Stop complaining about class balance in PvP!

zyk · May 2016

manny254 wrote: »

or the objective should be to have fun?

Doesn't that go without saying? I am not telling you how you should have fun. But obviously in a perfect world, all players in an RvR objective based game would enjoy and be focused on the core theme. Just like any game. One hopes all teammates on the basketball court are engaged in winning the game, no?

This isn't a perfect world and we play a broken game. Still, when discussing the role of siege, I think it should be from the POV of the core theme.

Is it so wrong that I prefer enjoyable fights? Objective game play is ultimately two different situations. The first is being heavily outnumbered. The second is heavily outnumbering your opponent. This essentially means frustration and boredom. If objectives/winning where all that mattered each faction would pick a server to dominate, and no one would actually pvp. Cyrodiil would be each faction gate camping on different servers.

Everybody prefers enjoyable fights. This goes for the dude who sits on a fire treb for the duration of every fight too.

I think objective gameplay is far more granular than your observation. Also, I think that actual fans of RvR objective gameplay are looking for close, hotly contested campaigns that go down to the wire.

However, I think that because this game has so many frustrating design issues, most players focus on individual goals instead. I think it is also possible most true fans of RvR have left already and it may be a disproportionate number of remaining players are no longer reflective of what was the target audience. The ultra-casual PVE side of this game doesn't really mesh well with open world RvR. "lol horse simulator"

I have probably taken/defended more objectives than any active US AD player, and I simply do not enjoy it. Contrary to popular belief I will help take objectives, but i prefer not to participate in the laggy mess of most keep fights.

I don't blame you. Is anyone calling you out? Not I. With the state the game is in, my opinion is that players should have fun where they can find it. I certainly recognize you and the groups you've run with as contributors to the successes AD has had.

Siege by far benefits the greater numbers. You need players to operate siege and actually fight. A huge zerg can sacrifice multiple players to siege, but a small group can not always do this.

The zerg has an abundance of all options, including siege. It can also be said the zerg can sacrifice multiple players to heal/dps/bombard/purge/whatever.

I agree with what you say about resources. Not only is it the best approach to winning a campaign, but it is also the best option to spread players out. Months ago, I advocated reducing the score evaluation interval to encourage more resource play. But as you say, most players don't care about campaigns. I think most remaining players just want some quick instant gratification pew pew pew at convenient locations.

Perhaps when ZOS considers applying the resources necessary to fix Cyrodiil, it asks itself, "for whom? These guys want cod on horses!"

Xsorus · May 2016

........Really......Are we really at the point where someone from a Large Scale PvP Guild is crying about Siege being to effective in a Keep Fight?

Bloody Hell..you guys should be thankful every time you get hit by siege it doesn't interrupt you for 3 seconds completely keeping you from casting ANYTHING.

frozywozy · May 2016

Satiar wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

God_flakes wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

zyk wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

The best counter is multiple breaches, but there is a huge problem with that idea. That tactic only really works if you outnumber the opponent. The core problem with siege is that it will always favor the larger numbers. Personally I do not want to win a battle because I outnumber the opponent.

Regardless of the numbers present, more breaches create more offensive options and are more difficult to defend. I also disagree that siege inherently favors the side with greater numbers.

In general, I think players are too preoccupied with numbers in Cyrodiil. RvR isn't supposed to have a primary focus on individual skills. In a game intended to have strategic elements, outnumbering an opponent in one location is a valid strategy. The cost to that should be vulnerability elsewhere.

The problem is that in an AP obsessed metagame like 2.3, no one will leave a large dtick quagmire. There is no incentive to attack an opponent stacked at one location elsewhere because: 1. no one will bother defending, so it will be pvdoor; 2. poor rewards.

The focus of this game needs to be winning objectives and campaigns. Not constantly trying to demonstrate how awesome our individual or group skills are by fighting outnumbered.

or the objective should be to have fun?

Is it so wrong that I prefer enjoyable fights? Objective game play is ultimately two different situations. The first is being heavily outnumbered. The second is heavily outnumbering your opponent. This essentially means frustration and boredom. If objectives/winning where all that mattered each faction would pick a server to dominate, and no one would actually pvp. Cyrodiil would be each faction gate camping on different servers.

I have probably taken/defended more objectives than any active US AD player, and I simply do not enjoy it. Contrary to popular belief I will help take objectives, but i prefer not to participate in the laggy mess of most keep fights.

Siege by far benefits the greater numbers. You need players to operate siege and actually fight. A huge zerg can sacrifice multiple players to siege, but a small group can not always do this.

But the name of the game IS objective focused. If we all just threw our hands up and refused to play the game as it is designed...what is the point of playing?? What is the point of tactics and strategy and trying to outwit and undermine enemies? This is an MMO, for crying out loud. It's SUPPOSED to be large group play and battles over objectives and keeps. This isn't COD. Why do people insist on trying to make this game all small warfare, onesies and twosies??? To me THAT is boring.

So the game is designed to be played at 1,000+ ping?

I did not insist that the game be made that way, but there should be a place for everyone to fight. Every night I have ran a group we spend the first 1-2 hours making sure AD has some keeps. Beyond that I will play to have fun. I will help if i see a good opportunity, but i prefer not to participate in the lag.

Frankly I do not buy any of the bs about winning campaigns/objectives. I have yet to see anyone try to win the ideal way.

Here is a quick guide to winning a campaign.

1. Loose both your scrolls. Let the other factions fight over these useless objectives.
2. Try to secure/defend your home keeps.
3. Gather a raid of 24
4. Split the group into pairs,
5. Send each group to a different resource. Ideally the tri keeps of the winning factions.
6. 1-2mins before the score eval cap the 12 resources.
7. Defend home keeps, and repeat steps 3-6.

That is the ideal way to win a campaign.

Ehhhhh...

Honestly it just seems like AD is scared of red at this point. Most nights I log on and AD has tri keeps and I have 60-70 EP pushing from Aleswell to Glade because they are safe in the knowledge that AD will not push them. Sure enough, later on in the evening when in pushing to dethrone, AD will conveniently avoid pushing red and will begin attaching DC-held nickel/brindle. I have, on multiple occasions, taken Alessia and left it unrepaired specifically so that AD will take a freaking keep and put pressure on the Sej corridor

Essentially, by not engaging in making the campaign competitive AD helps make it a lag fest. If EP doesn't have to worry about AD it will ALWAYS become faction vs faction slug fest because no one is pressuring them to be anywhere else.

You want less laggy fights? Pressure the map. Yesterday was hilarious, EP owned most of the map and had a Zerg at Glade, and the only AD group capable of pushing to get AD keeps back decides to come up to Glade to join in the lag fest. That will never split up the Zerg.

How does it feel to get double teamed for a while? EP got double teamed since the Thornblade victory streak. Until last Trueflame cycle, Chalman and Brk were enemy controlled at the beginning of every primetime as Nikolai described in his post.

frozywozy · May 2016

manny254 wrote: »

God_flakes wrote: »

Moj, I may not care. You may not care. But trust me, people care. I get at least 5 hate tells a night from salty EP who brag about winning the last campaign and predict they will win from here on out.

Half of EP also think I am the Antichrist.

I will not believe that people genuinely care until they do what I described for a campaign.

I do that often Mojican. It just gets really old when you hit enemy ressources with skirmish groups and get zerged down by entire enemy raids of 24+ saramises. On top of the lag. But when server is working well, we enjoy doing so.

Satiar · May 2016

frozywozy wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

God_flakes wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

zyk wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

The best counter is multiple breaches, but there is a huge problem with that idea. That tactic only really works if you outnumber the opponent. The core problem with siege is that it will always favor the larger numbers. Personally I do not want to win a battle because I outnumber the opponent.

Regardless of the numbers present, more breaches create more offensive options and are more difficult to defend. I also disagree that siege inherently favors the side with greater numbers.

In general, I think players are too preoccupied with numbers in Cyrodiil. RvR isn't supposed to have a primary focus on individual skills. In a game intended to have strategic elements, outnumbering an opponent in one location is a valid strategy. The cost to that should be vulnerability elsewhere.

The problem is that in an AP obsessed metagame like 2.3, no one will leave a large dtick quagmire. There is no incentive to attack an opponent stacked at one location elsewhere because: 1. no one will bother defending, so it will be pvdoor; 2. poor rewards.

The focus of this game needs to be winning objectives and campaigns. Not constantly trying to demonstrate how awesome our individual or group skills are by fighting outnumbered.

or the objective should be to have fun?

Is it so wrong that I prefer enjoyable fights? Objective game play is ultimately two different situations. The first is being heavily outnumbered. The second is heavily outnumbering your opponent. This essentially means frustration and boredom. If objectives/winning where all that mattered each faction would pick a server to dominate, and no one would actually pvp. Cyrodiil would be each faction gate camping on different servers.

I have probably taken/defended more objectives than any active US AD player, and I simply do not enjoy it. Contrary to popular belief I will help take objectives, but i prefer not to participate in the laggy mess of most keep fights.

Siege by far benefits the greater numbers. You need players to operate siege and actually fight. A huge zerg can sacrifice multiple players to siege, but a small group can not always do this.

But the name of the game IS objective focused. If we all just threw our hands up and refused to play the game as it is designed...what is the point of playing?? What is the point of tactics and strategy and trying to outwit and undermine enemies? This is an MMO, for crying out loud. It's SUPPOSED to be large group play and battles over objectives and keeps. This isn't COD. Why do people insist on trying to make this game all small warfare, onesies and twosies??? To me THAT is boring.

So the game is designed to be played at 1,000+ ping?

I did not insist that the game be made that way, but there should be a place for everyone to fight. Every night I have ran a group we spend the first 1-2 hours making sure AD has some keeps. Beyond that I will play to have fun. I will help if i see a good opportunity, but i prefer not to participate in the lag.

Frankly I do not buy any of the bs about winning campaigns/objectives. I have yet to see anyone try to win the ideal way.

Here is a quick guide to winning a campaign.

1. Loose both your scrolls. Let the other factions fight over these useless objectives.
2. Try to secure/defend your home keeps.
3. Gather a raid of 24
4. Split the group into pairs,
5. Send each group to a different resource. Ideally the tri keeps of the winning factions.
6. 1-2mins before the score eval cap the 12 resources.
7. Defend home keeps, and repeat steps 3-6.

That is the ideal way to win a campaign.

Ehhhhh...

Honestly it just seems like AD is scared of red at this point. Most nights I log on and AD has tri keeps and I have 60-70 EP pushing from Aleswell to Glade because they are safe in the knowledge that AD will not push them. Sure enough, later on in the evening when in pushing to dethrone, AD will conveniently avoid pushing red and will begin attaching DC-held nickel/brindle. I have, on multiple occasions, taken Alessia and left it unrepaired specifically so that AD will take a freaking keep and put pressure on the Sej corridor

Essentially, by not engaging in making the campaign competitive AD helps make it a lag fest. If EP doesn't have to worry about AD it will ALWAYS become faction vs faction slug fest because no one is pressuring them to be anywhere else.

You want less laggy fights? Pressure the map. Yesterday was hilarious, EP owned most of the map and had a Zerg at Glade, and the only AD group capable of pushing to get AD keeps back decides to come up to Glade to join in the lag fest. That will never split up the Zerg.

How does it feel to get double teamed for a while? EP got double teamed since the Thornblade victory streak. Until last Trueflame cycle, Chalman and Brk were enemy controlled at the beginning of every primetime as Nikolai described in his post.

I wouldn't know Frozn, I get online and push you back to your tri keeps within an hour or two and get between 800-1000 kills a night doing it.

The more pertinent question is, how does it feel double teaming 2 bar population with no groups on, and than getting ruined the moment any organized resistance logs on? I get you take your wins where you can but I'd stuggle to take pride in such a strategy

frozywozy · May 2016

Satiar wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

God_flakes wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

zyk wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

The best counter is multiple breaches, but there is a huge problem with that idea. That tactic only really works if you outnumber the opponent. The core problem with siege is that it will always favor the larger numbers. Personally I do not want to win a battle because I outnumber the opponent.

Regardless of the numbers present, more breaches create more offensive options and are more difficult to defend. I also disagree that siege inherently favors the side with greater numbers.

In general, I think players are too preoccupied with numbers in Cyrodiil. RvR isn't supposed to have a primary focus on individual skills. In a game intended to have strategic elements, outnumbering an opponent in one location is a valid strategy. The cost to that should be vulnerability elsewhere.

The problem is that in an AP obsessed metagame like 2.3, no one will leave a large dtick quagmire. There is no incentive to attack an opponent stacked at one location elsewhere because: 1. no one will bother defending, so it will be pvdoor; 2. poor rewards.

The focus of this game needs to be winning objectives and campaigns. Not constantly trying to demonstrate how awesome our individual or group skills are by fighting outnumbered.

or the objective should be to have fun?

Is it so wrong that I prefer enjoyable fights? Objective game play is ultimately two different situations. The first is being heavily outnumbered. The second is heavily outnumbering your opponent. This essentially means frustration and boredom. If objectives/winning where all that mattered each faction would pick a server to dominate, and no one would actually pvp. Cyrodiil would be each faction gate camping on different servers.

I have probably taken/defended more objectives than any active US AD player, and I simply do not enjoy it. Contrary to popular belief I will help take objectives, but i prefer not to participate in the laggy mess of most keep fights.

Siege by far benefits the greater numbers. You need players to operate siege and actually fight. A huge zerg can sacrifice multiple players to siege, but a small group can not always do this.

But the name of the game IS objective focused. If we all just threw our hands up and refused to play the game as it is designed...what is the point of playing?? What is the point of tactics and strategy and trying to outwit and undermine enemies? This is an MMO, for crying out loud. It's SUPPOSED to be large group play and battles over objectives and keeps. This isn't COD. Why do people insist on trying to make this game all small warfare, onesies and twosies??? To me THAT is boring.

So the game is designed to be played at 1,000+ ping?

I did not insist that the game be made that way, but there should be a place for everyone to fight. Every night I have ran a group we spend the first 1-2 hours making sure AD has some keeps. Beyond that I will play to have fun. I will help if i see a good opportunity, but i prefer not to participate in the lag.

Frankly I do not buy any of the bs about winning campaigns/objectives. I have yet to see anyone try to win the ideal way.

Here is a quick guide to winning a campaign.

1. Loose both your scrolls. Let the other factions fight over these useless objectives.
2. Try to secure/defend your home keeps.
3. Gather a raid of 24
4. Split the group into pairs,
5. Send each group to a different resource. Ideally the tri keeps of the winning factions.
6. 1-2mins before the score eval cap the 12 resources.
7. Defend home keeps, and repeat steps 3-6.

That is the ideal way to win a campaign.

Ehhhhh...

Honestly it just seems like AD is scared of red at this point. Most nights I log on and AD has tri keeps and I have 60-70 EP pushing from Aleswell to Glade because they are safe in the knowledge that AD will not push them. Sure enough, later on in the evening when in pushing to dethrone, AD will conveniently avoid pushing red and will begin attaching DC-held nickel/brindle. I have, on multiple occasions, taken Alessia and left it unrepaired specifically so that AD will take a freaking keep and put pressure on the Sej corridor

Essentially, by not engaging in making the campaign competitive AD helps make it a lag fest. If EP doesn't have to worry about AD it will ALWAYS become faction vs faction slug fest because no one is pressuring them to be anywhere else.

You want less laggy fights? Pressure the map. Yesterday was hilarious, EP owned most of the map and had a Zerg at Glade, and the only AD group capable of pushing to get AD keeps back decides to come up to Glade to join in the lag fest. That will never split up the Zerg.

How does it feel to get double teamed for a while? EP got double teamed since the Thornblade victory streak. Until last Trueflame cycle, Chalman and Brk were enemy controlled at the beginning of every primetime as Nikolai described in his post.

I wouldn't know Frozn, I get online and push you back to your tri keeps within an hour or two and get between 800-1000 kills a night doing it.

The more pertinent question is, how does it feel double teaming 2 bar population with no groups on, and than getting ruined the moment any organized resistance logs on? I get you take your wins where you can but I'd stuggle to take pride in such a strategy

I don't think you understood the part where we got double teamed since Thornblade, starting Primetime with Brk and Chal under enemy control and finishing primetime around 1:00am with all home keeps back to us. We have done really well at primetime until very recently (last campaign). Why? For multiple reasons.

1) Chuck Norris who used to AP farm in ressource towers and be a nuisance to its faction left the game.
2) HoD got better at what they are doing and is a guild primarily focused on objectives and map control.
3) VE stopped running the marathon around Bleakers stairs or on Arrius roof and actually coordinate with Hod in an effort to control the map.
4) Haxus's core is not as stable as it used to be.

Well done guys. About time.

In the meantime, don't try to blame me regarding the night / day cap. I work 40 hours a week and I don't participate in any of that. I am also a proud supporter of dynamic population caps.

Satiar · May 2016

frozywozy wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

God_flakes wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

zyk wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

The best counter is multiple breaches, but there is a huge problem with that idea. That tactic only really works if you outnumber the opponent. The core problem with siege is that it will always favor the larger numbers. Personally I do not want to win a battle because I outnumber the opponent.

Regardless of the numbers present, more breaches create more offensive options and are more difficult to defend. I also disagree that siege inherently favors the side with greater numbers.

In general, I think players are too preoccupied with numbers in Cyrodiil. RvR isn't supposed to have a primary focus on individual skills. In a game intended to have strategic elements, outnumbering an opponent in one location is a valid strategy. The cost to that should be vulnerability elsewhere.

The problem is that in an AP obsessed metagame like 2.3, no one will leave a large dtick quagmire. There is no incentive to attack an opponent stacked at one location elsewhere because: 1. no one will bother defending, so it will be pvdoor; 2. poor rewards.

The focus of this game needs to be winning objectives and campaigns. Not constantly trying to demonstrate how awesome our individual or group skills are by fighting outnumbered.

or the objective should be to have fun?

Is it so wrong that I prefer enjoyable fights? Objective game play is ultimately two different situations. The first is being heavily outnumbered. The second is heavily outnumbering your opponent. This essentially means frustration and boredom. If objectives/winning where all that mattered each faction would pick a server to dominate, and no one would actually pvp. Cyrodiil would be each faction gate camping on different servers.

I have probably taken/defended more objectives than any active US AD player, and I simply do not enjoy it. Contrary to popular belief I will help take objectives, but i prefer not to participate in the laggy mess of most keep fights.

Siege by far benefits the greater numbers. You need players to operate siege and actually fight. A huge zerg can sacrifice multiple players to siege, but a small group can not always do this.

But the name of the game IS objective focused. If we all just threw our hands up and refused to play the game as it is designed...what is the point of playing?? What is the point of tactics and strategy and trying to outwit and undermine enemies? This is an MMO, for crying out loud. It's SUPPOSED to be large group play and battles over objectives and keeps. This isn't COD. Why do people insist on trying to make this game all small warfare, onesies and twosies??? To me THAT is boring.

So the game is designed to be played at 1,000+ ping?

I did not insist that the game be made that way, but there should be a place for everyone to fight. Every night I have ran a group we spend the first 1-2 hours making sure AD has some keeps. Beyond that I will play to have fun. I will help if i see a good opportunity, but i prefer not to participate in the lag.

Frankly I do not buy any of the bs about winning campaigns/objectives. I have yet to see anyone try to win the ideal way.

Here is a quick guide to winning a campaign.

1. Loose both your scrolls. Let the other factions fight over these useless objectives.
2. Try to secure/defend your home keeps.
3. Gather a raid of 24
4. Split the group into pairs,
5. Send each group to a different resource. Ideally the tri keeps of the winning factions.
6. 1-2mins before the score eval cap the 12 resources.
7. Defend home keeps, and repeat steps 3-6.

That is the ideal way to win a campaign.

Ehhhhh...

Honestly it just seems like AD is scared of red at this point. Most nights I log on and AD has tri keeps and I have 60-70 EP pushing from Aleswell to Glade because they are safe in the knowledge that AD will not push them. Sure enough, later on in the evening when in pushing to dethrone, AD will conveniently avoid pushing red and will begin attaching DC-held nickel/brindle. I have, on multiple occasions, taken Alessia and left it unrepaired specifically so that AD will take a freaking keep and put pressure on the Sej corridor

Essentially, by not engaging in making the campaign competitive AD helps make it a lag fest. If EP doesn't have to worry about AD it will ALWAYS become faction vs faction slug fest because no one is pressuring them to be anywhere else.

You want less laggy fights? Pressure the map. Yesterday was hilarious, EP owned most of the map and had a Zerg at Glade, and the only AD group capable of pushing to get AD keeps back decides to come up to Glade to join in the lag fest. That will never split up the Zerg.

How does it feel to get double teamed for a while? EP got double teamed since the Thornblade victory streak. Until last Trueflame cycle, Chalman and Brk were enemy controlled at the beginning of every primetime as Nikolai described in his post.

I wouldn't know Frozn, I get online and push you back to your tri keeps within an hour or two and get between 800-1000 kills a night doing it.

The more pertinent question is, how does it feel double teaming 2 bar population with no groups on, and than getting ruined the moment any organized resistance logs on? I get you take your wins where you can but I'd stuggle to take pride in such a strategy

I don't think you understood the part where we got double teamed since Thornblade, starting Primetime with Brk and Chal under enemy control and finishing primetime around 1:00am with all home keeps back to us. We have done really well at primetime until very recently (last campaign). Why? For multiple reasons.

1) Chuck Norris who used to AP farm in ressource towers and be a nuisance to its faction left the game.
2) HoD got better at what they are doing and is a guild primarily focused on objectives and map control.
3) VE stopped running the marathon around Bleakers stairs or on Arrius roof and actually coordinate with Hod in an effort to control the map.
4) Haxus's core is not as stable as it used to be.

Well done guys. About time.

In the meantime, don't try to blame me regarding the night / day cap. I work 40 hours a week and I don't participate in any of that. I am also a proud supporter of dynamic population caps.

You should know better than to try to call me out on this, considering why we rerolled to DC (too many guilds and a sickening night cap by Red). How does it feel indeed.

It's not double teaming, it's straight up anti-competitive play.

Also edit: we have always focused map control, just, unlike EP, we don't hammer you into the dust when we know you're weak. Overall I'd say a farm at breakers or chal was preferable to us smashing the faction back to KC.

manny254 · May 2016

frozywozy wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

God_flakes wrote: »

Moj, I may not care. You may not care. But trust me, people care. I get at least 5 hate tells a night from salty EP who brag about winning the last campaign and predict they will win from here on out.

Half of EP also think I am the Antichrist.

I will not believe that people genuinely care until they do what I described for a campaign.

I do that often Mojican. It just gets really old when you hit enemy ressources with skirmish groups and get zerged down by entire enemy raids of 24+ saramises. On top of the lag. But when server is working well, we enjoy doing so.

Miss read

Satiar · May 2016

manny254 wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

God_flakes wrote: »

Moj, I may not care. You may not care. But trust me, people care. I get at least 5 hate tells a night from salty EP who brag about winning the last campaign and predict they will win from here on out.

Half of EP also think I am the Antichrist.

I will not believe that people genuinely care until they do what I described for a campaign.

I do that often Mojican. It just gets really old when you hit enemy ressources with skirmish groups and get zerged down by entire enemy raids of 24+ saramises. On top of the lag. But when server is working well, we enjoy doing so.

Did you just blame me for the lag? You? You of all people?

You are by far the most delusional person I have ever seen. You constantly complain about large groups, but you have no trouble hiding behind the entire EP faction. I can agree with a lot of what you say, but you are blind.

Yeah I don't get along with Moji for reasons but he did literally make a video of his character weeping because a 20-man group showed up to a fight. I doubt he is a lag monger.

Rohamad_Ali · May 2016

I have no idea wat the topic is anymore . Were you all discussing new siege or emp keeps or just arguing in general ? Not that it matters but I was slightly interested in the 2 keep minimum to hold emperorship theory I saw some where . Wait .. is this about creating lag too ? I need to read back .

Armitas · May 2016

Roehamad_Ali wrote: »

I have no idea wat the topic is anymore .

It's about....things...and stuff. More specifically its about all of the things and just some of the stuff.

God_flakes · May 2016

frozywozy wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

God_flakes wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

zyk wrote: »

manny254 wrote: »

The best counter is multiple breaches, but there is a huge problem with that idea. That tactic only really works if you outnumber the opponent. The core problem with siege is that it will always favor the larger numbers. Personally I do not want to win a battle because I outnumber the opponent.

Regardless of the numbers present, more breaches create more offensive options and are more difficult to defend. I also disagree that siege inherently favors the side with greater numbers.

In general, I think players are too preoccupied with numbers in Cyrodiil. RvR isn't supposed to have a primary focus on individual skills. In a game intended to have strategic elements, outnumbering an opponent in one location is a valid strategy. The cost to that should be vulnerability elsewhere.

The problem is that in an AP obsessed metagame like 2.3, no one will leave a large dtick quagmire. There is no incentive to attack an opponent stacked at one location elsewhere because: 1. no one will bother defending, so it will be pvdoor; 2. poor rewards.

The focus of this game needs to be winning objectives and campaigns. Not constantly trying to demonstrate how awesome our individual or group skills are by fighting outnumbered.

or the objective should be to have fun?

Is it so wrong that I prefer enjoyable fights? Objective game play is ultimately two different situations. The first is being heavily outnumbered. The second is heavily outnumbering your opponent. This essentially means frustration and boredom. If objectives/winning where all that mattered each faction would pick a server to dominate, and no one would actually pvp. Cyrodiil would be each faction gate camping on different servers.

I have probably taken/defended more objectives than any active US AD player, and I simply do not enjoy it. Contrary to popular belief I will help take objectives, but i prefer not to participate in the laggy mess of most keep fights.

Siege by far benefits the greater numbers. You need players to operate siege and actually fight. A huge zerg can sacrifice multiple players to siege, but a small group can not always do this.

But the name of the game IS objective focused. If we all just threw our hands up and refused to play the game as it is designed...what is the point of playing?? What is the point of tactics and strategy and trying to outwit and undermine enemies? This is an MMO, for crying out loud. It's SUPPOSED to be large group play and battles over objectives and keeps. This isn't COD. Why do people insist on trying to make this game all small warfare, onesies and twosies??? To me THAT is boring.

So the game is designed to be played at 1,000+ ping?

I did not insist that the game be made that way, but there should be a place for everyone to fight. Every night I have ran a group we spend the first 1-2 hours making sure AD has some keeps. Beyond that I will play to have fun. I will help if i see a good opportunity, but i prefer not to participate in the lag.

Frankly I do not buy any of the bs about winning campaigns/objectives. I have yet to see anyone try to win the ideal way.

Here is a quick guide to winning a campaign.

1. Loose both your scrolls. Let the other factions fight over these useless objectives.
2. Try to secure/defend your home keeps.
3. Gather a raid of 24
4. Split the group into pairs,
5. Send each group to a different resource. Ideally the tri keeps of the winning factions.
6. 1-2mins before the score eval cap the 12 resources.
7. Defend home keeps, and repeat steps 3-6.

That is the ideal way to win a campaign.

Ehhhhh...

Honestly it just seems like AD is scared of red at this point. Most nights I log on and AD has tri keeps and I have 60-70 EP pushing from Aleswell to Glade because they are safe in the knowledge that AD will not push them. Sure enough, later on in the evening when in pushing to dethrone, AD will conveniently avoid pushing red and will begin attaching DC-held nickel/brindle. I have, on multiple occasions, taken Alessia and left it unrepaired specifically so that AD will take a freaking keep and put pressure on the Sej corridor

Essentially, by not engaging in making the campaign competitive AD helps make it a lag fest. If EP doesn't have to worry about AD it will ALWAYS become faction vs faction slug fest because no one is pressuring them to be anywhere else.

You want less laggy fights? Pressure the map. Yesterday was hilarious, EP owned most of the map and had a Zerg at Glade, and the only AD group capable of pushing to get AD keeps back decides to come up to Glade to join in the lag fest. That will never split up the Zerg.

How does it feel to get double teamed for a while? EP got double teamed since the Thornblade victory streak. Until last Trueflame cycle, Chalman and Brk were enemy controlled at the beginning of every primetime as Nikolai described in his post.

So you admit EP needs AD help to dominate, even with their superior numbers and constant poplock? Two nights in a row now Ad has sat holed up in Dragonclaw sucking their thumbs and refusing ro engage EP or even get their scrolls back or any resources back. EP leaves their keeps totally untouched and ONLY pushes DC. I can see teaming up with ad when you're losing and undermanned. But when you're winning and overmanned? Come on nah....