Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Am I the only one that's noticing a trend on who's complaining about this set.

Pretty much everyone complaining runs a ball group of 16+ people.

Almost as if we actually play group content and understand what a mess this is going to be.

But sure, let's Ad Hom this up. Speaks volumes about the strength of your own arguments.

No you play Zerg Content...Lets not confuse it with actual Group Content

PhatGrimReaper wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Am I the only one that's noticing a trend on who's complaining about this set.

Pretty much everyone complaining runs a ball group of 16+ people.

I think you'll find that many of them not only 'run in 16 man groups', but in fact run the groups..... so, you know, they may just know what they are talking about.

I fairly certain that someone who actively partakes in an activity is far more qualified to analyze said activity, than someone who sits on the sidelines complaining about said activity.......

I actually play in group content..You're not playing group content..You're playing Zerg Content

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

I know I'll regret this but please, provide the class with your definitions of group play and Zerg play.

I've told you multiple times what i consider zerging and what I considered group play....Hell Lowbei has as well..If you've not figured it out after a year why would I repeat myself.

Hell if I recall...Half the time you spent trying to argue that you weren't zerging at all and that 6 groups is really just one.

If you're going to draw this distinction in this thread I think you should argue your definitions. As it stands, you seem to have two categories of "Zerg" and "not Zerg" that are entirely number based and not ratio based. I.e. A coordinated group of 20 is a Zerg, but also the random mob of 80 people they're attempting to fight is ALSO a Zerg (only bigger). Your definitions are bad. Your definitions lack context and thus any relevancy. 8 of you is not a Zerg by your standards, but to that 1-4 man you killed it is. To your 8 man my 20-24 is a Zerg, to my 20-24 man that 60-80 man horde is a Zerg.

I have respect for people and players in all group sizes, they all have thier distinct methods and strategies that are interesting and make for fun gameplay. You just hate on groups bigger than you.

So please share: when does a group become a Zerg? Is it the 8th player? The 9th? The 10th?

*sign*

You are all of a sudden not zerging just cause you run into a bigger Zerg.

If zerging is a set number, than what number constitutes a zerg?

If you don't know what zerging is after a year..After you've been told multiple times that you're zerging....Why would I bother to explain it to ya now?

Why are you dodging? Give me a number.

I given you numbers multiple times

You can go look up your own post history or mine.

Its not my fault you have the memory of a goldfish.

If you want to argue this point, putting forward a simple number is easy to do. Why are you dodging?

I'm waiting 30 seconds for you to repeat Why are you dodging again. I figure at this point you might be running in the Republican Primary soon if ya keep repeating yourself.

I'll assume you have no number and don't want to share it.

Derra wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Elong wrote: »

Seriously, how many is a zerg? Just answer the question.

Anything more then a group technically

Though I should clarify that steathers might consider something like 4 a Zerg if there is a stealther meta in the game. Since everyone stealths in this game it's harder to say

So.... because you have the mistaken impression 4 people is a group, you define 5 people a zerg?

Games standard grpsize and double that +1. Safe bet usually. In eso id go with 13+.

Arguing 4 is not the games standard grpsize is bs.

Satiar wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Elong wrote: »

Seriously, how many is a zerg? Just answer the question.

Anything more then a group technically

Though I should clarify that steathers might consider something like 4 a Zerg if there is a stealther meta in the game. Since everyone stealths in this game it's harder to say

So.... because you have the mistaken impression 4 people is a group, you define 5 people a zerg?

Games standard grpsize and double that +1. Safe bet usually. In eso id go with 13+.

Arguing 4 is not the games standard grpsize is bs.

Arguing any set number is a zerg is hilarious. The one guy who gets killed by 10 people doesn't care about your magic zerg number, he got ZERGED. That 16 man who got run over by 24 people doesn't care about your magic zerg number either, they got ZERGED. That 24-man that got trampled by 80 people also finds your magical zerg number hilarious.

What you're trying to do is assign a set number of people that is "wrong", which in an MMO like this is a really, really stupid thing to do. It's about ratios, not simple numbers. Two 24 man raids fighting arent zerging each other anymore than two players dueling are zerging each other.

Satiar wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Am I the only one that's noticing a trend on who's complaining about this set.

Pretty much everyone complaining runs a ball group of 16+ people.

Almost as if we actually play group content and understand what a mess this is going to be.

But sure, let's Ad Hom this up. Speaks volumes about the strength of your own arguments.

No you play Zerg Content...Lets not confuse it with actual Group Content

PhatGrimReaper wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Am I the only one that's noticing a trend on who's complaining about this set.

Pretty much everyone complaining runs a ball group of 16+ people.

I think you'll find that many of them not only 'run in 16 man groups', but in fact run the groups..... so, you know, they may just know what they are talking about.

I fairly certain that someone who actively partakes in an activity is far more qualified to analyze said activity, than someone who sits on the sidelines complaining about said activity.......

I actually play in group content..You're not playing group content..You're playing Zerg Content

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

I know I'll regret this but please, provide the class with your definitions of group play and Zerg play.

I've told you multiple times what i consider zerging and what I considered group play....Hell Lowbei has as well..If you've not figured it out after a year why would I repeat myself.

Hell if I recall...Half the time you spent trying to argue that you weren't zerging at all and that 6 groups is really just one.

If you're going to draw this distinction in this thread I think you should argue your definitions. As it stands, you seem to have two categories of "Zerg" and "not Zerg" that are entirely number based and not ratio based. I.e. A coordinated group of 20 is a Zerg, but also the random mob of 80 people they're attempting to fight is ALSO a Zerg (only bigger). Your definitions are bad. Your definitions lack context and thus any relevancy. 8 of you is not a Zerg by your standards, but to that 1-4 man you killed it is. To your 8 man my 20-24 is a Zerg, to my 20-24 man that 60-80 man horde is a Zerg.

I have respect for people and players in all group sizes, they all have thier distinct methods and strategies that are interesting and make for fun gameplay. You just hate on groups bigger than you.

So please share: when does a group become a Zerg? Is it the 8th player? The 9th? The 10th?

*sign*

You are all of a sudden not zerging just cause you run into a bigger Zerg.

If zerging is a set number, than what number constitutes a zerg?

If you don't know what zerging is after a year..After you've been told multiple times that you're zerging....Why would I bother to explain it to ya now?

Why are you dodging? Give me a number.

I given you numbers multiple times

You can go look up your own post history or mine.

Its not my fault you have the memory of a goldfish.

If you want to argue this point, putting forward a simple number is easy to do. Why are you dodging?

I'm waiting 30 seconds for you to repeat Why are you dodging again. I figure at this point you might be running in the Republican Primary soon if ya keep repeating yourself.

I'll assume you have no number and don't want to share it.

If we´re being harsh 5 ppl is kind of zerging as it needs the games raidframe.

Personally anything above two normal grps is kind of zerging for my personal gut feeling - that would be nine players.

Some people might argue that the game offers large grp content - which would be 12 players - i could get behind that too.

What i can´t get behind is declaring 24 as a normal grp. Somewhere between 8 and 12 it becomes insanely beneficial to stack on crown and move in tight formation. That´s when blobbing/zerging starts imo.

Strangely enough i´m too opposed to zerging without moving in tight formation. It´s the blobbing where it becomes impossible to tell apart different players/playstyles because everyone moves in some slug formed of playerbodys.
Everyone that moves and fights stacked on crown for 90% of the time. I don´t like it.

I mean, you can say it's not normal but I can keep inviting people to my group until i hit 24. The game really doesn't say anything when i hit 12, or 16, or 20. It sees no difference between 5 and 24. It's almost as if a game advertising big battles and hundreds of players finds your arbitrary restrictions to be of no relevancy.

For that matter, in 8-12 mans it's even MORE essential to be on crown because if you aren't focusing your DPS you don't have enough people to kill anything. The best groups, no matter how much they parrot to the contrary, always end up condensing for big damage and ultidumps... which is what the big groups do too. Everything between that is kiting, avoiding damage, etc. There is literally no way to get around the efficiency of focused damage, and to do this you're on your crown putting your damage where he/she tells you for maximum effect.

Septimus_Magna wrote: »

The definition of zerging gets pulled out of context here because Cyodiil isnt build for 4 man groups like the dungeons are.

There is a siege limit of 20 sieges per keep for example, this limit has been set for a reason.
If you take this a guideline we can estimate what the min/max "viable" group sizes are.

With the slowest sieges (trebs) you can operate 3 sieges per person. 20 sieges / 3 people = 7 people, assuming you need 1 healer to keep everyone alive from counter-siege that would make a minimum "viable" group size of 7+1= 8 people.

With everyone operating just one siege and 1/8 people healing the maximum group size would be 20 + 4 = 24 people.

This leads me to believe that the intended group size for Cyrodiil is between 8-24 people.
Anything bigger is a zerg, anything smaller is small-scale.

Recently this hasnt been the going rate for groups, at least not in Azura EU.
The minimum group size seems to be around 16 people (less people in group is GG and GN) and there often groups with 30-50 people.

Still these people complain about sh*tty performance, its like they have a mission to kill pvp or something.
Even though pvp is the thing they 'enjoy' each and every day of the week.

Satiar wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Am I the only one that's noticing a trend on who's complaining about this set.

Pretty much everyone complaining runs a ball group of 16+ people.

Almost as if we actually play group content and understand what a mess this is going to be.

But sure, let's Ad Hom this up. Speaks volumes about the strength of your own arguments.

No you play Zerg Content...Lets not confuse it with actual Group Content

PhatGrimReaper wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Am I the only one that's noticing a trend on who's complaining about this set.

Pretty much everyone complaining runs a ball group of 16+ people.

I think you'll find that many of them not only 'run in 16 man groups', but in fact run the groups..... so, you know, they may just know what they are talking about.

I fairly certain that someone who actively partakes in an activity is far more qualified to analyze said activity, than someone who sits on the sidelines complaining about said activity.......

I actually play in group content..You're not playing group content..You're playing Zerg Content

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

I know I'll regret this but please, provide the class with your definitions of group play and Zerg play.

I've told you multiple times what i consider zerging and what I considered group play....Hell Lowbei has as well..If you've not figured it out after a year why would I repeat myself.

Hell if I recall...Half the time you spent trying to argue that you weren't zerging at all and that 6 groups is really just one.

If you're going to draw this distinction in this thread I think you should argue your definitions. As it stands, you seem to have two categories of "Zerg" and "not Zerg" that are entirely number based and not ratio based. I.e. A coordinated group of 20 is a Zerg, but also the random mob of 80 people they're attempting to fight is ALSO a Zerg (only bigger). Your definitions are bad. Your definitions lack context and thus any relevancy. 8 of you is not a Zerg by your standards, but to that 1-4 man you killed it is. To your 8 man my 20-24 is a Zerg, to my 20-24 man that 60-80 man horde is a Zerg.

I have respect for people and players in all group sizes, they all have thier distinct methods and strategies that are interesting and make for fun gameplay. You just hate on groups bigger than you.

So please share: when does a group become a Zerg? Is it the 8th player? The 9th? The 10th?

*sign*

You are all of a sudden not zerging just cause you run into a bigger Zerg.

If zerging is a set number, than what number constitutes a zerg?

If you don't know what zerging is after a year..After you've been told multiple times that you're zerging....Why would I bother to explain it to ya now?

Why are you dodging? Give me a number.

I given you numbers multiple times

You can go look up your own post history or mine.

Its not my fault you have the memory of a goldfish.

If you want to argue this point, putting forward a simple number is easy to do. Why are you dodging?

I'm waiting 30 seconds for you to repeat Why are you dodging again. I figure at this point you might be running in the Republican Primary soon if ya keep repeating yourself.

I'll assume you have no number and don't want to share it.

If we´re being harsh 5 ppl is kind of zerging as it needs the games raidframe.

Personally anything above two normal grps is kind of zerging for my personal gut feeling - that would be nine players.

Some people might argue that the game offers large grp content - which would be 12 players - i could get behind that too.

What i can´t get behind is declaring 24 as a normal grp. Somewhere between 8 and 12 it becomes insanely beneficial to stack on crown and move in tight formation. That´s when blobbing/zerging starts imo.

Strangely enough i´m too opposed to zerging without moving in tight formation. It´s the blobbing where it becomes impossible to tell apart different players/playstyles because everyone moves in some slug formed of playerbodys.
Everyone that moves and fights stacked on crown for 90% of the time. I don´t like it.

I mean, you can say it's not normal but I can keep inviting people to my group until i hit 24. The game really doesn't say anything when i hit 12, or 16, or 20. It sees no difference between 5 and 24. It's almost as if a game advertising big battles and hundreds of players finds your arbitrary restrictions to be of no relevancy.

For that matter, in 8-12 mans it's even MORE essential to be on crown because if you aren't focusing your DPS you don't have enough people to kill anything. The best groups, no matter how much they parrot to the contrary, always end up condensing for big damage and ultidumps... which is what the big groups do too. Everything between that is kiting, avoiding damage, etc. There is literally no way to get around the efficiency of focused damage, and to do this you're on your crown putting your damage where he/she tells you for maximum effect.

SkylarkAU wrote: »

Septimus_Magna wrote: »

The definition of zerging gets pulled out of context here because Cyodiil isnt build for 4 man groups like the dungeons are.

There is a siege limit of 20 sieges per keep for example, this limit has been set for a reason.
If you take this a guideline we can estimate what the min/max "viable" group sizes are.

With the slowest sieges (trebs) you can operate 3 sieges per person. 20 sieges / 3 people = 7 people, assuming you need 1 healer to keep everyone alive from counter-siege that would make a minimum "viable" group size of 7+1= 8 people.

With everyone operating just one siege and 1/8 people healing the maximum group size would be 20 + 4 = 24 people.

This leads me to believe that the intended group size for Cyrodiil is between 8-24 people.
Anything bigger is a zerg, anything smaller is small-scale.

Recently this hasnt been the going rate for groups, at least not in Azura EU.
The minimum group size seems to be around 16 people (less people in group is GG and GN) and there often groups with 30-50 people.

Still these people complain about sh*tty performance, its like they have a mission to kill pvp or something.
Even though pvp is the thing they 'enjoy' each and every day of the week.

Actually my friend you can run 4 trebs simultaneously, I should know... I play for keeps

Satiar wrote: »

Elong wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Elong wrote: »

Seriously, how many is a zerg? Just answer the question.

Anything more then a group technically

Though I should clarify that steathers might consider something like 4 a Zerg if there is a stealther meta in the game. Since everyone stealths in this game it's harder to say

So.... because you have the mistaken impression 4 people is a group, you define 5 people a zerg?

I'm just gonna stay solo, I feel really unsure about what I'm allowed to do anymore.

Think about how I feel! I'm running, like, six zergs a night!