amiiegee wrote: »

xylena wrote: »

Artisian0001 wrote: »

why you always choose to speak so confidently om something you know nothing about is beyond me

Who is this mythical 4 man group pushing top tier 12 mans off siege? You?

Hey, if someone from Adrestia or whoever wants to admit that their top tier 12 man gets pushed off a ram by 4 guys, I guess I could admit I lost a forum argument.

You really have no clue of what you are talking about its funny. I have ran with top tier ball groups and you understimate the damage coordinated siege and a little coordinated group can do.

Immortal Ball groups are a myth and people like you just feed the fear.

@amiiegee, I just want add to your point about ball groups NOT being immortal and to not feed the fear. I run Cyro solo, but usually with multiple high level randoms I have come to know over time`. Although it does not happen often, it is quite satisfying to break down a ball group and finally defeat them. My experience is that if you can take out the healer or one or two other players, the ball group can break down depending on their own talent and abilities. It is a great accomplishment to win as an underdog. Again, ball groups are most certainly NOT immortal. @amiiegee, as a former ball group leader, I am sure you would testify to that.

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

This conversations pretty much ran its course

Not if you're still posting in it!

On Vengeance I used ground siege behind a pug raid to win an easy 2v12, but we couldn't put a dent in the structured 24 man zerg raid. Seems pretty balanced to me.

On GH, Siege Shield is extremely unbalanced, completely bricking most siege, further warping the meta around Negate and ball bomb tactics.

Negate is not mandatory on Vengeance. There is no mandatory ult. Play how you like.

Artisian0001 wrote: »

Siege is overpowered even with siege shield

??????????????????????????????????????????

nerf bishops buff rooks

Artisian0001 wrote: »

coordinated ballgroup

My words were "pug raid" but if that's what you consider a "coordinated ball group" then I guess that would explain a lot of what is going here.

xylena wrote: »

Negate is not mandatory on Vengeance. There is no mandatory ult. Play how you like.

On GH there is no loadouts. Play how you like.

imPDA wrote: »

On GH there is no loadouts. Play how you like.

There are more viable loadouts on Vengeance than there are viable builds on GH. Building to the meta on GH is extremely limited, but mediocre GH players love to think they're onto some big powerful secret by slapping bad sets on what's otherwise a meta build.

It does bring up an interesting point though. How does one evaluate their own impact on the battlefield? The game doesn't give much useful feedback. Mid skill players running Hunding's Rage will still kill bad players running total jank. Confirmation bias everywhere.

xylena wrote: »

There are more viable loadouts on Vengeance

NB and ... That's it? Seriously?

P.S. Sorry, I can't be serious hearing these statements.

xylena wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

This conversations pretty much ran its course

Not if you're still posting in it!

One post to say Yandere is correct lol

No one's saying anything new otherwise, is just rehashing the same points over and over.

GulmarAvocado wrote: »

Artisian0001 wrote: »

xylena wrote: »

Artisian0001 wrote: »

why you always choose to speak so confidently om something you know nothing about is beyond me

Who is this mythical 4 man group pushing top tier 12 mans off siege? You?

Hey, if someone from Adrestia or whoever wants to admit that their top tier 12 man gets pushed off a ram by 4 guys, I guess I could admit I lost a forum argument.

I'm 100% sure @YandereGirlfriend would agree and say the exact same thing I have said and he has played against Adrestia plenty of times. There is no "mythical" 4 man group. Oils are extremely overpowered. 3 people rotating oils with 1 other person shooting scatter, meatbag, or a lancer just like was stated prior would push them off.

If so much as 1 other person decided to come in with a negate bomb while under this oil pressure they could very easily kill members and make them completely give up on the keep. I would be happy to provide a screenshot of a DM between the lead of Adrestia if you want me to ask them the question, but I feel you will just move the goalpost afterward.

Hello, certified Adrasties player here.
Can confirm: 4 coordinated players with siege can absolutely push a top-tier ball group off a keep — and not just oils. Two or three properly timed coldstone treb shots will delete multiple people in a ball before they even realize what hit them. Seen it. Lived it. Died to it. Respect it.

Credentials (100% verified):
– Adrestia 2024–2025
– ex-CB
– ex-Hold Block
– Orc Dismantler
– Drac Disbander
– ex-4D
– ex-MC
– Multi-world record holder
– Patch sweeper
– Former top Wayrest fiend
– 2× Battleground tournament champion, undefeated
– ex-Legend mod
– Unemployed since COVID, still waiting for someone to hire me. Did you read the “ex-4D” part on my CV?
— Looking for e-girl, again I'm ex-4D

Thank you for your confirmation as a credentialed Adrestia player. Some people have a hard time grasping reality when it comes to ESO because things do not go their way. Vengeance sadly is not the solution to fixing peoples personal gripes, especially considering that the campaign is lacking in population and only reducing the ability to focus on fixing performance.

xylena wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

No one's saying anything new otherwise, is just rehashing the same points over and over.

xylena wrote: »

It does bring up an interesting point though. How does one evaluate their own impact on the battlefield? The game doesn't give much useful feedback. Mid skill players running Hunding's Rage will still kill bad players running total jank. Confirmation bias everywhere.

So how do you evaluate the effectiveness of your siege tactics or SnB DK prowess?

This game has always been full of players who claim their terrible build is actually amazing because they "win" by zerging down solos 10v1 with chain spam or whatever, no awareness that what they are doing is at replacement level (or worse).

Please stay on topic this has nothing to do with whether or not Vengeance is viable as a campaign when its population is lower than GH 24/7. The population of vengeance has been decreasing steadily at every single new implantation.

xylena wrote: »

Artisian0001 wrote: »

Please stay on topic this has nothing to do with whether or not Vengeance is viable as a campaign when its population is lower than GH 24/7.

Okay. Where is GH getting its new players from? Still nowhere. Under what scenario does GH recover in population? Some magical "simple fix" to the lag and heal stacking that they haven't thought of in 12 years? Lol no. GH is a dead end going nowhere but down.

Vengeance is far from perfect but it offers room for growth. GH does not. Therefore, Vengeance is viable, and GH is not. We have 12 years of proof that the GH model is not viable.

GH isn't getting new players, correct. but neither is Vengeance and it just came out, and is declining MUCH FASTER than GH. Vengeance has never out populated GH when both were available at the same time. This is very concerning considering it is the newer option. GH has been out, or an equivalent for a much longer period of time and still sees more population than the newer counterpart. You can't look at this from one perspective, it makes no sense to ask the question you just asked.

If I release a campaign and the peak playerbase is 3 people during primetime, would you say "okay but GH isn't improving population!" that makes no logical sense. If a newer option is already dying faster than something that has been out for years, it makes no sense to sink resources into it when the consensus is clear. Additionally, there hasn't been a single primetime since release of GH and vengeance at the same time where GH has had less players, and that is extremely telling. You could make some argument if GH had greater population 75% of the nights and sometimes players did decide to just check into Vengeance for the experience, but it is 100% GH and that is a huge issue.

You say we have 12 years of proof GH is not viable yet it is literally TRIPLE POP LOCKED so you again, aren't making any logical sense. Answer this one simple question, if a campaign that has been out longer, with more population every night is not viable, than what is something that is brand new and trails it in population?

Artisian0001 wrote: »

GH isn't getting new players, correct. but neither is Vengeance and it just came out, and is declining MUCH FASTER than GH. Vengeance has never out populated GH when both were available at the same time.

Steady two bars on Vengeance mean more players than one minute queue pop locked GH, and that's what we could see prime time PC EU at the beginning of the 2nd week of V4. Precise your platform.
And the last time I queued to Cyro for GP there was no such thing as Vengeance for me to queue. So how did it "just came out", that's nonsense. It might come out next year and we will see about its populations then, when it's actually on.

xylena wrote: »

Artisian0001 wrote: »

You say we have 12 years of proof GH is not viable yet it is literally TRIPLE POP LOCKED

That's because the pop caps are low to control the lag. 100 per side during NA prime is pathetic. Hate Vengeance all you want, but GH is dead and you effectively admit as much:

Artisian0001 wrote: »

GH isn't getting new players, correct.

GH players would rather kill their own game than see it move on without them.

Notice how you never respond when asked a direct question?

"You say we have 12 years of proof GH is not viable yet it is literally TRIPLE POP LOCKED so you again, aren't making any logical sense. Answer this one simple question, if a campaign that has been out longer, with more population every night is not viable, than what is something that is brand new and trails it in population?" Answer this.

Artisian0001 wrote: »

"You say we have 12 years of proof GH is not viable yet it is literally TRIPLE POP LOCKED so you again, aren't making any logical sense. Answer this one simple question, if a campaign that has been out longer, with more population every night is not viable, than what is something that is brand new and trails it in population?" Answer this.

The question was answered by a Zos dev earlier in the thread: Veng pop is >3x the cap of GH.

"Number hard. Pikchr easy! But pikchr no same-same?? GRONK HED HRRT."

Artisian0001 wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

Artisian0001 wrote: »

GH isn't getting new players, correct. but neither is Vengeance and it just came out, and is declining MUCH FASTER than GH. Vengeance has never out populated GH when both were available at the same time.

Steady two bars on Vengeance mean more players than one minute queue pop locked GH, and that's what we could see prime time PC EU at the beginning of the 2nd week of V4. Precise your platform.
And the last time I queued to Cyro for GP there was no such thing as Vengeance for me to queue. So how did it "just come out", that's nonsense. It might come out next year and we will see about its populations then, when it's actually on.

Lying about population does no good to further your claim on a forum. Your second point which is just nonsensical and difficult to even parse is just a random claim with nothing backing it. You said the last time you qued GP (a typo for GH?) there was no thing as vengeance. Yes, wouldn't that make it new? LOL...

GP - Golden Pursuits, the current one. State your platform, it doesn't seem to be PC EU, so on what basis are you accusing me of lying? Did you participate every day during the fourth iteration of Vengeance tests on PC EU?