AoE. Spread out forces could always be fought spread out.

Edit: This was not even true for WoE, wich was about the only competitive ranged AoE damage, so you could use it from short range outside the blob.

Ah two wrongs making it right. Now I get it. Stupid mom. Didn't teach me anything. Lol

Using the tools that Zos gave you. But it's okay for small groups. Don't be hypocritical.

The ***? I didn't even run in such a group myself, when my group would encounter a zerg ball we'd only have the numbers for a sieger, a healer, a DK tank and my Sorc for Negates.

Btw, I must've already stated somewhere I am okay with people stacking up if they want to. What I am not okay with, is forcing others to do so to be competitive.

prootch · October 2015

@spenc
Personnal shaming attempts of another post will not give any value to your argument.

Of course organized groups can pack/depack at will...so what... it does not make aoe damage decap any more suitable to get lagless fights. The fact that aoe damage is the "I win" solution atm, obviously causing major lag issues, does not mean we couldn't get a better and less laggy gameplay by discouraging ball play.

If there is anyone to blame (apart from eso technical limitations), the aoe spammer balls are, and most of them really are not pugs. Still these aoe spammers chose the "I like to win in lag" solution, probably in a kind of desperate attempt to justify their fantasm of uber gamer status, hoping to destroy large concentration of ennemy forces that are nonetheless strategically logical at some points in an open rvr game (last emperor keep for example).

An old mmo myth that mostly flatters the egos of some... but does nothing to settle the lag issue.

Pushing for more stack with damage decap will not change that situation: is has already been tried. Making everyone lag in the process. Instant death through aoe damage decap is a myth. We had it at the beginning of the game, with several warbands stacking +aoe pulsar/bat in 10 sq meters and hundreds of players spread around roaming in laglang.

Merlight · October 2015

Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »

Exactly. When I get to the walls of my Keep to defend against the players attacking. I want to see a large group out there. Whenever I see a handful of enemy players I cant help but think...This is a diversion the actual fight is somewhere else. I came to this game for the large scale PvP.

Another diversion from the actual topic. Suggestions to remove AoE caps, re-introduce dynamic ultimate generation, buff siege weapons etc. aren't newly contrived mechanics intended to remove large-scale PvP from the game. They're asking to revert changes that had lead to the current dumb-scale PvP.

They would hardly have any effect on the number of enemies you see ante portas. They should, however, have effect on how many and in what shape get inside.

When you stand on the walls, see 10 allies around and 30 enemies attacking, will you get large-scale PvP? No. When they breach the wall, does it matter whether you pour burning oil on them? No. The result has most likely been decided before they started to siege. I'm not saying those 10 should have a 50% chance to win. Defending against 3 times your numbers should be difficult, no question about that. Back in the day it was possible to fend them off at choke points. Now the only choke points remaining are FPS and network latency, and those work against the smaller force.

Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »

All of these players demanding changes to the game to benefit smaller groups over larger ones completely miss the point of Cyrodiil. And instead of asking and waiting for ZOS to get around to small arenas they look to take gameplay away from other PvPers that actually enjoy the large scale PvP.

So what exactly would removing the extra damage mitigation and more collective ultimates you get for being a large group take away from you? I mean, when you meet a group that's not the same size as yours, do you enjoy a fight that is decided by sheer numbers?