The current system in Cyrodiil is designed to cater to force readiness and punishes small groups.
Knowledge
✭✭✭✭✭
✭
✭
At the present time, with the current system, Cyrodiil is less about PVP and more about zerg readiness and force readiness. The side with the larger amount of raids or coordinated zerg forces will usually prevail at the end of the campaign. The system provides for you to overwhelm your opponent at a given objective or outright avoid your opponent by either baiting them into attacking a "troll siege" and then using your main force to take the real objective or simply to exploit their undefended areas (back capping).
The design of this system will cater to large groups that run raids during specific times of the day or most of the day. These coordinated zergs can simply overwhelm an objective with a Forward Camp and usually take said objective while the opponent is crushed by sheer force size. This discourages real PVP and encourages a faction to avoid the enemy until their force size is larger than their adversary which results in a PVDoor game.
Do not get me wrong, there is decent PVP in Cyrodiil for those that don't care about winning the campaign or those that are less concerned with it. These players will usually seek out smaller engagements and good fights around smaller objectives deep in enemy territory. However, I do think the current system is broken in such a sense that it is fully designed to cater to the "bring more until you win" principle.
Since not all factions are equal, not all factions have coordinated zergs and/or their coordinated zerg may not be present at all times, I propose that certain changed be made to Cyrodiil to make things more realistic and fair. My first suggestion would be to remove the "cut off feature". By allowing a keep to be cut off the organized zerg is more likely to always succeed until they log off or do something else in the game. For the faction without organized raids running it would be more beneficial if they could continue to reinforce any keep they own via the transitus shrine until the keep falls. This would change the dynamics of the game in such a way that a coordinated zerg force would still be dealing with a similarly sized adversary. This would also encourage an enemy to strike multiple keeps at once in an effort to put a strain on the enemies force strength and therefore lower the population size at a given keep as there would be multiple defenses or offenses taking place more often.
I'd also like to stress that keeps can be taken too quickly and that should be addressed. I think the structure walls and doors should be stronger with the inner keep walls and door taking longer to go down.
Edited by Knowledge on April 15, 2018 7:10PM The design of this system will cater to large groups that run raids during specific times of the day or most of the day. These coordinated zergs can simply overwhelm an objective with a Forward Camp and usually take said objective while the opponent is crushed by sheer force size. This discourages real PVP and encourages a faction to avoid the enemy until their force size is larger than their adversary which results in a PVDoor game.
Do not get me wrong, there is decent PVP in Cyrodiil for those that don't care about winning the campaign or those that are less concerned with it. These players will usually seek out smaller engagements and good fights around smaller objectives deep in enemy territory. However, I do think the current system is broken in such a sense that it is fully designed to cater to the "bring more until you win" principle.
Since not all factions are equal, not all factions have coordinated zergs and/or their coordinated zerg may not be present at all times, I propose that certain changed be made to Cyrodiil to make things more realistic and fair. My first suggestion would be to remove the "cut off feature". By allowing a keep to be cut off the organized zerg is more likely to always succeed until they log off or do something else in the game. For the faction without organized raids running it would be more beneficial if they could continue to reinforce any keep they own via the transitus shrine until the keep falls. This would change the dynamics of the game in such a way that a coordinated zerg force would still be dealing with a similarly sized adversary. This would also encourage an enemy to strike multiple keeps at once in an effort to put a strain on the enemies force strength and therefore lower the population size at a given keep as there would be multiple defenses or offenses taking place more often.
I'd also like to stress that keeps can be taken too quickly and that should be addressed. I think the structure walls and doors should be stronger with the inner keep walls and door taking longer to go down.
9
-
Taleof2Cities✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Some of these issues are already being addressed for the upcoming Summerset patch, @Knowledge. Keep your eyes on the patch notes Monday.3 -
Knowledge✭✭✭✭✭
✭Taleof2Cities wrote: »Some of these issues are already being addressed for the upcoming Summerset patch, @Knowledge. Keep your eyes on the patch notes Monday.
I agree some are being addressed but the majority of what I said in my post is not going to be addressed unless there are additional patch notes that I am unaware of.1 -
TequilaFire✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭You are stating the obvious as the game was always designed for large scale AvAvA fights.
And you are supposed to care about winning the campaign.
Go to BG if you want smaller scale.33 -
kargen27✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I think you are backwards on your cutting off a keep thinking. Cutting off supply lines during war is a viable strategy and cutting off a keep in game is a similar strategy. A small group can use cutting off a keep to their advantage. If you couldn't cut off a keep a large zerg could just have sentries posted at each keep and travel where the trouble is. Cutting off the keep you know you have a little time to get the doors down before the big group can arrive on mounts. Isolating a keep is exactly what lets smaller groups have a chance to influence the map.
With camps the attacking forces can also revive and return to battle negating the advantage a defending force would have in getting back to the battle.and then the parrot said, "must be the water mines green too."6 -
Knowledge✭✭✭✭✭
✭I think you are backwards on your cutting off a keep thinking. Cutting off supply lines during war is a viable strategy and cutting off a keep in game is a similar strategy. A small group can use cutting off a keep to their advantage. If you couldn't cut off a keep a large zerg could just have sentries posted at each keep and travel where the trouble is. Cutting off the keep you know you have a little time to get the doors down before the big group can arrive on mounts. Isolating a keep is exactly what lets smaller groups have a chance to influence the map.
With camps the attacking forces can also revive and return to battle negating the advantage a defending force would have in getting back to the battle.
Your argument can't really be applied to this game as we can revive people in battle from death (impossible in real life). We can also continually respawn after being mortally wounded if someone can't revive us.
The main issue I have is force readiness. When an enemy zerg suddenly arrives at a keep in force and cuts that keep off before it can be defended they have a significant advantage over the defender.
Since we all want to have instant gratification, to an extent, and roam around finding fights we don't usually sit at a keep with a large force waiting for an enemy to strike. Usually we will just be cut off and the enemy will have a 40+ man force hitting the keep with siege.
We're then forced to move to that location at a snails pace while they attack a nearly empty keep while having the initiative. This rewards the organized zerg and prevents disorganized PVPers from being able to mount a reasonable defense.Edited by Knowledge on April 15, 2018 10:04PM2 -
kargen27✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭My argument can easily be applied to the game. In real life if an advancing force gets cut off they run out of supplies. This means they are easier to push back or defeat outright. In the game you cut off a keep is works similar to what happens when supplies are cut off. The approaching enemies abilities to sustain the battle are severely hampered. If you cut off a keep that has two or three enemy players inside they can't just post in zone and instantly get a defense going. There is going to be a horse ride (or bear maybe a wolf) involved and that takes time. That added time could be the difference in the battle just like stalling an advance by limiting supplies in real battles could be the difference.
Being able to isolate a keep is what lets small groups take keeps influencing the map. Plans have to change when keeps become isolated.and then the parrot said, "must be the water mines green too."3 -
Syncronaut✭✭✭Main problem is that zerg is not punishable enogh. Sure you can bomb them, but you cant catch them if they keep moving.
(or you die before that)
1 easy fix would be a reduced speed to all players in zerg (team or no team).
Its a bit based on realizem, as when infantry is crouded to close, they have a harder time to move.
Or most of cyrodil games look like this:
2 -
generalmyrick✭✭✭✭✭
✭Why are people trying to nerf a zerg?
Yes yes... You're better than everybody at everything excdpt overwhelming odds...sorry the math doesn't work out for you all of the time.
Bgs has a pop cap go there."The red pill and its opposite, the blue pill, are a popular cultural meme, a metaphor representing the choice between:
Knowledge, freedom, uncertainty and the brutal truths of reality (red pill)
Security, happiness, beauty, and the blissful ignorance of illusion (blue pill)"
Insight to Agree to Awesome Ratio = 1:6.04:2.76 as of 1/25/2019
Compared to people that I've ignored = I am 18% more insightful, 20% less agreeable, and 88% more awesome.6 -
Knowledge✭✭✭✭✭
✭generalmyrick wrote: »Why are people trying to nerf a zerg?
Yes yes... You're better than everybody at everything excdpt overwhelming odds...sorry the math doesn't work out for you all of the time.
Bgs has a pop cap go there.
I'm not trying to nerf a zerg I am arguing for a balance in the game to give everyone a chance. This is a game after all and should be played for fun.
My argument is primarily focused on one main factor and that is that whoever has the larger and more organized force will always prevail. A side that has less organization (a lot of small scattered groups) is going to lose the campaign against a zerg force that has been organized and is using its sheer size to overcome any opposition in the form of skill or tactical finesse.
As a lower numbered group, even if organized, you can't even prevail tactically or strategically if your opponent exceeds a certain number of players. Your skill and ability count for nothing and you even lose the capability to quickly defend a keep by being instantly cut off giving further advantage to the massive group that is attacking.Edited by Knowledge on April 15, 2018 10:28PM2 -
generalmyrick✭✭✭✭✭
✭Can't wait to read the possible solutions! :-)"The red pill and its opposite, the blue pill, are a popular cultural meme, a metaphor representing the choice between:
Knowledge, freedom, uncertainty and the brutal truths of reality (red pill)
Security, happiness, beauty, and the blissful ignorance of illusion (blue pill)"
Insight to Agree to Awesome Ratio = 1:6.04:2.76 as of 1/25/2019
Compared to people that I've ignored = I am 18% more insightful, 20% less agreeable, and 88% more awesome.1 -
Knowledge✭✭✭✭✭
✭generalmyrick wrote: »Can't wait to read the possible solutions! :-)
I offered some in my OP.0 -
Tannus15✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭What I'm reading is "large groups of coordinated players are stronger than small groups or large groups of uncoordinated players." and for some reason this isn't fair and you don't like it.
No matter what change they apply this fact is always going to be true.10 -
Pink_Violinz✭✭✭✭✭generalmyrick wrote: »Why are people trying to nerf a zerg?
Yes yes... You're better than everybody at everything excdpt overwhelming odds...sorry the math doesn't work out for you all of the time.
Bgs has a pop cap go there.
I'm not trying to nerf a zerg I am arguing for a balance in the game to give everyone a chance. This is a game after all and should be played for fun.
My argument is primarily focused on one main factor and that is that whoever has the larger and more organized force will always prevail. A side that has less organization (a lot of small scattered groups) is going to lose the campaign against a zerg force that has been organized and is using its sheer size to overcome any opposition in the form of skill or tactical finesse.
As a lower numbered group, even if organized, you can't even prevail tactically or strategically if your opponent exceeds a certain number of players. Your skill and ability count for nothing and you even lose the capability to quickly defend a keep by being instantly cut off giving further advantage to the massive group that is attacking.
Good lord where to start.
Everyone has the ability to join a zerg. It is not limited to one faction or guild, so everyone does have an equal chance of winning.
Of course who ever has the larger, more organized force will win. Why would it be any other way? Sure you can play a small organized force, but numbers will usually win out unless you're a fantastic team. If you want your team to have an organized group, make that team. Complaining that your color isn't as good as the other does absolutely nothing but hold your team back while you're typing that out.
Also, not all who zerg are mindless. I play large scale, because I enjoy the pressure of keeping so many people alive. All of the players I know, who occasionally zerg, have well made builds and know how to play them. The idea that "zerglings" don't know anything is old and for the most part incorrect.
Again, of course numbers will win. In what world will having two players win against a 20 man team be fair. If you sit in the middle of a field with one guy, unless you're some unbeatable god monster you're gonna die. Find a tower, get a camp, play smart and you'll get somewhere. But at the end of the day, there is such a thing as an unwinnable fight.
7 -
Rohamad_Ali✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Collision system would nerf zergs . Lol Spartan shield line that can't be breached without engaging .
5 -
DoctorESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭At the present time, with the current system, Cyrodiil is less about PVP and more about zerg readiness and force readiness. The side with the larger amount of raids or coordinated zerg forces will usually prevail at the end of the campaign. The system provides for you to overwhelm your opponent at a given objective or outright avoid your opponent by either baiting them into attacking a "troll siege" and then using your main force to take the real objective or simply to exploit their undefended areas (back capping).
The design of this system will cater to large groups that run raids during specific times of the day or most of the day. These coordinated zergs can simply overwhelm an objective with a Forward Camp and usually take said objective while the opponent is crushed by sheer force size. This discourages real PVP and encourages a faction to avoid the enemy until their force size is larger than their adversary which results in a PVDoor game.
Do not get me wrong, there is decent PVP in Cyrodiil for those that don't care about winning the campaign or those that are less concerned with it. These players will usually seek out smaller engagements and good fights around smaller objectives deep in enemy territory. However, I do think the current system is broken in such a sense that it is fully designed to cater to the "bring more until you win" principle.
Since not all factions are equal, not all factions have coordinated zergs and/or their coordinated zerg may not be present at all times, I propose that certain changed be made to Cyrodiil to make things more realistic and fair. My first suggestion would be to remove the "cut off feature". By allowing a keep to be cut off the organized zerg is more likely to always succeed until they log off or do something else in the game. For the faction without organized raids running it would be more beneficial if they could continue to reinforce any keep they own via the transitus shrine until the keep falls. This would change the dynamics of the game in such a way that a coordinated zerg force would still be dealing with a similarly sized adversary. This would also encourage an enemy to strike multiple keeps at once in an effort to put a strain on the enemies force strength and therefore lower the population size at a given keep as there would be multiple defenses or offenses taking place more often.
I'd also like to stress that keeps can be taken too quickly and that should be addressed. I think the structure walls and doors should be stronger with the inner keep walls and door taking longer to go down.
You can't beat the zerg.
1 -
Knowledge✭✭✭✭✭
✭Rohamad_Ali wrote: »Collision system would nerf zergs . Lol Spartan shield line that can't be breached without engaging .
That would be fantastic. Imagine if we had collision like Black Desert Online?2 -
fred4✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭
I mostly run around solo, but let me play devil's advocate for the Cyro PvP guilds I sometimes group up with in-game and on Teamspeak. The raid leaders of these guilds do not share your narrow sense of what "real" PvP is. They are fully aware that they are leading a zerg of relative "potatoes". They consider small-scalers, who try to tie them up at a resource for example, as a nuisance, and will urge the group to move on. They are playing the strategic game to win a campaign, or crown an emperor, and they are giving a home to players of all proficiency levels, many of whom are not that good and possibly not able to compete in "real" PvP, as you put it.The design of this system will cater to large groups that run raids during specific times of the day or most of the day. These coordinated zergs can simply overwhelm an objective with a Forward Camp and usually take said objective while the opponent is crushed by sheer force size. This discourages real PVP...3 -
Knowledge✭✭✭✭✭
✭
I mostly run around solo, but let me play devil's advocate for the Cyro PvP guilds I sometimes group up with in-game and on Teamspeak. The raid leaders of these guilds do not share your narrow sense of what "real" PvP is. They are fully aware that they are leading a zerg of relative "potatoes". They consider small-scalers, who try to tie them up at a resource for example, as a nuisance, and will urge the group to move on. They are playing the strategic game to win a campaign, or crown an emperor, and they are giving a home to players of all proficiency levels, many of whom are not that good and possibly not able to compete in "real" PvP, as you put it.The design of this system will cater to large groups that run raids during specific times of the day or most of the day. These coordinated zergs can simply overwhelm an objective with a Forward Camp and usually take said objective while the opponent is crushed by sheer force size. This discourages real PVP...
My argument is not all factions have raid leaders leading big zergs around at all hours of the evening. Specific factions, not naming them, have more zerg-friendly commanders and coordinated groups that place other factions at a disadvantage for not having the same numbers or command structure.2 -
swippy✭✭✭✭✭At the present time, with the current system, Cyrodiil is less about PVP and more about zerg readiness and force readiness. The side with the larger amount of raids or coordinated zerg forces will usually prevail at the end of the campaign. The system provides for you to overwhelm your opponent at a given objective or outright avoid your opponent by either baiting them into attacking a "troll siege" and then using your main force to take the real objective or simply to exploit their undefended areas (back capping).
The design of this system will cater to large groups that run raids during specific times of the day or most of the day. These coordinated zergs can simply overwhelm an objective with a Forward Camp and usually take said objective while the opponent is crushed by sheer force size. This discourages real PVP and encourages a faction to avoid the enemy until their force size is larger than their adversary which results in a PVDoor game.
Do not get me wrong, there is decent PVP in Cyrodiil for those that don't care about winning the campaign or those that are less concerned with it. These players will usually seek out smaller engagements and good fights around smaller objectives deep in enemy territory. However, I do think the current system is broken in such a sense that it is fully designed to cater to the "bring more until you win" principle.
Since not all factions are equal, not all factions have coordinated zergs and/or their coordinated zerg may not be present at all times...
to me, this kind of sounds a lot like how wars work. having a larger force of soldiers and resources, or better coordination, or special ops units, yeah that's gonna be an advantage in a war. isn't that what we're doing here? we're talking about the Alliance War in Cyrodiil, right? that sounds like war.
if you want a fair fight, or to play paintball, check out Dueling and Battlegrounds.4 -
VaranisArano✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Huh. Its almost like a PVP game mode designed for large scale battles and groups of 8 to 24 players favors organized raids and the factions who can field them.
Who'da thunk it?9 -
fred4✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Yeah, yellow always wins Vivec PC EU, and one of my friends on the emperor leaderboard is always online, day and night, whenever I log in. What can you do in a system that accumulates points for a whole month? You can't compete with that.0 -
Knowledge✭✭✭✭✭
✭At the present time, with the current system, Cyrodiil is less about PVP and more about zerg readiness and force readiness. The side with the larger amount of raids or coordinated zerg forces will usually prevail at the end of the campaign. The system provides for you to overwhelm your opponent at a given objective or outright avoid your opponent by either baiting them into attacking a "troll siege" and then using your main force to take the real objective or simply to exploit their undefended areas (back capping).
The design of this system will cater to large groups that run raids during specific times of the day or most of the day. These coordinated zergs can simply overwhelm an objective with a Forward Camp and usually take said objective while the opponent is crushed by sheer force size. This discourages real PVP and encourages a faction to avoid the enemy until their force size is larger than their adversary which results in a PVDoor game.
Do not get me wrong, there is decent PVP in Cyrodiil for those that don't care about winning the campaign or those that are less concerned with it. These players will usually seek out smaller engagements and good fights around smaller objectives deep in enemy territory. However, I do think the current system is broken in such a sense that it is fully designed to cater to the "bring more until you win" principle.
Since not all factions are equal, not all factions have coordinated zergs and/or their coordinated zerg may not be present at all times...
to me, this kind of sounds a lot like how wars work. having a larger force of soldiers and resources, or better coordination, or special ops units, yeah that's gonna be an advantage in a war. isn't that what we're doing here? we're talking about the Alliance War in Cyrodiil, right? that sounds like war.
if you want a fair fight, or to play paintball, check out Dueling and Battlegrounds.
Not all wars have been won in pitched battles. Not all outnumbered opponents have lost.
An example would be the Battle of Pharsalus where Julius Caesar was outnumbered by Pompey. 22,000 vs 40,000.
Pompey committed his cavalry to attempt an encirclement of Caesar's forces in an effort to sandwich them between the cavalry and infantry. Knowing this, Caesar sent a group of heavy infantry to hide behind his own lines and await the cavalry to which he had them engage Pompey's cavalry. Being surprised and suffering heavy casualties the cavalry had to retreat. Seeing this retreat caused the whole of Pompey's army to route.
Real life is not like a game.0 -
DoctorESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭At the present time, with the current system, Cyrodiil is less about PVP and more about zerg readiness and force readiness. The side with the larger amount of raids or coordinated zerg forces will usually prevail at the end of the campaign. The system provides for you to overwhelm your opponent at a given objective or outright avoid your opponent by either baiting them into attacking a "troll siege" and then using your main force to take the real objective or simply to exploit their undefended areas (back capping).
The design of this system will cater to large groups that run raids during specific times of the day or most of the day. These coordinated zergs can simply overwhelm an objective with a Forward Camp and usually take said objective while the opponent is crushed by sheer force size. This discourages real PVP and encourages a faction to avoid the enemy until their force size is larger than their adversary which results in a PVDoor game.
Do not get me wrong, there is decent PVP in Cyrodiil for those that don't care about winning the campaign or those that are less concerned with it. These players will usually seek out smaller engagements and good fights around smaller objectives deep in enemy territory. However, I do think the current system is broken in such a sense that it is fully designed to cater to the "bring more until you win" principle.
Since not all factions are equal, not all factions have coordinated zergs and/or their coordinated zerg may not be present at all times...
to me, this kind of sounds a lot like how wars work. having a larger force of soldiers and resources, or better coordination, or special ops units, yeah that's gonna be an advantage in a war. isn't that what we're doing here? we're talking about the Alliance War in Cyrodiil, right? that sounds like war.
if you want a fair fight, or to play paintball, check out Dueling and Battlegrounds.
Not all wars have been won in pitched battles. Not all outnumbered opponents have lost.
An example would be the Battle of Pharsalus where Julius Caesar was outnumbered by Pompey. 22,000 vs 40,000.
Pompey committed his cavalry to attempt an encirclement of Caesar's forces in an effort to sandwich them between the cavalry and infantry. Knowing this, Caesar sent a group of heavy infantry to hide behind his own lines and await the cavalry to which he had them engage Pompey's cavalry. Being surprised and suffering heavy casualties the cavalry had to retreat. Seeing this retreat caused the whole of Pompey's army to route.
Real life is not like a game.
What about the 300 Spartans who held off thousands?0 -
DoctorESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Let's also not forget what one really great fighter can do against multiple opponents.
0 -
Sheezabeast✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Why isn't this in the PVP section? You will get more diverse opinions when you post there.
One thing to keep in mind is that lots of people don't care about the point system in Cyrodiil. You may see people in zone talking about eval time and asking that people take resources. Not everyone cares who wins the campaign, some just want their AP. And that's fine. But directing the zerg to go where you think they should go is silly, unless you join/communicate with the raid leader or the guilds discord chat.Grand Master Crafter, Beta baby who grew with the game. PC/NA. @Sheezabeast if you have crafting needs!0 -
swippy✭✭✭✭✭At the present time, with the current system, Cyrodiil is less about PVP and more about zerg readiness and force readiness. The side with the larger amount of raids or coordinated zerg forces will usually prevail at the end of the campaign. The system provides for you to overwhelm your opponent at a given objective or outright avoid your opponent by either baiting them into attacking a "troll siege" and then using your main force to take the real objective or simply to exploit their undefended areas (back capping).
The design of this system will cater to large groups that run raids during specific times of the day or most of the day. These coordinated zergs can simply overwhelm an objective with a Forward Camp and usually take said objective while the opponent is crushed by sheer force size. This discourages real PVP and encourages a faction to avoid the enemy until their force size is larger than their adversary which results in a PVDoor game.
Do not get me wrong, there is decent PVP in Cyrodiil for those that don't care about winning the campaign or those that are less concerned with it. These players will usually seek out smaller engagements and good fights around smaller objectives deep in enemy territory. However, I do think the current system is broken in such a sense that it is fully designed to cater to the "bring more until you win" principle.
Since not all factions are equal, not all factions have coordinated zergs and/or their coordinated zerg may not be present at all times...
to me, this kind of sounds a lot like how wars work. having a larger force of soldiers and resources, or better coordination, or special ops units, yeah that's gonna be an advantage in a war. isn't that what we're doing here? we're talking about the Alliance War in Cyrodiil, right? that sounds like war.
if you want a fair fight, or to play paintball, check out Dueling and Battlegrounds.
Not all wars have been won in pitched battles. Not all outnumbered opponents have lost.
An example would be the Battle of Pharsalus where Julius Caesar was outnumbered by Pompey. 22,000 vs 40,000.
Pompey committed his cavalry to attempt an encirclement of Caesar's forces in an effort to sandwich them between the cavalry and infantry. Knowing this, Caesar sent a group of heavy infantry to hide behind his own lines and await the cavalry to which he had them engage Pompey's cavalry. Being surprised and suffering heavy casualties the cavalry had to retreat. Seeing this retreat caused the whole of Pompey's army to route.
that reads like one example of an outnumbered force winning a battle (not a war). it seems to ignore the overwhelming majority of instances where that isn't what happens.
it also underscores the importance of good leadership with strong organization and tactics, defeating your own point about those qualities being unfair or whatever.Real life is not like a game.
exactly. the game in Cyrodiil simulates war. if you want the game to simulate more "fair" things, like paintball or single combat, you have Battlegrounds and Dueling you can check out.
edited for formatting, but i'll add: it's not like the zerg always wins in Cyrodiil, either. a few weeks ago my group of 6 was rushed by a group of more than 30 immediately after completing our repairs from taking an outpost. we had decided to go somewhere far away that we weren't linked to, so seeing the zerg was a bit of a relief from the idea of horse-riding all the way north, so we decided to stand and fight for the fun of it. well, of course we fought like we had nothing to lose, and to our amazement we eventually beat them all down with only one temporary death. riding horses isn't so tedious after a victory like that.Edited by swippy on April 16, 2018 2:11AM0 -
swippy✭✭✭✭✭At the present time, with the current system, Cyrodiil is less about PVP and more about zerg readiness and force readiness. The side with the larger amount of raids or coordinated zerg forces will usually prevail at the end of the campaign. The system provides for you to overwhelm your opponent at a given objective or outright avoid your opponent by either baiting them into attacking a "troll siege" and then using your main force to take the real objective or simply to exploit their undefended areas (back capping).
The design of this system will cater to large groups that run raids during specific times of the day or most of the day. These coordinated zergs can simply overwhelm an objective with a Forward Camp and usually take said objective while the opponent is crushed by sheer force size. This discourages real PVP and encourages a faction to avoid the enemy until their force size is larger than their adversary which results in a PVDoor game.
Do not get me wrong, there is decent PVP in Cyrodiil for those that don't care about winning the campaign or those that are less concerned with it. These players will usually seek out smaller engagements and good fights around smaller objectives deep in enemy territory. However, I do think the current system is broken in such a sense that it is fully designed to cater to the "bring more until you win" principle.
Since not all factions are equal, not all factions have coordinated zergs and/or their coordinated zerg may not be present at all times...
to me, this kind of sounds a lot like how wars work. having a larger force of soldiers and resources, or better coordination, or special ops units, yeah that's gonna be an advantage in a war. isn't that what we're doing here? we're talking about the Alliance War in Cyrodiil, right? that sounds like war.
if you want a fair fight, or to play paintball, check out Dueling and Battlegrounds.
Not all wars have been won in pitched battles. Not all outnumbered opponents have lost.
An example would be the Battle of Pharsalus where Julius Caesar was outnumbered by Pompey. 22,000 vs 40,000.
Pompey committed his cavalry to attempt an encirclement of Caesar's forces in an effort to sandwich them between the cavalry and infantry. Knowing this, Caesar sent a group of heavy infantry to hide behind his own lines and await the cavalry to which he had them engage Pompey's cavalry. Being surprised and suffering heavy casualties the cavalry had to retreat. Seeing this retreat caused the whole of Pompey's army to route.
Real life is not like a game.
What about the 300 Spartans who held off thousands?
they all died, and lost the battle.
(not the best example if you meant to bolster Knowledge's argument that the zerg doesn't always win in real life.)4 -
Knowledge✭✭✭✭✭
✭At the present time, with the current system, Cyrodiil is less about PVP and more about zerg readiness and force readiness. The side with the larger amount of raids or coordinated zerg forces will usually prevail at the end of the campaign. The system provides for you to overwhelm your opponent at a given objective or outright avoid your opponent by either baiting them into attacking a "troll siege" and then using your main force to take the real objective or simply to exploit their undefended areas (back capping).
The design of this system will cater to large groups that run raids during specific times of the day or most of the day. These coordinated zergs can simply overwhelm an objective with a Forward Camp and usually take said objective while the opponent is crushed by sheer force size. This discourages real PVP and encourages a faction to avoid the enemy until their force size is larger than their adversary which results in a PVDoor game.
Do not get me wrong, there is decent PVP in Cyrodiil for those that don't care about winning the campaign or those that are less concerned with it. These players will usually seek out smaller engagements and good fights around smaller objectives deep in enemy territory. However, I do think the current system is broken in such a sense that it is fully designed to cater to the "bring more until you win" principle.
Since not all factions are equal, not all factions have coordinated zergs and/or their coordinated zerg may not be present at all times...
to me, this kind of sounds a lot like how wars work. having a larger force of soldiers and resources, or better coordination, or special ops units, yeah that's gonna be an advantage in a war. isn't that what we're doing here? we're talking about the Alliance War in Cyrodiil, right? that sounds like war.
if you want a fair fight, or to play paintball, check out Dueling and Battlegrounds.
Not all wars have been won in pitched battles. Not all outnumbered opponents have lost.
An example would be the Battle of Pharsalus where Julius Caesar was outnumbered by Pompey. 22,000 vs 40,000.
Pompey committed his cavalry to attempt an encirclement of Caesar's forces in an effort to sandwich them between the cavalry and infantry. Knowing this, Caesar sent a group of heavy infantry to hide behind his own lines and await the cavalry to which he had them engage Pompey's cavalry. Being surprised and suffering heavy casualties the cavalry had to retreat. Seeing this retreat caused the whole of Pompey's army to route.
that reads like one example of an outnumbered force winning a battle (not a war). it seems to ignore the overwhelming majority of instances where that isn't what happens.
it also underscores the importance of good leadership with strong organization and tactics, defeating your own point about those qualities being unfair or whatever.Real life is not like a game.
exactly. the game in Cyrodiil simulates war. if you want the game to simulate more "fair" things, like paintball or single combat, you have Battlegrounds and Dueling you can check out.
edited for formatting, but i'll add: it's not like the zerg always wins in Cyrodiil, either. a few weeks ago my group of 6 was rushed by a group of more than 30 immediately after completing our repairs from taking an outpost. we had decided to go somewhere far away that we weren't linked to, so seeing the zerg was a bit of a relief from the idea of horse-riding all the way north, so we decided to stand and fight for the fun of it. well, of course we fought like we had nothing to lose, and to our amazement we eventually beat them all down with only one temporary death. riding horses isn't so tedious after a victory like that.
There are many wars that have been won by outnumbered combatants. The battle of Pharsalus is a battle in the Great Roman Civil War that Julius Caesar was outnumbered in for most engagements. The Vietnam war is another example of a victory where the winning side was outnumbered. The same can be said about the American Revolutionary War.
There's many more examples proving your argument falls through.0 -
Knowledge✭✭✭✭✭
✭At the present time, with the current system, Cyrodiil is less about PVP and more about zerg readiness and force readiness. The side with the larger amount of raids or coordinated zerg forces will usually prevail at the end of the campaign. The system provides for you to overwhelm your opponent at a given objective or outright avoid your opponent by either baiting them into attacking a "troll siege" and then using your main force to take the real objective or simply to exploit their undefended areas (back capping).
The design of this system will cater to large groups that run raids during specific times of the day or most of the day. These coordinated zergs can simply overwhelm an objective with a Forward Camp and usually take said objective while the opponent is crushed by sheer force size. This discourages real PVP and encourages a faction to avoid the enemy until their force size is larger than their adversary which results in a PVDoor game.
Do not get me wrong, there is decent PVP in Cyrodiil for those that don't care about winning the campaign or those that are less concerned with it. These players will usually seek out smaller engagements and good fights around smaller objectives deep in enemy territory. However, I do think the current system is broken in such a sense that it is fully designed to cater to the "bring more until you win" principle.
Since not all factions are equal, not all factions have coordinated zergs and/or their coordinated zerg may not be present at all times...
to me, this kind of sounds a lot like how wars work. having a larger force of soldiers and resources, or better coordination, or special ops units, yeah that's gonna be an advantage in a war. isn't that what we're doing here? we're talking about the Alliance War in Cyrodiil, right? that sounds like war.
if you want a fair fight, or to play paintball, check out Dueling and Battlegrounds.
Not all wars have been won in pitched battles. Not all outnumbered opponents have lost.
An example would be the Battle of Pharsalus where Julius Caesar was outnumbered by Pompey. 22,000 vs 40,000.
Pompey committed his cavalry to attempt an encirclement of Caesar's forces in an effort to sandwich them between the cavalry and infantry. Knowing this, Caesar sent a group of heavy infantry to hide behind his own lines and await the cavalry to which he had them engage Pompey's cavalry. Being surprised and suffering heavy casualties the cavalry had to retreat. Seeing this retreat caused the whole of Pompey's army to route.
Real life is not like a game.
What about the 300 Spartans who held off thousands?
they all died, and lost the battle.
(not the best example if you meant to bolster Knowledge's argument that the zerg doesn't always win in real life.)
The zerg doesn't always win in real life. The Spartan's did die at Thermopylae but the Persian Empire did lose the war and dramatically outnumbered the Greek forces. This was called the Second Persian Invasion of Greece and was a part of a larger conflict called the Greco-Persian war. During most of the Greco-Persian wars the Greek city-states were wholly outnumbered and the Persian's lost.
Cyrodiil is not simulating war as you say it's simulating a game outside the boundaries of real life that doesn't allow permanent death to occur.
Your argument would again lose footing if we take into account that zergs in real life often lose whereas in the game they win ninety percent of the time. This would actually be contrary to valid simulation. So, if anything, the game is more unrealistic than realistic in terms of attempting a war simulation.Edited by Knowledge on April 16, 2018 2:36AM2
This discussion has been closed.