NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

@SneaK such a casual attitude shouldn't weigh into balance discussions, though.

I'll admit, it's awfully hard for me to discuss anything on these forums in a non-casual manner.. I didn't bring up the cold-fire stuff btw, was just saying I thought it was a fun thing back when silent siege existed.

But to be fair, I think the suggestion of bringing it back is actually relevant to the OP, and perhaps a decent suggestion. It would help combat zergs, as most the time the zerglings were the one's that didn't realize they were burning to death until it was too late (probably due to the lag, that they create).

Lots of things would help combat zergs. Random instant deaths when there are more than 20 allies within render range or spontaneously combusting Pact Militia tabbards would help combat zergs. Just because an idea would help combat zergs doesn't mean it's a good idea, relevant, or worth serious discussion.

Counterplay is necessary to serious balance suggestions. Without it, an idea is merely derailing the thread.

Although I would so get a kick out of spontaneously combusting zerglings.

I don't think their suggestion is derailing the thread though. I think it was a valid suggestion, to which I agreed with, nothing real crazy here.. Another suggestion, maybe make camps exclusive to groups. This would however mean ZOS would have to allow more camps in a certain radius.

I'd love to see a res sickness that lasts for at least a few minutes if you res via manual res or a camp within a minute or so of dying.

Sandman929 wrote: »

I don't know if it's been suggested or not, but why ZOS doesn't just add some sort of debuff mechanic rather than the various anti-zerg mechanisms that are inevitably used by zergs.
The debuff could essentially just operate in the same way that sets like Sanctuary apply to group members within a radius, it could reduce max health, regens, weapon/spell damage, healing received, etc by a percentage for every ally over some threshold (maybe 12) within a radius (10 meters? 20?).
It'd be nice to have some visual indication that the debuff is in effect, prompting large numbers to spread out.

Sandman929 wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

I don't know if it's been suggested or not, but why ZOS doesn't just add some sort of debuff mechanic rather than the various anti-zerg mechanisms that are inevitably used by zergs.
The debuff could essentially just operate in the same way that sets like Sanctuary apply to group members within a radius, it could reduce max health, regens, weapon/spell damage, healing received, etc by a percentage for every ally over some threshold (maybe 12) within a radius (10 meters? 20?).
It'd be nice to have some visual indication that the debuff is in effect, prompting large numbers to spread out.

That's a tough one. I don't know if ZOS should penalize people for simply being in a certain radius of allies, especially since the game's PvP is centered around large scale AvAvA/siege warfare. I think the best solution is to add more meaningful objectives to the map that would change some of the ball-up logic players currently have, and to re-implement more effective ways to bust up large groups of players. No easy solution, mainly cause it's all player behavior that we're talking about.

True, but it seems like they already try to penalize zerging, but they do it in ways that simply empower it. It's supposed to be AvAvA, and I don't really have anything against zergs because of that, but I do have something against making them stronger. There's already a numbers advantage, so they're stronger by default. If ZOS is trying to provide counter play for smaller groups, I think it either has to be a debuff for large closely packed groups or new dynamic ultimate generation to empower smaller groups. Sets and skills doing high AoE damage is just empowering large groups.

Sandman929 wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

I don't know if it's been suggested or not, but why ZOS doesn't just add some sort of debuff mechanic rather than the various anti-zerg mechanisms that are inevitably used by zergs.
The debuff could essentially just operate in the same way that sets like Sanctuary apply to group members within a radius, it could reduce max health, regens, weapon/spell damage, healing received, etc by a percentage for every ally over some threshold (maybe 12) within a radius (10 meters? 20?).
It'd be nice to have some visual indication that the debuff is in effect, prompting large numbers to spread out.

That's a tough one. I don't know if ZOS should penalize people for simply being in a certain radius of allies, especially since the game's PvP is centered around large scale AvAvA/siege warfare. I think the best solution is to add more meaningful objectives to the map that would change some of the ball-up logic players currently have, and to re-implement more effective ways to bust up large groups of players. No easy solution, mainly cause it's all player behavior that we're talking about.

True, but it seems like they already try to penalize zerging, but they do it in ways that simply empower it. It's supposed to be AvAvA, and I don't really have anything against zergs because of that, but I do have something against making them stronger. There's already a numbers advantage, so they're stronger by default. If ZOS is trying to provide counter play for smaller groups, I think it either has to be a debuff for large closely packed groups or new dynamic ultimate generation to empower smaller groups. Sets and skills doing high AoE damage is just empowering large groups.

Kind of, but the real zergs don't properly use sets like VD/Fasalla's or skills like Purge/Proxy anyway. Those are for the most part in the coordinated groups, which shouldn't be easy to take down. IMO the way to deal with either/or is somewhat separate. To break up the AP farming coordinated groups you'd have to change the way they get AP, to break up the uncoordinated zergs you'd have to equip players with more zerg busting tools, like siege/proxy/etc. (or debuffs like you mentioned).

I'm not disagreeing with you, just saying I think the term zerg is different from the groups that are running the trains and actually utilizing certain overpowered mechanics.

I actually think buffing defensive siege is a hard counter to real "zerging" but don't have many ideas to combat coordinated AP farming groups (but that's somewhat acceptable, since they're coordinated and should be hard to kill).

Obviously the thresholds for activating the and strength of the debuffs would have to be considered carefully. Coordinated small groups that are large-group-surfing (I'll just stop using "zerg", because the debuff should be aimed at stacked numbers not their level of coordination) should get the same debuff as the zerg IMO since the point is to spread out or pay a price. Large-group busting tools are quickly adopted by Large-groups (and yes, multiple "coordinated small man groups" are a Large-group, the same as any other), and the idea behind a debuff is that it would be nice to have a Large-group-discouraging tool added that can't be exploited for a change. Empowering proxy or siege just empowers it's use by greater numbers as well as smaller numbers.
Call it "Fatigue" or call it "Famine", but the idea of the debuff is that it's something that scales up as numbers grow that weakens larger armies but not smaller squads. I think such a system would help empower small-groups against large groups. I know it's supposed to be AvAvA, but all signs point to the fact that the servers simply can't deal with it, so there are technical benefits to such a debuff system too.