Sandman929 wrote: »

You just have to change everything you're doing and then you have a chance to overcome the incredible defensive advantages that ball groups use to stay alive. Sound advice.

Do you not think that having to change builds to counter different objectives in pvp is interesting?

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

You just have to change everything you're doing and then you have a chance to overcome the incredible defensive advantages that ball groups use to stay alive. Sound advice.

Do you not think that having to change builds to counter different objectives in pvp is interesting?

Like most, I think, I queue into Cyrodiil on a build I want to play and often that isn't a build centered around countering ball groups. Ball groups aren't an objective in Cyrodiil.
As I've said, I have no problem with the offensive strength of coordinated play, my objection is to the defensive strength of certain game mechanics.
But I think I've made my argument too much already to continue going back and forth about it. If these mechanics don't create an unbalanced situation there's really no need to defend them. People protect what they know to be exploitable because they enjoy exploiting it.

From my side I'll normally have a couple different setups available if i'm queuing in solo. 1 for general zerg surf / solo and one for more bombing/group based coordinated play. Compare this to when im playing in group, I carry between 3-5 setups.

I don't think encouraging people to expand their normal setups is a bad thing.

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

You just have to change everything you're doing and then you have a chance to overcome the incredible defensive advantages that ball groups use to stay alive. Sound advice.

Do you not think that having to change builds to counter different objectives in pvp is interesting?

Like most, I think, I queue into Cyrodiil on a build I want to play and often that isn't a build centered around countering ball groups. Ball groups aren't an objective in Cyrodiil.
As I've said, I have no problem with the offensive strength of coordinated play, my objection is to the defensive strength of certain game mechanics.
But I think I've made my argument too much already to continue going back and forth about it. If these mechanics don't create an unbalanced situation there's really no need to defend them. People protect what they know to be exploitable because they enjoy exploiting it.

From my side I'll normally have a couple different setups available if i'm queuing in solo. 1 for general zerg surf / solo and one for more bombing/group based coordinated play. Compare this to when im playing in group, I carry between 3-5 setups.

I don't think encouraging people to expand their normal setups is a bad thing.

It is if it's to counter an imbalance that could/should be addressed. Sometimes queues into campaigns get longer as time passes and expecting people to change characters to counter this defensively imbalanced playstyle requires waiting in a queue.

Any character can be used to fight, sure there are some which are more effective but also groups, especially ball groups generally have certain days and times they run so its 'expected' to see them on certain nights.

I'm talking about setups for the same character not character switching above.

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

You just have to change everything you're doing and then you have a chance to overcome the incredible defensive advantages that ball groups use to stay alive. Sound advice.

Do you not think that having to change builds to counter different objectives in pvp is interesting?

Like most, I think, I queue into Cyrodiil on a build I want to play and often that isn't a build centered around countering ball groups. Ball groups aren't an objective in Cyrodiil.
As I've said, I have no problem with the offensive strength of coordinated play, my objection is to the defensive strength of certain game mechanics.
But I think I've made my argument too much already to continue going back and forth about it. If these mechanics don't create an unbalanced situation there's really no need to defend them. People protect what they know to be exploitable because they enjoy exploiting it.

From my side I'll normally have a couple different setups available if i'm queuing in solo. 1 for general zerg surf / solo and one for more bombing/group based coordinated play. Compare this to when im playing in group, I carry between 3-5 setups.

I don't think encouraging people to expand their normal setups is a bad thing.

It is if it's to counter an imbalance that could/should be addressed. Sometimes queues into campaigns get longer as time passes and expecting people to change characters to counter this defensively imbalanced playstyle requires waiting in a queue.

Any character can be used to fight, sure there are some which are more effective but also groups, especially ball groups generally have certain days and times they run so its 'expected' to see them on certain nights.

I'm talking about setups for the same character not character switching above.

But you keep insisting that it's on the rest of the community to change what they're doing, and in doing so I think you're being disingenuous about the imbalance created by stacked healing and group purging.
If the rest of the community doesn't change what they're doing to address the imbalance, the imbalance is too great to be overcome by anything besides luck (server lag).
IMO that is too great an imbalance to continue.

I'm not insisting that anyone changes what they do. I'm simply saying that those insisting that groups are changed but aren't willing to change anything they do are more of an issue imo

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

You just have to change everything you're doing and then you have a chance to overcome the incredible defensive advantages that ball groups use to stay alive. Sound advice.

Do you not think that having to change builds to counter different objectives in pvp is interesting?

Like most, I think, I queue into Cyrodiil on a build I want to play and often that isn't a build centered around countering ball groups. Ball groups aren't an objective in Cyrodiil.
As I've said, I have no problem with the offensive strength of coordinated play, my objection is to the defensive strength of certain game mechanics.
But I think I've made my argument too much already to continue going back and forth about it. If these mechanics don't create an unbalanced situation there's really no need to defend them. People protect what they know to be exploitable because they enjoy exploiting it.

From my side I'll normally have a couple different setups available if i'm queuing in solo. 1 for general zerg surf / solo and one for more bombing/group based coordinated play. Compare this to when im playing in group, I carry between 3-5 setups.

I don't think encouraging people to expand their normal setups is a bad thing.

It is if it's to counter an imbalance that could/should be addressed. Sometimes queues into campaigns get longer as time passes and expecting people to change characters to counter this defensively imbalanced playstyle requires waiting in a queue.

Any character can be used to fight, sure there are some which are more effective but also groups, especially ball groups generally have certain days and times they run so its 'expected' to see them on certain nights.

I'm talking about setups for the same character not character switching above.

But you keep insisting that it's on the rest of the community to change what they're doing, and in doing so I think you're being disingenuous about the imbalance created by stacked healing and group purging.
If the rest of the community doesn't change what they're doing to address the imbalance, the imbalance is too great to be overcome by anything besides luck (server lag).
IMO that is too great an imbalance to continue.

I'm not insisting that anyone changes what they do. I'm simply saying that those insisting that groups are changed but aren't willing to change anything they do are more of an issue imo

I don't insist that groups change, I would like certain mechanics that I believe lead to an imbalance to change. Of course, that will force groups to change. I don't expect any player to stop using what's strongest in any playstyle, but that doesn't mean an imbalance should be preserved.

As zos has said either be in a ball group or don't pvp.

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

You just have to change everything you're doing and then you have a chance to overcome the incredible defensive advantages that ball groups use to stay alive. Sound advice.

Do you not think that having to change builds to counter different objectives in pvp is interesting?

Like most, I think, I queue into Cyrodiil on a build I want to play and often that isn't a build centered around countering ball groups. Ball groups aren't an objective in Cyrodiil.
As I've said, I have no problem with the offensive strength of coordinated play, my objection is to the defensive strength of certain game mechanics.
But I think I've made my argument too much already to continue going back and forth about it. If these mechanics don't create an unbalanced situation there's really no need to defend them. People protect what they know to be exploitable because they enjoy exploiting it.

From my side I'll normally have a couple different setups available if i'm queuing in solo. 1 for general zerg surf / solo and one for more bombing/group based coordinated play. Compare this to when im playing in group, I carry between 3-5 setups.

I don't think encouraging people to expand their normal setups is a bad thing.

It is if it's to counter an imbalance that could/should be addressed. Sometimes queues into campaigns get longer as time passes and expecting people to change characters to counter this defensively imbalanced playstyle requires waiting in a queue.

Any character can be used to fight, sure there are some which are more effective but also groups, especially ball groups generally have certain days and times they run so its 'expected' to see them on certain nights.

I'm talking about setups for the same character not character switching above.

But you keep insisting that it's on the rest of the community to change what they're doing, and in doing so I think you're being disingenuous about the imbalance created by stacked healing and group purging.
If the rest of the community doesn't change what they're doing to address the imbalance, the imbalance is too great to be overcome by anything besides luck (server lag).
IMO that is too great an imbalance to continue.

I think it was izanagi that said earlier in this thread (I’m not 100% sure) that zos should encourage players to learn and get better at the game rather than keep making it easier for them. Ball groups have been around since the start of the game and people still don’t know how to slot ranged detos and negates. Players flock to the keep with their single target zerg surf builds and just get farmed over and over whilst not being able to do anything because they aren’t using the correct skills or gear.

It’s imbalanced because you have a group of coordinated players using voice and synergised roles/sets vs unorganised pugs that don’t know which skills to use because they aren’t being encouraged to learn the game. Even if u nerfed heal stacking and group purging, ball groups would still have an advantage.

JingoJango046 wrote: »

I find that ball groups are counterable with the right gameplay so long as the lag or any other issues are not present. There are tactics like those previously mentioned that can and do work, such as proxy det or chaining. But, as is, its extremely difficult to do when skills or bar swaps often dont work.
Its too easy to blame the ball groups, we can see they cause the lag, we all know when you go near them you cant mount for ages, you often cant use skills etc etc. But they dont make the game, they play the game. The design of the ball groups is obviously extremely effective and well done to those that lead them.

While the game is the way it is, facing ball groups will remain difficult. Lets see what the latest proc set tests brings us and applaud eso for at least trying to do something to make the game better for us all. It was wonderful in RW on EU recently btw, no ball groups so no horrendous lag.

RW EU was pretty good performance wise. The long Queue deterred ballgroups which made gameplay very smooth, relatively speaking. It was a lot of fun.

Quagmire turned into an Emp trading campaign, where they could trade blue and yellow Emps very easily by camping Arrius, as is the power of ball groups currently. It was a complete joke.

NotTaylorSwift wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

You just have to change everything you're doing and then you have a chance to overcome the incredible defensive advantages that ball groups use to stay alive. Sound advice.

Do you not think that having to change builds to counter different objectives in pvp is interesting?

Like most, I think, I queue into Cyrodiil on a build I want to play and often that isn't a build centered around countering ball groups. Ball groups aren't an objective in Cyrodiil.
As I've said, I have no problem with the offensive strength of coordinated play, my objection is to the defensive strength of certain game mechanics.
But I think I've made my argument too much already to continue going back and forth about it. If these mechanics don't create an unbalanced situation there's really no need to defend them. People protect what they know to be exploitable because they enjoy exploiting it.

From my side I'll normally have a couple different setups available if i'm queuing in solo. 1 for general zerg surf / solo and one for more bombing/group based coordinated play. Compare this to when im playing in group, I carry between 3-5 setups.

I don't think encouraging people to expand their normal setups is a bad thing.

It is if it's to counter an imbalance that could/should be addressed. Sometimes queues into campaigns get longer as time passes and expecting people to change characters to counter this defensively imbalanced playstyle requires waiting in a queue.

Any character can be used to fight, sure there are some which are more effective but also groups, especially ball groups generally have certain days and times they run so its 'expected' to see them on certain nights.

I'm talking about setups for the same character not character switching above.

But you keep insisting that it's on the rest of the community to change what they're doing, and in doing so I think you're being disingenuous about the imbalance created by stacked healing and group purging.
If the rest of the community doesn't change what they're doing to address the imbalance, the imbalance is too great to be overcome by anything besides luck (server lag).
IMO that is too great an imbalance to continue.

I think it was izanagi that said earlier in this thread (I’m not 100% sure) that zos should encourage players to learn and get better at the game rather than keep making it easier for them. Ball groups have been around since the start of the game and people still don’t know how to slot ranged detos and negates. Players flock to the keep with their single target zerg surf builds and just get farmed over and over whilst not being able to do anything because they aren’t using the correct skills or gear.

It’s imbalanced because you have a group of coordinated players using voice and synergised roles/sets vs unorganised pugs that don’t know which skills to use because they aren’t being encouraged to learn the game. Even if u nerfed heal stacking and group purging, ball groups would still have an advantage.

Easier said that done though. I am not going to slot ranged inevitable detonation because it's on overly specialized skill that will put me at a disadvantaged in most combat situations I find myself in an open world environment. And neither is 95% of everyone else since I rarely come across players using that skill and most of those who do are pretty much bantha fodder whenever I fight them. So that's the thing. As players do get better, they figure out for themselves that Zos's "counter" to organized groups hurts them in most of the combat situations they find themselves in so they eventually drop it. I think most players would accept their builds will not be optimal or even "good," vs. a certain type of opponent, but it's another thing to dictate to players that unless they slot highly specialized "correct" skills or gear sets, it's pretty much throw your hands up in the air and might as well go somewhere else on the map.

The convenience of organized groups having specialized stuff like purge and prox det and harmony jewelry is a huge factor in how strong they are relative to everyone else. That's fine, though it does stink that prox det was meant to counter them and let's not pretend as though this is not a mechanical reality in Cyrodiil. I can't even use Purge to give those pugs getting farmed access to this specialized skill because somebody thought it was a brilliant idea to ensure that such a powerful skill was solely to be used by organized groups.

I think most players would accept that by virtue of organization and synergy, organized groups should be stronger, perhaps noticeably so. But when the reasoning becomes they are strong because you're not running skills that will gimp your build in the vast majority of fights you'll be in and they have access to skills that work simply because they are in a group, that's something else.

For me the argument seems to be coming down to: should players have to adapt their build or playstyle to counter some other players.

Honestly for me that has always been one of the key aspects of PvP. It's what makes a game were there are so many sets and combat styles available fun.

I think that expecting to just sit 100% of the time in a Xv1 zergsurf build and never have to deal with anything challenging would be a sad waste of the games potential.

It would be like expecting to do hard mode trials with everyone in a maelstrom arena one bar heavy attack build.

I have some nice footage here to sum up this whole discussion.

It basically shows all aspects of this discussion. We encounter:

- the unresponsive and repetitive behaviour of unorganized groups stacking up again and again
- around 6:00 minutes into the video we see how a small group of "zerglings" suddenly is able to pressure an organized ball group by pulling out single players and disrupting movement
- we see how the leader starts to make mistakes trying to save the tick(which he loses) as well as his players (which he eventually saves)
- we see how this happens due to absolutely *** game additions like rezz ult and earthgore, which - while being a staple of unorganized zerg gameplay - are also used by organized groups

The example group has only three proximity detonations and two players with VD while around two third of their damage is stamina based and doesn't stem from the sources that are deemed as so problematic here.