Trueflame resources should not give any points.

NBrookus · January 2017

zyk wrote: »

Pchela wrote: »

zyk wrote: »

I think a better solution would be to decrease the score evaluation interval to 20-30 minutes. This would better enable small groups to contribute to the score.

If small group play at resources was more impactful through the course of an entire hour--vs the final 5-10 minutes--more players would do it. This would have two positive effects: server lag would be reduced with players more spread out and responses to resource fights would be less zergy as there would be more to respond to.

Last time I went to take a resource there were no 'small groups' defending it, and no 'small groups' came to take it back, it was full on tsunami.

That was my point. If a greater number of resources were being challenged, the response to each of them would, in theory, be less zergy.

Doubt it. As long as resources flip so much faster with a large group than a small one, that solo/duo/small group flipping resources can't keep up the pace. There's no benefit to splitting up a large group into small ones to take resources.

I like the idea of random score evaluations.

Satiar · January 2017

frozywozy wrote: »

Also, it's quite amusing to see players who participate in 24men ballgroups complain about zerging. Cap your group at 16, then talk. Until that happens, your words will come in one ear and go off the other.

Props to Vokundein, Invictus, Haxus, Flame, Fengrush's squad, K-Hole, Adamant, Rage, Alacrity, No Mercy, Condemned for running medium groups, keeping it clean and competitive until battlegrounds get released.

@frozywozy
Most of those groups didn't cap at 16, and two of them ran 20+ each on the last day of the campaign and stacked on top of each other like PM to flip keeps.

I am, however, glad to see we've moved up from glorifying small scale PvP to medium scale PvP. It's an improvement!

Telel · January 2017

frozywozy wrote: »

Also, it's quite amusing to see players who participate in 24men ballgroups complain about zerging. Cap your group at 16, then talk. Until that happens, your words will come in one ear and go off the other.

Props to Vokundein, Invictus, Haxus, Flame, Fengrush's squad, K-Hole, Adamant, Rage, Alacrity, No Mercy, Condemned for running medium groups, keeping it clean and competitive until battlegrounds get released.

Funny. This one hasn't run more than 14 in a group for months with the average coming in at 7-9. But they still get accused of 'zerging' by people whose groups move like conjoined siblings who spit fire, and poop purges.

But maybe you can sit down and talk to such grumpy elves and let them know the good work Khajiit does with those 'massive' 10 man PUG groups they've been running the last few weeks. Then perhaps they won't be getting so upset that they and their dozen buddies had to use more than 2 skills to win a fight.

Especially since they've usually gained a lot of AP by the time they wipe...usually from Telel.

Xsorus · January 2017

They should of capped group size at 12 in my opinion. Personally prefer 8 but the 12 would match more with trials

Delphinia · January 2017

I don't have an issue with large scale battles, nor do I have an issue with small scale. There is an issue however, when numbers are not balanced. Unfortunately, that's not really an area players can easily control. If they know another guild is running, they can try to go elsewhere, but if that guild needs support because they're up against an opposing faction stacking more players than they can handle, they may have to temporarily join forces.
There are many leaders I've had the pleasure of following who I've seen make a conscious effort to not run alongside another group.
One of the more difficult and somewhat ridiculous instances I've seen is when it takes 6 or more players to take down just 1. These builds are amazing and I'm sure I'll never have that skill to accomplish this myself, but in those cases, you may need more to succeed against such strong builds. I'm seeing more and more of this, which is great for them, but then I would think they can't be upset if they die to what they might call a "Zerg". I can only guess that's part of the "fun" of creating such a build. To be able to take on so many players at one time. So, you may end up with a "Zerg" for just a small group if the players in that small group are all running these builds.
Cyrodiil is an ongoing 24/7 battle. People play whenever they want, even if it's not convenient for the other factions. If there are hundreds on one side, and only thirty to fifty on the other two sides, chances are, the side with the overwhelming numbers will succeed.
I would love it if Zos would be willing to at least consider a campaign where it had a sliding population bar of sorts. Where there could not be more than a set number of difference between factions. For instance, if my faction already has fifty more players in the campaign than the other two, I cannot join this campaign until their numbers increase by a set amount, or mine decrease.
I've played other mmos that have implemented this, but I can imagine this might be more difficult to achieve in a 24/7 battle.
Either way, it is a bit frustrating and disheartening to constantly be run down by massive numbers.

Potenza · January 2017

OP, perhaps how the scoring is evaluated needs to be changed - It should be scoring every minute based on current live conditions, not once an hour where everything that happens in-between means nothing.

Joy_Division · January 2017

They should name the game Chalman Mine Online. That point on the map is worth more than the actual elder Scrolls and receives a million times more attention by the PvP community.

Astanphaeus · January 2017

frozywozy wrote: »

Also, it's quite amusing to see players who participate in 24men ballgroups complain about zerging. Cap your group at 16, then talk. Until that happens, your words will come in one ear and go off the other.

Props to Vokundein, Invictus, Haxus, Flame, Fengrush's squad, K-Hole, Adamant, Rage, Alacrity, No Mercy, Condemned for running medium groups, keeping it clean and competitive until battlegrounds get released.

Like Satiar said, there are zero groups on this list that, while they may specifically have fewer players in their group, haven't stacked with other groups and pugs frequently. Honestly, this self-aggrandizing is pathetic at best.

frozywozy · January 2017

Astanphaeus wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Also, it's quite amusing to see players who participate in 24men ballgroups complain about zerging. Cap your group at 16, then talk. Until that happens, your words will come in one ear and go off the other.

Props to Vokundein, Invictus, Haxus, Flame, Fengrush's squad, K-Hole, Adamant, Rage, Alacrity, No Mercy, Condemned for running medium groups, keeping it clean and competitive until battlegrounds get released.

Like Satiar said, there are zero groups on this list that, while they may specifically have fewer players in their group, haven't stacked with other groups and pugs frequently. Honestly, this self-aggrandizing is pathetic at best.

Easily said, the facts are, they cap at 16. The rest, you can see it in the videos if you browse forums. You will see that they don't need to stack with other guilds to perform well, unlike all the ballgroups who run with 20 players or more because they can't do anything with 16 or less. I just can't wait for the next aoe changes, that shall be alot of fun.

Telel · January 2017

frozywozy wrote: »

Astanphaeus wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Also, it's quite amusing to see players who participate in 24men ballgroups complain about zerging. Cap your group at 16, then talk. Until that happens, your words will come in one ear and go off the other.

Props to Vokundein, Invictus, Haxus, Flame, Fengrush's squad, K-Hole, Adamant, Rage, Alacrity, No Mercy, Condemned for running medium groups, keeping it clean and competitive until battlegrounds get released.

Like Satiar said, there are zero groups on this list that, while they may specifically have fewer players in their group, haven't stacked with other groups and pugs frequently. Honestly, this self-aggrandizing is pathetic at best.

Easily said, the facts are, they cap at 16. The rest, you can see it in the videos if you browse forums. You will see that they don't need to stack with other guilds to perform well, unlike all the ballgroups who run with 20 players or more because they can't do anything with 16 or less. I just can't wait for the next aoe changes, that shall be alot of fun.

Don't forget removing the stunning effect from templar shards.

Since certain blobmer seem to rely on that for half of their 'skill based gameplay' this one imagines that some of them will be suddenly getting bored with their templars and deciding to move to 'something new and fresh'.

Though how magika derp knights will be new and fresh is not something khajiit is ready to speculate upon. Especially when most of them are likely to be vampires wielding destro sticks.

Esgameplaya1 · January 2017

Joy_Division wrote: »

They should name the game Chalman Mine Online. That point on the map is worth more than the actual elder Scrolls and receives a million times more attention by the PvP community.

Yeh for some reason when my character gets to this area I become instantly bored, oh and the bridge also!!

frozywozy · January 2017

Telel wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Astanphaeus wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Also, it's quite amusing to see players who participate in 24men ballgroups complain about zerging. Cap your group at 16, then talk. Until that happens, your words will come in one ear and go off the other.

Props to Vokundein, Invictus, Haxus, Flame, Fengrush's squad, K-Hole, Adamant, Rage, Alacrity, No Mercy, Condemned for running medium groups, keeping it clean and competitive until battlegrounds get released.

Like Satiar said, there are zero groups on this list that, while they may specifically have fewer players in their group, haven't stacked with other groups and pugs frequently. Honestly, this self-aggrandizing is pathetic at best.

Easily said, the facts are, they cap at 16. The rest, you can see it in the videos if you browse forums. You will see that they don't need to stack with other guilds to perform well, unlike all the ballgroups who run with 20 players or more because they can't do anything with 16 or less. I just can't wait for the next aoe changes, that shall be alot of fun.

Don't forget removing the stunning effect from templar shards.

Since certain blobmer seem to rely on that for half of their 'skill based gameplay' this one imagines that some of them will be suddenly getting bored with their templars and deciding to move to 'something new and fresh'.

Though how magika derp knights will be new and fresh is not something khajiit is ready to speculate upon. Especially when most of them are likely to be vampires wielding destro sticks.

Just like some cats nightblades moved from bombard spam to something else, I Imagine templars will also adjust to the new meta accordingly.

DeadlyRecluse · January 2017

Make holding a resource more important than capping it (whoever holds a resource for the greatest percentage of the last score cycle gets the point)?

Now there is no incentive to ninjaflip before reset, but a big incentive to hold as many resources as possible for as long as possible.

NACtron · January 2017

frozywozy wrote: »

Astanphaeus wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Also, it's quite amusing to see players who participate in 24men ballgroups complain about zerging. Cap your group at 16, then talk. Until that happens, your words will come in one ear and go off the other.

Props to Vokundein, Invictus, Haxus, Flame, Fengrush's squad, K-Hole, Adamant, Rage, Alacrity, No Mercy, Condemned for running medium groups, keeping it clean and competitive until battlegrounds get released.

Like Satiar said, there are zero groups on this list that, while they may specifically have fewer players in their group, haven't stacked with other groups and pugs frequently. Honestly, this self-aggrandizing is pathetic at best.

Easily said, the facts are, they cap at 16. The rest, you can see it in the videos if you browse forums. You will see that they don't need to stack with other guilds to perform well, unlike all the ballgroups who run with 20 players or more because they can't do anything with 16 or less. I just can't wait for the next aoe changes, that shall be alot of fun.

Most large guilds I know of, my guild, VE Fantasia etc I have seen perform perfectly well with 16 or less.

When PM runs below 16 (which happens more often than you would think) we usually do perfectly fine. Just cause some guilds run above what you consider to be the correct number of players to have in a group does not mean they are bad and stack together to perform well. Perhaps they do it cause they like large scale zerg v zerg warfare.

No_True_Scotsman · January 2017

4v4v4 battlegrounds soon. I'll be surprised if I ever make it into Cyrodiil again lol

Telel · January 2017

frozywozy wrote: »

Telel wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Astanphaeus wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Also, it's quite amusing to see players who participate in 24men ballgroups complain about zerging. Cap your group at 16, then talk. Until that happens, your words will come in one ear and go off the other.

Props to Vokundein, Invictus, Haxus, Flame, Fengrush's squad, K-Hole, Adamant, Rage, Alacrity, No Mercy, Condemned for running medium groups, keeping it clean and competitive until battlegrounds get released.

Like Satiar said, there are zero groups on this list that, while they may specifically have fewer players in their group, haven't stacked with other groups and pugs frequently. Honestly, this self-aggrandizing is pathetic at best.

Easily said, the facts are, they cap at 16. The rest, you can see it in the videos if you browse forums. You will see that they don't need to stack with other guilds to perform well, unlike all the ballgroups who run with 20 players or more because they can't do anything with 16 or less. I just can't wait for the next aoe changes, that shall be alot of fun.

Don't forget removing the stunning effect from templar shards.

Since certain blobmer seem to rely on that for half of their 'skill based gameplay' this one imagines that some of them will be suddenly getting bored with their templars and deciding to move to 'something new and fresh'.

Though how magika derp knights will be new and fresh is not something khajiit is ready to speculate upon. Especially when most of them are likely to be vampires wielding destro sticks.

Just like some cats nightblades moved from bombard spam to something else, I Imagine templars will also adjust to the new meta accordingly.

Yes, some did rely on that a bit much didn't they? Fortunately certain humble khajiit are known to be constantly altering their builds rather than simply relying on what makes them 'got gud'.

And somehow that humble one can still get angry elf words whispered at them by those who have gone and 'got gud'. In fact they're so humble they somehow count as up to six players despite being told how utterly terrible they are.

HoloYoitsu · January 2017

No_True_Scotsman wrote: »

4v4v4 battlegrounds soon. I'll be surprised if I ever make it into Cyrodiil again lol

...Because you'll be too busy getting one shot by 2hand ults to queue up?

No_True_Scotsman · January 2017

HoloYoitsu wrote: »

No_True_Scotsman wrote: »

4v4v4 battlegrounds soon. I'll be surprised if I ever make it into Cyrodiil again lol

...Because you'll be too busy getting one shot by 2hand ults to queue up?

omg it happened like twice shush sorc

ChrisXO · January 2017

frozywozy wrote: »

Also, it's quite amusing to see players who participate in 24men ballgroups complain about zerging. Cap your group at 16, then talk. Until that happens, your words will come in one ear and go off the other.

I've long thought a campaign ruleset that capped groups at 12 or 16 would be fun and perhaps help with performance.

Telel · February 2017

ChrisXO wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Also, it's quite amusing to see players who participate in 24men ballgroups complain about zerging. Cap your group at 16, then talk. Until that happens, your words will come in one ear and go off the other.

I've long thought a campaign ruleset that capped groups at 12 or 16 would be fun and perhaps help with performance.

Which would be fine if the ratio of group leaders to LFG spammers wasn't as terrible as it is now.

You can't really expect all those hand holders and newbs to spread out unless people stop being elfish and take some time to grab a few and drag them off for a bit of education.

frozywozy · February 2017

Telel wrote: »

ChrisXO wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Also, it's quite amusing to see players who participate in 24men ballgroups complain about zerging. Cap your group at 16, then talk. Until that happens, your words will come in one ear and go off the other.

I've long thought a campaign ruleset that capped groups at 12 or 16 would be fun and perhaps help with performance.

Which would be fine if the ratio of group leaders to LFG spammers wasn't as terrible as it is now.

You can't really expect all those hand holders and newbs to spread out unless people stop being elfish and take some time to grab a few and drag them off for a bit of education.

Again, there is a big difference between a 24men group of pugs running mostly single target abilities, without max cps and an organized 24men ballgroup using teamspeak communication to synchronize ultimate drops, prox dets and aoes all together. The last one causes alot more performance issues.

Anazasi · February 2017

frozywozy wrote: »

Astanphaeus wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Also, it's quite amusing to see players who participate in 24men ballgroups complain about zerging. Cap your group at 16, then talk. Until that happens, your words will come in one ear and go off the other.

Props to Vokundein, Invictus, Haxus, Flame, Fengrush's squad, K-Hole, Adamant, Rage, Alacrity, No Mercy, Condemned for running medium groups, keeping it clean and competitive until battlegrounds get released.

Like Satiar said, there are zero groups on this list that, while they may specifically have fewer players in their group, haven't stacked with other groups and pugs frequently. Honestly, this self-aggrandizing is pathetic at best.

Easily said, the facts are, they cap at 16. The rest, you can see it in the videos if you browse forums. You will see that they don't need to stack with other guilds to perform well, unlike all the ballgroups who run with 20 players or more because they can't do anything with 16 or less. I just can't wait for the next aoe changes, that shall be alot of fun.

I'm laughing at this statement.

"We're great we only run 16 players in our groups." Sure that's all you have in your group but what's the other 2 raids you are running next to, cannon fodder? Don't pretend no one is buying that lemon you are selling.

Enslaved · February 2017

zyk wrote: »

I think a better solution would be to decrease the score evaluation interval to 20-30 minutes. This would better enable small groups to contribute to the score.

If small group play at resources was more impactful through the course of an entire hour--vs the final 5-10 minutes--more players would do it. This would have two positive effects: server lag would be reduced with players more spread out and responses to resource fights would be less zergy as there would be more to respond to.

Now this is great idea. Evaluation every 30 minutes, and if that does not help, make it 20 minutes.

frozywozy · February 2017

Anazasi wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Astanphaeus wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Also, it's quite amusing to see players who participate in 24men ballgroups complain about zerging. Cap your group at 16, then talk. Until that happens, your words will come in one ear and go off the other.

Props to Vokundein, Invictus, Haxus, Flame, Fengrush's squad, K-Hole, Adamant, Rage, Alacrity, No Mercy, Condemned for running medium groups, keeping it clean and competitive until battlegrounds get released.

Like Satiar said, there are zero groups on this list that, while they may specifically have fewer players in their group, haven't stacked with other groups and pugs frequently. Honestly, this self-aggrandizing is pathetic at best.

Easily said, the facts are, they cap at 16. The rest, you can see it in the videos if you browse forums. You will see that they don't need to stack with other guilds to perform well, unlike all the ballgroups who run with 20 players or more because they can't do anything with 16 or less. I just can't wait for the next aoe changes, that shall be alot of fun.

I'm laughing at this statement.

"We're great we only run 16 players in our groups." Sure that's all you have in your group but what's the other 2 raids you are running next to, cannon fodder? Don't pretend no one is buying that lemon you are selling.

Again, this is easily said. Invictus and Haxus have a ton of video footage with the Miat's addon on demonstrating disgusting outnumbered fights 12-16 vs 30-50 but still killing them (without any other EPs around). They are all over these forums.

Where are your 16men group DK clips bro?

Joy_Division · February 2017

Oh look, it's Frozn trying to shame other players from artificially capping their groups even though I often see his small man in an EP faction stack.

frozywozy · February 2017

Joy_Division wrote: »

Oh look, it's Frozn trying to shame other players from artificially capping their groups even though I often see his small man in an EP faction stack.

Again, for the third time, everyone zerg surf in this game from time to time. There is no shame in that. Sometimes you are just tired and you don't feel like doing the efforts to fight outnumbered which require a certain level of skills.

Problem is, some people never challenge themselves to go make their own fights and constantly run with absurd numbers zerging one player down with 4x more all the way across the map.

Then they come here and complain about zerging.

This is from this morning. Again, where is your proof that you challenge yourself unstacking from your own faction and do some efforts to help server performances?

No_True_Scotsman · February 2017

I love that no one takes Frozn seriously lmao

frozywozy · February 2017

No_True_Scotsman wrote: »

I love that no one takes Frozn seriously lmao

haters gonna hate.

Telel · February 2017

frozywozy wrote: »

Telel wrote: »

ChrisXO wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Also, it's quite amusing to see players who participate in 24men ballgroups complain about zerging. Cap your group at 16, then talk. Until that happens, your words will come in one ear and go off the other.

I've long thought a campaign ruleset that capped groups at 12 or 16 would be fun and perhaps help with performance.

Which would be fine if the ratio of group leaders to LFG spammers wasn't as terrible as it is now.

You can't really expect all those hand holders and newbs to spread out unless people stop being elfish and take some time to grab a few and drag them off for a bit of education.

Again, there is a big difference between a 24men group of pugs running mostly single target abilities, without max cps and an organized 24men ballgroup using teamspeak communication to synchronize ultimate drops, prox dets and aoes all together. The last one causes alot more performance issues.

Yes, this one is well acquainted with the performance issues that seem to follow certain Blobmer around the map wherever they go.

However that does not do much to resolve the very real fact that there is a decided shortage of people willing, and competent, enough to grab some randoms and try to drag them away from the big fights. Which is what is required if people honestly want to spread their faction out across the map.

Sadly most of the 'good' players are just to elfish to remove themselves from the hips of their blobs long enough to try and lead some randoms around. Especially as it might mean....less AP an hour, and or fewer youtube montages.

Which leaves the three or four people willing to herd players with a tough quandary.

Do they cap their groups and deny newer people a chance to learn, which just means more people running to one spot anyways?

Or do they take on as many as they can and risk 'the wrath' of the blobmer and zone generals who are themselves refusing to help with the problem?

With all the being said that leaves but one simple question.

How does one get all the zone generals, and zerg shamers to grow a set of khajiit parts and start leading the groups they're demanding that other people run?

Anazasi · February 2017

frozywozy wrote: »

Anazasi wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Astanphaeus wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Also, it's quite amusing to see players who participate in 24men ballgroups complain about zerging. Cap your group at 16, then talk. Until that happens, your words will come in one ear and go off the other.

Props to Vokundein, Invictus, Haxus, Flame, Fengrush's squad, K-Hole, Adamant, Rage, Alacrity, No Mercy, Condemned for running medium groups, keeping it clean and competitive until battlegrounds get released.

Like Satiar said, there are zero groups on this list that, while they may specifically have fewer players in their group, haven't stacked with other groups and pugs frequently. Honestly, this self-aggrandizing is pathetic at best.

Easily said, the facts are, they cap at 16. The rest, you can see it in the videos if you browse forums. You will see that they don't need to stack with other guilds to perform well, unlike all the ballgroups who run with 20 players or more because they can't do anything with 16 or less. I just can't wait for the next aoe changes, that shall be alot of fun.

I'm laughing at this statement.

"We're great we only run 16 players in our groups." Sure that's all you have in your group but what's the other 2 raids you are running next to, cannon fodder? Don't pretend no one is buying that lemon you are selling.

Again, this is easily said. Invictus and Haxus have a ton of video footage with the Miat's addon on demonstrating disgusting outnumbered fights 12-16 vs 30-50 but still killing them (without any other EPs around). They are all over these forums.

Where are your 16men group DK clips bro?