BGs aren't what small scale players were asking for at all though. Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic aren't dedicated to any small-scaler's playstyle, nor is the existence of a Power Sigil. (I say this as someone who enjoys BGs.)King_Thelon wrote: »Saying things like:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »Stop trying to balance the game for 1vX.
And:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »I am starting to see that it's the 1vX'ers that are trying to ruin this game with nerfs to their playstyle all so they can show off to their friends on twitch and youtube.
And:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »This game is AvAvA. Get with the program
In his defense, it's like ZoS heard feedback about smaller scale players complaining they having no mode that dedicated to their playstyle, then added BGs which those same small scale players refuse to play in but still complain about zergs.
So in that essence he's not wrong; if you want smaller groups for more fairer PvP play in BGs. It's like trying to play football but you only want to face against the quarterback and complain when 10 linebackers make you their ***.
Someone who:
* Runs in large groups
* Frequently zerg surfs
* Says things like “I can’t be a zergling because I’m not in a group” or “I’m solo” while he’s buried in a group of other players of their alliance
* Chases down a solo player or small group across the map with a large group
* Defends sloads/zaan/proc sets/other crutch sets as balanced
* Says things like “This is war” to justify being surrounded by 50 other players
* PvDoors empty keeps on the regular
* Cares about campaign score
* Won’t 1v1 anyone they zerg down but still claims to be better than them
* Genuinely gets upset when people scroll farm/troll
* Thinks that numbers should trump strategy/skill in fights
Did I miss anything else?
BGs aren't what small scale players were asking for at all though. Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic aren't dedicated to any small-scaler's playstyle, nor is the existence of a Power Sigil. (I say this as someone who enjoys BGs.)King_Thelon wrote: »Saying things like:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »Stop trying to balance the game for 1vX.
And:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »I am starting to see that it's the 1vX'ers that are trying to ruin this game with nerfs to their playstyle all so they can show off to their friends on twitch and youtube.
And:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »This game is AvAvA. Get with the program
In his defense, it's like ZoS heard feedback about smaller scale players complaining they having no mode that dedicated to their playstyle, then added BGs which those same small scale players refuse to play in but still complain about zergs.
So in that essence he's not wrong; if you want smaller groups for more fairer PvP play in BGs. It's like trying to play football but you only want to face against the quarterback and complain when 10 linebackers make you their ***.
BGs aren't what small scale players were asking for at all though. Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic aren't dedicated to any small-scaler's playstyle, nor is the existence of a Power Sigil. (I say this as someone who enjoys BGs.)King_Thelon wrote: »Saying things like:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »Stop trying to balance the game for 1vX.
And:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »I am starting to see that it's the 1vX'ers that are trying to ruin this game with nerfs to their playstyle all so they can show off to their friends on twitch and youtube.
And:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »This game is AvAvA. Get with the program
In his defense, it's like ZoS heard feedback about smaller scale players complaining they having no mode that dedicated to their playstyle, then added BGs which those same small scale players refuse to play in but still complain about zergs.
So in that essence he's not wrong; if you want smaller groups for more fairer PvP play in BGs. It's like trying to play football but you only want to face against the quarterback and complain when 10 linebackers make you their ***.
I think that's a valid opinion. Though chaos balls offers the most balanced PvP of the modes with the first 5 minutes of crazy king being about fights on limited but rotational flags (only objective that actively punishes healbots/tanks or punishes builds that kite too much). And maybe something got lost in the translation between feedback/Dev work (relic/domination are not PvP centric I agree) but overall I think BGs are alot more PvP oriented than players are willing to admit.
Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into a score. If BGs aren't that, then what are small scale players trying to accomplish complaining about cyro being too zergy yet refuse to play the only game mode that doesn't result in any zerged fights? If you don't play it regularly, how can the devs take that feedback seriously?
BGs aren't what small scale players were asking for at all though. Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic aren't dedicated to any small-scaler's playstyle, nor is the existence of a Power Sigil. (I say this as someone who enjoys BGs.)King_Thelon wrote: »Saying things like:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »Stop trying to balance the game for 1vX.
And:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »I am starting to see that it's the 1vX'ers that are trying to ruin this game with nerfs to their playstyle all so they can show off to their friends on twitch and youtube.
And:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »This game is AvAvA. Get with the program
In his defense, it's like ZoS heard feedback about smaller scale players complaining they having no mode that dedicated to their playstyle, then added BGs which those same small scale players refuse to play in but still complain about zergs.
So in that essence he's not wrong; if you want smaller groups for more fairer PvP play in BGs. It's like trying to play football but you only want to face against the quarterback and complain when 10 linebackers make you their ***.
I think that's a valid opinion. Though chaos balls offers the most balanced PvP of the modes with the first 5 minutes of crazy king being about fights on limited but rotational flags (only objective that actively punishes healbots/tanks or punishes builds that kite too much). And maybe something got lost in the translation between feedback/Dev work (relic/domination are not PvP centric I agree) but overall I think BGs are alot more PvP oriented than players are willing to admit.
Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into a score. If BGs aren't that, then what are small scale players trying to accomplish complaining about cyro being too zergy yet refuse to play the only game mode that doesn't result in any zerged fights? If you don't play it regularly, how can the devs take that feedback seriously?
Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into the Cyrodiil score. We wanted our actions to matter to the Alliance War, not some Elder Scrolls version of American Gladiator.
What's more, most of us never asked for changes that would allow us to avoid fighting zergs entirely. Fighting outnumbered is part of the appeal. The request was always to eliminate gameplay elements that disproportionately favored sheer numbers. (The perfect example of this is the ult cost poison -- it's so sub-optimal to run this that the only way to get any net benefit out of it is to be within the safety of a group that's fighting lesser numbers).
BGs just always felt like ZOS shrugging their shoulders and saying "we can't figure out how to make the Alliance War work for multiple types of group and player at once, so here's a way where we can get rid of the small-scalers". Again, I actually enjoy BGs, they just hardly do anything to address what small-scalers have been saying to ZOS for years, and don't replicate the experience of finding successful small-scale play in Cyrodiil.
Yeah, agreed.BGs aren't what small scale players were asking for at all though. Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic aren't dedicated to any small-scaler's playstyle, nor is the existence of a Power Sigil. (I say this as someone who enjoys BGs.)King_Thelon wrote: »Saying things like:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »Stop trying to balance the game for 1vX.
And:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »I am starting to see that it's the 1vX'ers that are trying to ruin this game with nerfs to their playstyle all so they can show off to their friends on twitch and youtube.
And:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »This game is AvAvA. Get with the program
In his defense, it's like ZoS heard feedback about smaller scale players complaining they having no mode that dedicated to their playstyle, then added BGs which those same small scale players refuse to play in but still complain about zergs.
So in that essence he's not wrong; if you want smaller groups for more fairer PvP play in BGs. It's like trying to play football but you only want to face against the quarterback and complain when 10 linebackers make you their ***.
I think that's a valid opinion. Though chaos balls offers the most balanced PvP of the modes with the first 5 minutes of crazy king being about fights on limited but rotational flags (only objective that actively punishes healbots/tanks or punishes builds that kite too much). And maybe something got lost in the translation between feedback/Dev work (relic/domination are not PvP centric I agree) but overall I think BGs are alot more PvP oriented than players are willing to admit.
Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into a score. If BGs aren't that, then what are small scale players trying to accomplish complaining about cyro being too zergy yet refuse to play the only game mode that doesn't result in any zerged fights? If you don't play it regularly, how can the devs take that feedback seriously?
Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into the Cyrodiil score. We wanted our actions to matter to the Alliance War, not some Elder Scrolls version of American Gladiator.
What's more, most of us never asked for changes that would allow us to avoid fighting zergs entirely. Fighting outnumbered is part of the appeal. The request was always to eliminate gameplay elements that disproportionately favored sheer numbers. (The perfect example of this is the ult cost poison -- it's so sub-optimal to run this that the only way to get any net benefit out of it is to be within the safety of a group that's fighting lesser numbers).
BGs just always felt like ZOS shrugging their shoulders and saying "we can't figure out how to make the Alliance War work for multiple types of group and player at once, so here's a way where we can get rid of the small-scalers". Again, I actually enjoy BGs, they just hardly do anything to address what small-scalers have been saying to ZOS for years, and don't replicate the experience of finding successful small-scale play in Cyrodiil.
Makes sense.
Though I think we all know deep down you can't stop zerging unless you hard cap the numbers. Game modes/objectives can only go so far to influence play. But if you give the option to stack 100 players in one area, they are going to do exactly that regardless of the objective at hand (look at zos intention for resorces to be for smaller groups but giant zergs still take those resorces regularly or IC having bigger groups or towns being taken by large raids, etc.).
BGs have a similar problem when premades stack objectives there with tankier specs. It's mostly because they can, and aside from friendly fire, I don't think an intelligent option exists to limit stacking of any number of players.
Yeah, agreed.BGs aren't what small scale players were asking for at all though. Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic aren't dedicated to any small-scaler's playstyle, nor is the existence of a Power Sigil. (I say this as someone who enjoys BGs.)King_Thelon wrote: »Saying things like:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »Stop trying to balance the game for 1vX.
And:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »I am starting to see that it's the 1vX'ers that are trying to ruin this game with nerfs to their playstyle all so they can show off to their friends on twitch and youtube.
And:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »This game is AvAvA. Get with the program
In his defense, it's like ZoS heard feedback about smaller scale players complaining they having no mode that dedicated to their playstyle, then added BGs which those same small scale players refuse to play in but still complain about zergs.
So in that essence he's not wrong; if you want smaller groups for more fairer PvP play in BGs. It's like trying to play football but you only want to face against the quarterback and complain when 10 linebackers make you their ***.
I think that's a valid opinion. Though chaos balls offers the most balanced PvP of the modes with the first 5 minutes of crazy king being about fights on limited but rotational flags (only objective that actively punishes healbots/tanks or punishes builds that kite too much). And maybe something got lost in the translation between feedback/Dev work (relic/domination are not PvP centric I agree) but overall I think BGs are alot more PvP oriented than players are willing to admit.
Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into a score. If BGs aren't that, then what are small scale players trying to accomplish complaining about cyro being too zergy yet refuse to play the only game mode that doesn't result in any zerged fights? If you don't play it regularly, how can the devs take that feedback seriously?
Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into the Cyrodiil score. We wanted our actions to matter to the Alliance War, not some Elder Scrolls version of American Gladiator.
What's more, most of us never asked for changes that would allow us to avoid fighting zergs entirely. Fighting outnumbered is part of the appeal. The request was always to eliminate gameplay elements that disproportionately favored sheer numbers. (The perfect example of this is the ult cost poison -- it's so sub-optimal to run this that the only way to get any net benefit out of it is to be within the safety of a group that's fighting lesser numbers).
BGs just always felt like ZOS shrugging their shoulders and saying "we can't figure out how to make the Alliance War work for multiple types of group and player at once, so here's a way where we can get rid of the small-scalers". Again, I actually enjoy BGs, they just hardly do anything to address what small-scalers have been saying to ZOS for years, and don't replicate the experience of finding successful small-scale play in Cyrodiil.
Makes sense.
Though I think we all know deep down you can't stop zerging unless you hard cap the numbers. Game modes/objectives can only go so far to influence play. But if you give the option to stack 100 players in one area, they are going to do exactly that regardless of the objective at hand (look at zos intention for resorces to be for smaller groups but giant zergs still take those resorces regularly or IC having bigger groups or towns being taken by large raids, etc.).
BGs have a similar problem when premades stack objectives there with tankier specs. It's mostly because they can, and aside from friendly fire, I don't think an intelligent option exists to limit stacking of any number of players.
CU will enable player collision -- I still think it would be hilarious to try that in ESO.
King_Thelon wrote: »Saying things like:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »Stop trying to balance the game for 1vX.
And:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »I am starting to see that it's the 1vX'ers that are trying to ruin this game with nerfs to their playstyle all so they can show off to their friends on twitch and youtube.
And:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »This game is AvAvA. Get with the program
or how about people that say "get exposed" when they run over 4 players with 23?
I think we need more categories for players that don't like solo or small scale pvp. I feel that players who only play in large groups and players that only follow the objective shouldn't be classed into the same category.
IMO a zergling is someone who is looking for / joins a large group who's numbers are larger than the opponents they fight.
CatchMeTrolling wrote: »Think it’s zerging 24/7 and your mindset. Such as chasing someone down like your life depends on it , especially when they’re not at an objective.
It’s AvA so zerging is expected. Nothing wrong with zerging but it’s nothing fun about sitting in a zerg every time you log in either.
Yeah, agreed.BGs aren't what small scale players were asking for at all though. Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic aren't dedicated to any small-scaler's playstyle, nor is the existence of a Power Sigil. (I say this as someone who enjoys BGs.)King_Thelon wrote: »Saying things like:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »Stop trying to balance the game for 1vX.
And:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »I am starting to see that it's the 1vX'ers that are trying to ruin this game with nerfs to their playstyle all so they can show off to their friends on twitch and youtube.
And:Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »This game is AvAvA. Get with the program
In his defense, it's like ZoS heard feedback about smaller scale players complaining they having no mode that dedicated to their playstyle, then added BGs which those same small scale players refuse to play in but still complain about zergs.
So in that essence he's not wrong; if you want smaller groups for more fairer PvP play in BGs. It's like trying to play football but you only want to face against the quarterback and complain when 10 linebackers make you their ***.
I think that's a valid opinion. Though chaos balls offers the most balanced PvP of the modes with the first 5 minutes of crazy king being about fights on limited but rotational flags (only objective that actively punishes healbots/tanks or punishes builds that kite too much). And maybe something got lost in the translation between feedback/Dev work (relic/domination are not PvP centric I agree) but overall I think BGs are alot more PvP oriented than players are willing to admit.
Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into a score. If BGs aren't that, then what are small scale players trying to accomplish complaining about cyro being too zergy yet refuse to play the only game mode that doesn't result in any zerged fights? If you don't play it regularly, how can the devs take that feedback seriously?
Small scalers asked for objectives they can play without being zerged and yet feel like their actions are tallied into the Cyrodiil score. We wanted our actions to matter to the Alliance War, not some Elder Scrolls version of American Gladiator.
What's more, most of us never asked for changes that would allow us to avoid fighting zergs entirely. Fighting outnumbered is part of the appeal. The request was always to eliminate gameplay elements that disproportionately favored sheer numbers. (The perfect example of this is the ult cost poison -- it's so sub-optimal to run this that the only way to get any net benefit out of it is to be within the safety of a group that's fighting lesser numbers).
BGs just always felt like ZOS shrugging their shoulders and saying "we can't figure out how to make the Alliance War work for multiple types of group and player at once, so here's a way where we can get rid of the small-scalers". Again, I actually enjoy BGs, they just hardly do anything to address what small-scalers have been saying to ZOS for years, and don't replicate the experience of finding successful small-scale play in Cyrodiil.
Makes sense.
Though I think we all know deep down you can't stop zerging unless you hard cap the numbers. Game modes/objectives can only go so far to influence play. But if you give the option to stack 100 players in one area, they are going to do exactly that regardless of the objective at hand (look at zos intention for resorces to be for smaller groups but giant zergs still take those resorces regularly or IC having bigger groups or towns being taken by large raids, etc.).
BGs have a similar problem when premades stack objectives there with tankier specs. It's mostly because they can, and aside from friendly fire, I don't think an intelligent option exists to limit stacking of any number of players.
CU will enable player collision -- I still think it would be hilarious to try that in ESO.
That would be great honestly lol. Even with the door trolling; it would force players to spread out so battles look like real battles but idk how that impacts calculations for server performance.
I'd imagine it wouldn't be too bad for calculations but who the hell knows
caeliusstarbreaker wrote: »The basic Zerg warrior.
Added: Also someone who is a novice in a Starcraft Lore Forum.