Glorious Alpha Two Testers!

Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.

Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.

Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.

Throne and Liberty further proves Ashes needs Factions

1235789

Comments

  • GithalGithal Member
    edited July 22
    Saabynator wrote: »
    Maybe AOC already has some systems in place, that can stop a huge zergy guild. I know there is a limit in the guild, but you could make sister builds and ally up, i suppose. But I think we should have the question on a Q&A, before everyone runs amok.

    For this to work they need to remove the alliance system as a whole, and limit the guild to 50 players max. And have "friendly fire" for everyone that is not in your guild

    Tho having 50 players at 1 place doing something is still A LOT. Maybe best is to have groups of 8 and each group does friendly fire to any other group, even if in same guild

    Like if the 2 groups are "Non combatants" they wont do dmg to each other. But if you want to PVP you become combatant and now there is friendly fire between every different group.
  • VeeshanVeeshan Member, Alpha Two
    edited July 22
    Saabynator wrote: »
    Maybe AOC already has some systems in place, that can stop a huge zergy guild. I know there is a limit in the guild, but you could make sister builds and ally up, i suppose. But I think we should have the question on a Q&A, before everyone runs amok.

    lack of fast travel kinda hamper them to a degree too it makes it so much harder for zerg guilds to react to anything that isnt close to their main force location
  • Solid_SneakSolid_Sneak Member
    edited July 22
    Githal wrote: »
    Saabynator wrote: »
    Maybe AOC already has some systems in place, that can stop a huge zergy guild. I know there is a limit in the guild, but you could make sister builds and ally up, i suppose. But I think we should have the question on a Q&A, before everyone runs amok.

    For this to work they need to remove the alliance system as a whole, and limit the guild to 50 players max. And have "friendly fire" for everyone that is not in your guild

    Basically scrap the node systen, no biggy. See what I mean. Why do people want to play a different game than what Ashes advertised as. Massive numbers means massive zergs.

    🤷‍♂️ if people hate assymetrical warfare they should go play Alterac Valley in Classic WoW if you want "fair fights".
  • GithalGithal Member
    edited July 22
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Saabynator wrote: »
    Maybe AOC already has some systems in place, that can stop a huge zergy guild. I know there is a limit in the guild, but you could make sister builds and ally up, i suppose. But I think we should have the question on a Q&A, before everyone runs amok.

    For this to work they need to remove the alliance system as a whole, and limit the guild to 50 players max. And have "friendly fire" for everyone that is not in your guild

    Basically scrap the node systen, no biggy. See what I mean. Why do people want to play a different game than what Ashes advertised as. Massive numbers means massive zergs.

    🤷‍♂️ if people hate assymetrical warfare they should go play Alterac Valley in Classic WoW if you want "fair fights".

    You kind of delude yourself there.. Node and guild are 2 separate things. Node wars are not guild wars.

    And ye - zerg fights are the most boring thing that can exist. Well maybe for someone who has 0 skill at all and cant do anything in a 8v8 / 3v3 / 1v1 or some other format of those, then you may enjoy zerg fights, since no skill is required there at all

    If i wanted to play game where no skill is required i would play T&L
  • DimitraeosDimitraeos Member
    edited July 22
    Veeshan wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Veeshan wrote: »
    George_Black wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    George_Black wrote: »
    Dolyem wrote: »
    Also, if there is no AOE cap, zergs will crumble to small groups.

    With or without caps, if AoC allows for AoE gameplay to overshadow single target dmg the massively larger numbers will always win and nobody will enjoy pvp.

    Why would having a handful of AoE options to punish heavily grouped up zerg/deathballs mean that single target is overshadowed?

    How does a smaller group fight a larger group without some kind of strong aoe to punish them zerging?

    Because the zerg group has the option for the same abilities.
    You have let's say 20 people with aoe abilities that deal 2k aoe dmg. No limit on targets.
    And you have 30 people with the same shit.
    The 30 will win.

    Doesnt quiet work that way, player density of the larger group is higher so your aoe will hit more targets at once since a smaller group can spread out easier than a larger one.

    Dont get me wrong the larger group has the advantage still but it not as much

    10 players vs 30 players the cluster of 30 players ill be more dense so any aoe are more likely to hit more targets at once than the group of 30 aoeing the group of 10

    Single target skills
    10 players = 10 instances of dmg
    30 players = 30 instances of dmg

    AoE attacks for 10v30
    10 players casting aoe can do 0-300 instances of dmg (However higher chance to hit closer to the 300 mark due to more players density)
    where 30 players do 0 - 300 instances of dmg aswell (However lower chance to hit the 300 mark due to lower player density)


    You have never faced a Zerg group have you? If your numbers are small they will just run over you. They have more heals in their group than the full number of members of your group. You can hardly kill a single player of the enemy even when your whole group focus him with single targets. AOE will do nothing since the healers will just use 1 mass heal each and its already GG. And dont forget that they have several times more CC than your group. They just spam all their biggest cds at start of the combat to cc and deal big dmg and till the spells end you already lost.

    Majority of my games i play are large scale seige based PvP MMO of varying quality and out of all the ones ive played the ones you have the highest chance to fight larger number groups is as followed
    1 - Uncapped AoE
    2 - Friendly fire
    3- Where tactics actually matter
    4- High skill ceiling (I personaly dont like this one though since it can be demorilising for less skilled players watching 1 person roll 12 people is not good for gameplay since those 12 end up quitting :P and u canabalise the game to a degree of it playerbase)

    Edit: Ill add guild politic/espionage as well since effective use of these things can bring down and dismantle zergs guilds fairly well which we did in archage when our 20 man guild made enemies of a 100 man one. Constant hit and run tactics on trade packs aswell as spies alts infiltrating and stealing tradepacks constantly off there plots kinda made there leadership implode and start kicking most people from the guild (didnt get the spy account though haha)

    The more of the above 4 things are in the game the more chance u have at winning with smaller numbers. We wont have friendly fire and we wont have a high skill ceiling which leads to Uncapped AoE and tactics which i think you can probaly win fights if used well against twice your numbers.

    Trust me aswell Guild/node politics will play huge role in the game much like in darkfall when people make mega alliance everyone else tend to come together to crush it then split apart again when threat gone. Happen time and time again in that game one alliance gets to big and after a month or 2 they get crushed and split appart.
    Well organised smaller groups syncing up aoe on a cluster at once can often kill anyone in that spot before healing even occures if timed well too when you start getting into 20+ player territory and larger the group more players who get caught into it since it harder to spread appart.


    Edit: If i were the devs i would make aoe heals only heal party members and AoE dmg spell hit anyone in range of the aoe, which would make sense since the game is being designed/balanced around 8 man groups.

    Or have AoE healing capped to X (Lets say 8 players) amount of players and dmg no cap lets face if if 20 people being caugh in a single AoE then your doing something wrong and the group who catches 20 players in their aoe deserve to be rewarded for it :P

    I actually super agree with AoE healing being capped as a way to "tax" zergs to force them to have to coordinate more to be effective. I still think they need something to watch out for like a dangerous AoE of some kind that forces them to spread out and not just try and steamroll an enemy but we will see.
    "Divinity is not just Love, Devotion or Purpose. Divinity is the hammer which we use to crush Corruption."
    l4nvaryf9xpf.png
  • DimitraeosDimitraeos Member
    edited July 22
    Noaani wrote: »

    16 isn't a zerg. Its less than half of a raid.

    If that is the size you are thinking this.kind of thing is for, then I change my opinion from "it won't work" to "it won't work and it isn't needed".

    A zerg is 50 at a minimum. The 30 in the example above was enough to point out that it wouldn't work, but 30 is still less than a fill raid.

    If you have 8 and are going uo against 16, the appropriate solution is to get more people, not to expect the game to provide you with leverage

    And then we are back to square one and zergs remain the default instead of "hey we might be fewer, but if we are smart with our timing, positioning and abilities, we might have a fighting chance."

    I think an example where someone is at a 2:1 disadvantage is fair in a group to raid sized battle. I think in a scenario where its 2:1 numerical disadvantage, the only solution shouldnt be "just get more", thats literally so boring. It should be A solution, sure, but not the only one. Something where you could leverage a handful of powerful AoEs + surprise + terrain/geography would be WAY more interesting.

    Literally saying "just get more" is the logic of the zerg/deathball and why nearly every MMO is afflicted with it.

    "Divinity is not just Love, Devotion or Purpose. Divinity is the hammer which we use to crush Corruption."
    l4nvaryf9xpf.png
  • GithalGithal Member
    edited July 22
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »

    16 isn't a zerg. Its less than half of a raid.

    If that is the size you are thinking this.kind of thing is for, then I change my opinion from "it won't work" to "it won't work and it isn't needed".

    A zerg is 50 at a minimum. The 30 in the example above was enough to point out that it wouldn't work, but 30 is still less than a fill raid.

    If you have 8 and are going uo against 16, the appropriate solution is to get more people, not to expect the game to provide you with leverage

    And then we are back to square one and zergs remain the default instead of "hey we might be fewer, but if we are smart with our timing, positioning and abilities, we might have a fighting chance."

    And my example using numbers could be literally any number. I think in a scenario where its 2:1 numerical disadvantate, the only solutions should be "just get more". It should be A solution, sure, but not the only one. Thats boring. Something where you could leverage a handful of powerful AoEs + surprise + terrain/geography would be more interesting.

    Literally saying "just get more" is the logic of the zerg/deathball.

    I have had situations in WOW back in the days when i was playing it (Wotlk expansion) where in arena my partner disconnects at start of fight, and i win 1v2 (well they were 2 dps, no healers, but still both had better gear than me), and these fights are 1 of the most interesting things that can happen when you have chance even in 1v2
  • Solid_SneakSolid_Sneak Member
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Saabynator wrote: »
    Maybe AOC already has some systems in place, that can stop a huge zergy guild. I know there is a limit in the guild, but you could make sister builds and ally up, i suppose. But I think we should have the question on a Q&A, before everyone runs amok.

    For this to work they need to remove the alliance system as a whole, and limit the guild to 50 players max. And have "friendly fire" for everyone that is not in your guild

    Basically scrap the node systen, no biggy. See what I mean. Why do people want to play a different game than what Ashes advertised as. Massive numbers means massive zergs.

    🤷‍♂️ if people hate assymetrical warfare they should go play Alterac Valley in Classic WoW if you want "fair fights".

    You kind of delude yourself there.. Node and guild are 2 separate things. Node wars are not guild wars.

    And ye - zerg fights are the most boring thing that can exist. Well maybe for someone who has 0 skill at all and cant do anything in a 8v8 / 3v3 / 1v1 or some other format of those, then you may enjoy zerg fights, since no skill is required there at all

    If i wanted to play game where no skill is required i would play T&L

    Cool. What prevents 6 alliances that are unaffiliated to declare war on one target guild.

    That shit went down in EVE when the whole server just declared war on the Goons. The event is called World War Bee. And the Goonswarm itself on being a true zerg.

    And yes, zergs are boring. I like just waylaying larger groups and cleaving them with my small dedicated group.
  • GithalGithal Member
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Saabynator wrote: »
    Maybe AOC already has some systems in place, that can stop a huge zergy guild. I know there is a limit in the guild, but you could make sister builds and ally up, i suppose. But I think we should have the question on a Q&A, before everyone runs amok.

    For this to work they need to remove the alliance system as a whole, and limit the guild to 50 players max. And have "friendly fire" for everyone that is not in your guild

    Basically scrap the node systen, no biggy. See what I mean. Why do people want to play a different game than what Ashes advertised as. Massive numbers means massive zergs.

    🤷‍♂️ if people hate assymetrical warfare they should go play Alterac Valley in Classic WoW if you want "fair fights".

    You kind of delude yourself there.. Node and guild are 2 separate things. Node wars are not guild wars.

    And ye - zerg fights are the most boring thing that can exist. Well maybe for someone who has 0 skill at all and cant do anything in a 8v8 / 3v3 / 1v1 or some other format of those, then you may enjoy zerg fights, since no skill is required there at all

    If i wanted to play game where no skill is required i would play T&L

    Cool. What prevents 6 alliances that are unaffiliated to declare war on one target guild.

    That shit went down in EVE when the whole server just declared war on the Goons. The event is called World War Bee. And the Goonswarm itself on being a true zerg.

    And yes, zergs are boring. I like just waylaying larger groups and cleaving them with my small dedicated group.

    There are limitations on war declarations, You cant declare war on someone that is already in war
  • Solid_SneakSolid_Sneak Member
    Githal wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »

    16 isn't a zerg. Its less than half of a raid.

    If that is the size you are thinking this.kind of thing is for, then I change my opinion from "it won't work" to "it won't work and it isn't needed".

    A zerg is 50 at a minimum. The 30 in the example above was enough to point out that it wouldn't work, but 30 is still less than a fill raid.

    If you have 8 and are going uo against 16, the appropriate solution is to get more people, not to expect the game to provide you with leverage

    And then we are back to square one and zergs remain the default instead of "hey we might be fewer, but if we are smart with our timing, positioning and abilities, we might have a fighting chance."

    And my example using numbers could be literally any number. I think in a scenario where its 2:1 numerical disadvantate, the only solutions should be "just get more". It should be A solution, sure, but not the only one. Thats boring. Something where you could leverage a handful of powerful AoEs + surprise + terrain/geography would be more interesting.

    Literally saying "just get more" is the logic of the zerg/deathball.

    I have had situations in WOW back in the days when i was playing it (Wotlk expansion) where in arena my partner disconnects at start of fight, and i win 1v2 (well they were 2 dps, no healers, but still both had better gear than me), and these fights are 1 of the most interesting things that can happen when you have chance even in 1v2

    I used to play in BFA with my prot pala in arena, and the amount of hate when you win 1v2 is unreal.

    Oops, I guess we should disable arenas for tanks in Ashes. We would not want them "rouge" players getting angry.
  • GithalGithal Member
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »

    16 isn't a zerg. Its less than half of a raid.

    If that is the size you are thinking this.kind of thing is for, then I change my opinion from "it won't work" to "it won't work and it isn't needed".

    A zerg is 50 at a minimum. The 30 in the example above was enough to point out that it wouldn't work, but 30 is still less than a fill raid.

    If you have 8 and are going uo against 16, the appropriate solution is to get more people, not to expect the game to provide you with leverage

    And then we are back to square one and zergs remain the default instead of "hey we might be fewer, but if we are smart with our timing, positioning and abilities, we might have a fighting chance."

    And my example using numbers could be literally any number. I think in a scenario where its 2:1 numerical disadvantate, the only solutions should be "just get more". It should be A solution, sure, but not the only one. Thats boring. Something where you could leverage a handful of powerful AoEs + surprise + terrain/geography would be more interesting.

    Literally saying "just get more" is the logic of the zerg/deathball.

    I have had situations in WOW back in the days when i was playing it (Wotlk expansion) where in arena my partner disconnects at start of fight, and i win 1v2 (well they were 2 dps, no healers, but still both had better gear than me), and these fights are 1 of the most interesting things that can happen when you have chance even in 1v2

    I used to play in BFA with my prot pala in arena, and the amount of hate when you win 1v2 is unreal.

    Oops, I guess we should disable arenas for tanks in Ashes. We would not want them "rouge" players getting angry.

    The thing is - SKILL SHOULD MATTER. And if you win 1v2 then you deserve the win. But in zerg fight, your skill means nothing. Even if 1 person is afk the whole fight this wont change anything
  • Solid_SneakSolid_Sneak Member
    edited July 22
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Saabynator wrote: »
    Maybe AOC already has some systems in place, that can stop a huge zergy guild. I know there is a limit in the guild, but you could make sister builds and ally up, i suppose. But I think we should have the question on a Q&A, before everyone runs amok.

    For this to work they need to remove the alliance system as a whole, and limit the guild to 50 players max. And have "friendly fire" for everyone that is not in your guild

    Basically scrap the node systen, no biggy. See what I mean. Why do people want to play a different game than what Ashes advertised as. Massive numbers means massive zergs.

    🤷‍♂️ if people hate assymetrical warfare they should go play Alterac Valley in Classic WoW if you want "fair fights".

    You kind of delude yourself there.. Node and guild are 2 separate things. Node wars are not guild wars.

    And ye - zerg fights are the most boring thing that can exist. Well maybe for someone who has 0 skill at all and cant do anything in a 8v8 / 3v3 / 1v1 or some other format of those, then you may enjoy zerg fights, since no skill is required there at all

    If i wanted to play game where no skill is required i would play T&L

    Cool. What prevents 6 alliances that are unaffiliated to declare war on one target guild.

    That shit went down in EVE when the whole server just declared war on the Goons. The event is called World War Bee. And the Goonswarm itself on being a true zerg.

    And yes, zergs are boring. I like just waylaying larger groups and cleaving them with my small dedicated group.

    There are limitations on war declarations, You cant declare war on someone that is already in war

    Excellent. PK is back on the menu boys!

    Corruption? Gear loss? You must mean "operational expenditures". Nothing can prevent me and my group from being paid (in game) by an Auction House baron or his entire guild of barons just to harrass someone else's guild.
  • GithalGithal Member
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Saabynator wrote: »
    Maybe AOC already has some systems in place, that can stop a huge zergy guild. I know there is a limit in the guild, but you could make sister builds and ally up, i suppose. But I think we should have the question on a Q&A, before everyone runs amok.

    For this to work they need to remove the alliance system as a whole, and limit the guild to 50 players max. And have "friendly fire" for everyone that is not in your guild

    Basically scrap the node systen, no biggy. See what I mean. Why do people want to play a different game than what Ashes advertised as. Massive numbers means massive zergs.

    🤷‍♂️ if people hate assymetrical warfare they should go play Alterac Valley in Classic WoW if you want "fair fights".

    You kind of delude yourself there.. Node and guild are 2 separate things. Node wars are not guild wars.

    And ye - zerg fights are the most boring thing that can exist. Well maybe for someone who has 0 skill at all and cant do anything in a 8v8 / 3v3 / 1v1 or some other format of those, then you may enjoy zerg fights, since no skill is required there at all

    If i wanted to play game where no skill is required i would play T&L

    Cool. What prevents 6 alliances that are unaffiliated to declare war on one target guild.

    That shit went down in EVE when the whole server just declared war on the Goons. The event is called World War Bee. And the Goonswarm itself on being a true zerg.

    And yes, zergs are boring. I like just waylaying larger groups and cleaving them with my small dedicated group.

    There are limitations on war declarations, You cant declare war on someone that is already in war

    Excellent. PK is back on the menu boys!

    Corruption? Gear loss? You must mean "operational expenditures". Nothing can prevent me and my group from being paid (in game) by an Auction House baron or his entire guild of barons from, just to harrass someone else's guild.

    Thats part of the game mechanics/diplomacy or call it however you want. As long as it dont turn out into a zerg feast then it will be good.
  • VeeshanVeeshan Member, Alpha Two
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Saabynator wrote: »
    Maybe AOC already has some systems in place, that can stop a huge zergy guild. I know there is a limit in the guild, but you could make sister builds and ally up, i suppose. But I think we should have the question on a Q&A, before everyone runs amok.

    For this to work they need to remove the alliance system as a whole, and limit the guild to 50 players max. And have "friendly fire" for everyone that is not in your guild

    Basically scrap the node systen, no biggy. See what I mean. Why do people want to play a different game than what Ashes advertised as. Massive numbers means massive zergs.

    🤷‍♂️ if people hate assymetrical warfare they should go play Alterac Valley in Classic WoW if you want "fair fights".

    Diplomacy is hard for people who dont play PvP games often, zerg forms come together with smaller alliances wipe zerg out and go do your own thing again, unite agiast people who get a little to big for comfort
  • VeeshanVeeshan Member, Alpha Two
    edited July 22
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Saabynator wrote: »
    Maybe AOC already has some systems in place, that can stop a huge zergy guild. I know there is a limit in the guild, but you could make sister builds and ally up, i suppose. But I think we should have the question on a Q&A, before everyone runs amok.

    For this to work they need to remove the alliance system as a whole, and limit the guild to 50 players max. And have "friendly fire" for everyone that is not in your guild

    Basically scrap the node systen, no biggy. See what I mean. Why do people want to play a different game than what Ashes advertised as. Massive numbers means massive zergs.

    🤷‍♂️ if people hate assymetrical warfare they should go play Alterac Valley in Classic WoW if you want "fair fights".

    You kind of delude yourself there.. Node and guild are 2 separate things. Node wars are not guild wars.

    And ye - zerg fights are the most boring thing that can exist. Well maybe for someone who has 0 skill at all and cant do anything in a 8v8 / 3v3 / 1v1 or some other format of those, then you may enjoy zerg fights, since no skill is required there at all

    If i wanted to play game where no skill is required i would play T&L

    Zerg fights are boring when it become no tactic zerg balling, ive had some amazing fight in large scale when aoe function and pvp doesnt become a who can stack ontop of eachother in the death ball better just that most games end up this route due to they have a tendancy to make aoe useless or target capped :P
  • Solid_SneakSolid_Sneak Member
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »

    16 isn't a zerg. Its less than half of a raid.

    If that is the size you are thinking this.kind of thing is for, then I change my opinion from "it won't work" to "it won't work and it isn't needed".

    A zerg is 50 at a minimum. The 30 in the example above was enough to point out that it wouldn't work, but 30 is still less than a fill raid.

    If you have 8 and are going uo against 16, the appropriate solution is to get more people, not to expect the game to provide you with leverage

    And then we are back to square one and zergs remain the default instead of "hey we might be fewer, but if we are smart with our timing, positioning and abilities, we might have a fighting chance."

    And my example using numbers could be literally any number. I think in a scenario where its 2:1 numerical disadvantate, the only solutions should be "just get more". It should be A solution, sure, but not the only one. Thats boring. Something where you could leverage a handful of powerful AoEs + surprise + terrain/geography would be more interesting.

    Literally saying "just get more" is the logic of the zerg/deathball.

    I have had situations in WOW back in the days when i was playing it (Wotlk expansion) where in arena my partner disconnects at start of fight, and i win 1v2 (well they were 2 dps, no healers, but still both had better gear than me), and these fights are 1 of the most interesting things that can happen when you have chance even in 1v2

    I used to play in BFA with my prot pala in arena, and the amount of hate when you win 1v2 is unreal.

    Oops, I guess we should disable arenas for tanks in Ashes. We would not want them "rouge" players getting angry.

    The thing is - SKILL SHOULD MATTER. And if you win 1v2 then you deserve the win. But in zerg fight, your skill means nothing. Even if 1 person is afk the whole fight this wont change anything

    Sadly, skill rarely affects a battle. Tactics do. Choke points, terrain, the high ground for them bowboys and dress-wearers. Most talented generals in history rarely were good in battle.

    If you fight the Mongol Horde in the open fields where their horseback archers can black ball you, you deserve the loss.
  • VeeshanVeeshan Member, Alpha Two
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »

    16 isn't a zerg. Its less than half of a raid.

    If that is the size you are thinking this.kind of thing is for, then I change my opinion from "it won't work" to "it won't work and it isn't needed".

    A zerg is 50 at a minimum. The 30 in the example above was enough to point out that it wouldn't work, but 30 is still less than a fill raid.

    If you have 8 and are going uo against 16, the appropriate solution is to get more people, not to expect the game to provide you with leverage

    And then we are back to square one and zergs remain the default instead of "hey we might be fewer, but if we are smart with our timing, positioning and abilities, we might have a fighting chance."

    And my example using numbers could be literally any number. I think in a scenario where its 2:1 numerical disadvantate, the only solutions should be "just get more". It should be A solution, sure, but not the only one. Thats boring. Something where you could leverage a handful of powerful AoEs + surprise + terrain/geography would be more interesting.

    Literally saying "just get more" is the logic of the zerg/deathball.

    I have had situations in WOW back in the days when i was playing it (Wotlk expansion) where in arena my partner disconnects at start of fight, and i win 1v2 (well they were 2 dps, no healers, but still both had better gear than me), and these fights are 1 of the most interesting things that can happen when you have chance even in 1v2

    I used to play in BFA with my prot pala in arena, and the amount of hate when you win 1v2 is unreal.

    Oops, I guess we should disable arenas for tanks in Ashes. We would not want them "rouge" players getting angry.

    The thing is - SKILL SHOULD MATTER. And if you win 1v2 then you deserve the win. But in zerg fight, your skill means nothing. Even if 1 person is afk the whole fight this wont change anything

    Sadly, skill rarely affects a battle. Tactics do. Choke points, terrain, the high ground for them bowboys and dress-wearers. Most talented generals in history rarely were good in battle.

    If you fight the Mongol Horde in the open fields where their horseback archers can black ball you, you deserve the loss.

    Do a china build a wall to stand on :P
  • Solid_SneakSolid_Sneak Member
    Veeshan wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »

    16 isn't a zerg. Its less than half of a raid.

    If that is the size you are thinking this.kind of thing is for, then I change my opinion from "it won't work" to "it won't work and it isn't needed".

    A zerg is 50 at a minimum. The 30 in the example above was enough to point out that it wouldn't work, but 30 is still less than a fill raid.

    If you have 8 and are going uo against 16, the appropriate solution is to get more people, not to expect the game to provide you with leverage

    And then we are back to square one and zergs remain the default instead of "hey we might be fewer, but if we are smart with our timing, positioning and abilities, we might have a fighting chance."

    And my example using numbers could be literally any number. I think in a scenario where its 2:1 numerical disadvantate, the only solutions should be "just get more". It should be A solution, sure, but not the only one. Thats boring. Something where you could leverage a handful of powerful AoEs + surprise + terrain/geography would be more interesting.

    Literally saying "just get more" is the logic of the zerg/deathball.

    I have had situations in WOW back in the days when i was playing it (Wotlk expansion) where in arena my partner disconnects at start of fight, and i win 1v2 (well they were 2 dps, no healers, but still both had better gear than me), and these fights are 1 of the most interesting things that can happen when you have chance even in 1v2

    I used to play in BFA with my prot pala in arena, and the amount of hate when you win 1v2 is unreal.

    Oops, I guess we should disable arenas for tanks in Ashes. We would not want them "rouge" players getting angry.

    The thing is - SKILL SHOULD MATTER. And if you win 1v2 then you deserve the win. But in zerg fight, your skill means nothing. Even if 1 person is afk the whole fight this wont change anything

    Sadly, skill rarely affects a battle. Tactics do. Choke points, terrain, the high ground for them bowboys and dress-wearers. Most talented generals in history rarely were good in battle.

    If you fight the Mongol Horde in the open fields where their horseback archers can black ball you, you deserve the loss.

    Do a china build a wall to stand on :P

    Cross fingers, Tank/Tank is like able to build 50 Walls in a row 🤣
  • GithalGithal Member
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »

    16 isn't a zerg. Its less than half of a raid.

    If that is the size you are thinking this.kind of thing is for, then I change my opinion from "it won't work" to "it won't work and it isn't needed".

    A zerg is 50 at a minimum. The 30 in the example above was enough to point out that it wouldn't work, but 30 is still less than a fill raid.

    If you have 8 and are going uo against 16, the appropriate solution is to get more people, not to expect the game to provide you with leverage

    And then we are back to square one and zergs remain the default instead of "hey we might be fewer, but if we are smart with our timing, positioning and abilities, we might have a fighting chance."

    And my example using numbers could be literally any number. I think in a scenario where its 2:1 numerical disadvantate, the only solutions should be "just get more". It should be A solution, sure, but not the only one. Thats boring. Something where you could leverage a handful of powerful AoEs + surprise + terrain/geography would be more interesting.

    Literally saying "just get more" is the logic of the zerg/deathball.

    I have had situations in WOW back in the days when i was playing it (Wotlk expansion) where in arena my partner disconnects at start of fight, and i win 1v2 (well they were 2 dps, no healers, but still both had better gear than me), and these fights are 1 of the most interesting things that can happen when you have chance even in 1v2

    I used to play in BFA with my prot pala in arena, and the amount of hate when you win 1v2 is unreal.

    Oops, I guess we should disable arenas for tanks in Ashes. We would not want them "rouge" players getting angry.

    The thing is - SKILL SHOULD MATTER. And if you win 1v2 then you deserve the win. But in zerg fight, your skill means nothing. Even if 1 person is afk the whole fight this wont change anything

    Sadly, skill rarely affects a battle. Tactics do. Choke points, terrain, the high ground for them bowboys and dress-wearers. Most talented generals in history rarely were good in battle.

    If you fight the Mongol Horde in the open fields where their horseback archers can black ball you, you deserve the loss.

    You talking about modern wars tho.... In sword fights skill do matter, and yes tactics and position matters also, but skill is not less of an factor
  • GithalGithal Member
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »

    16 isn't a zerg. Its less than half of a raid.

    If that is the size you are thinking this.kind of thing is for, then I change my opinion from "it won't work" to "it won't work and it isn't needed".

    A zerg is 50 at a minimum. The 30 in the example above was enough to point out that it wouldn't work, but 30 is still less than a fill raid.

    If you have 8 and are going uo against 16, the appropriate solution is to get more people, not to expect the game to provide you with leverage

    And then we are back to square one and zergs remain the default instead of "hey we might be fewer, but if we are smart with our timing, positioning and abilities, we might have a fighting chance."

    And my example using numbers could be literally any number. I think in a scenario where its 2:1 numerical disadvantate, the only solutions should be "just get more". It should be A solution, sure, but not the only one. Thats boring. Something where you could leverage a handful of powerful AoEs + surprise + terrain/geography would be more interesting.

    Literally saying "just get more" is the logic of the zerg/deathball.

    I have had situations in WOW back in the days when i was playing it (Wotlk expansion) where in arena my partner disconnects at start of fight, and i win 1v2 (well they were 2 dps, no healers, but still both had better gear than me), and these fights are 1 of the most interesting things that can happen when you have chance even in 1v2

    I used to play in BFA with my prot pala in arena, and the amount of hate when you win 1v2 is unreal.

    Oops, I guess we should disable arenas for tanks in Ashes. We would not want them "rouge" players getting angry.

    The thing is - SKILL SHOULD MATTER. And if you win 1v2 then you deserve the win. But in zerg fight, your skill means nothing. Even if 1 person is afk the whole fight this wont change anything

    Sadly, skill rarely affects a battle. Tactics do. Choke points, terrain, the high ground for them bowboys and dress-wearers. Most talented generals in history rarely were good in battle.

    If you fight the Mongol Horde in the open fields where their horseback archers can black ball you, you deserve the loss.

    But yes these fights can all be considered "zerg fights" since they include thousands of people. So ofc skill values matter less.

    But just coz in real life battles of thousands are like this, doesnt mean that my MMO experience should also remove skill from the table
  • Solid_SneakSolid_Sneak Member
    edited July 22
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »

    16 isn't a zerg. Its less than half of a raid.

    If that is the size you are thinking this.kind of thing is for, then I change my opinion from "it won't work" to "it won't work and it isn't needed".

    A zerg is 50 at a minimum. The 30 in the example above was enough to point out that it wouldn't work, but 30 is still less than a fill raid.

    If you have 8 and are going uo against 16, the appropriate solution is to get more people, not to expect the game to provide you with leverage

    And then we are back to square one and zergs remain the default instead of "hey we might be fewer, but if we are smart with our timing, positioning and abilities, we might have a fighting chance."

    And my example using numbers could be literally any number. I think in a scenario where its 2:1 numerical disadvantate, the only solutions should be "just get more". It should be A solution, sure, but not the only one. Thats boring. Something where you could leverage a handful of powerful AoEs + surprise + terrain/geography would be more interesting.

    Literally saying "just get more" is the logic of the zerg/deathball.

    I have had situations in WOW back in the days when i was playing it (Wotlk expansion) where in arena my partner disconnects at start of fight, and i win 1v2 (well they were 2 dps, no healers, but still both had better gear than me), and these fights are 1 of the most interesting things that can happen when you have chance even in 1v2

    I used to play in BFA with my prot pala in arena, and the amount of hate when you win 1v2 is unreal.

    Oops, I guess we should disable arenas for tanks in Ashes. We would not want them "rouge" players getting angry.

    The thing is - SKILL SHOULD MATTER. And if you win 1v2 then you deserve the win. But in zerg fight, your skill means nothing. Even if 1 person is afk the whole fight this wont change anything

    Sadly, skill rarely affects a battle. Tactics do. Choke points, terrain, the high ground for them bowboys and dress-wearers. Most talented generals in history rarely were good in battle.

    If you fight the Mongol Horde in the open fields where their horseback archers can black ball you, you deserve the loss.

    You talking about modern wars tho.... In sword fights skill do matter, and yes tactics and position matters also, but skill is not less of an factor

    You miss the point. At a certain size of combatants - like in the EVE Online 500v500, only tactics and target calling win you the fight. If a healer, has 1000 hp and 50% mitigation they have an estimated 2000 HP. If 1 player can deliver 100 damage on a hit, then 20 players will DELETE the healer in one coordinated attack.

    If the leader can actually do target calling, that wins the battle. If the tanks body block poking from archers, that wins the battle.


    If your raid leader cannot say "archers on the back, tanks on the front" ... then good luck with your mad skills in 1v1. 🤷‍♂️
  • GithalGithal Member
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »

    16 isn't a zerg. Its less than half of a raid.

    If that is the size you are thinking this.kind of thing is for, then I change my opinion from "it won't work" to "it won't work and it isn't needed".

    A zerg is 50 at a minimum. The 30 in the example above was enough to point out that it wouldn't work, but 30 is still less than a fill raid.

    If you have 8 and are going uo against 16, the appropriate solution is to get more people, not to expect the game to provide you with leverage

    And then we are back to square one and zergs remain the default instead of "hey we might be fewer, but if we are smart with our timing, positioning and abilities, we might have a fighting chance."

    And my example using numbers could be literally any number. I think in a scenario where its 2:1 numerical disadvantate, the only solutions should be "just get more". It should be A solution, sure, but not the only one. Thats boring. Something where you could leverage a handful of powerful AoEs + surprise + terrain/geography would be more interesting.

    Literally saying "just get more" is the logic of the zerg/deathball.

    I have had situations in WOW back in the days when i was playing it (Wotlk expansion) where in arena my partner disconnects at start of fight, and i win 1v2 (well they were 2 dps, no healers, but still both had better gear than me), and these fights are 1 of the most interesting things that can happen when you have chance even in 1v2

    I used to play in BFA with my prot pala in arena, and the amount of hate when you win 1v2 is unreal.

    Oops, I guess we should disable arenas for tanks in Ashes. We would not want them "rouge" players getting angry.

    The thing is - SKILL SHOULD MATTER. And if you win 1v2 then you deserve the win. But in zerg fight, your skill means nothing. Even if 1 person is afk the whole fight this wont change anything

    Sadly, skill rarely affects a battle. Tactics do. Choke points, terrain, the high ground for them bowboys and dress-wearers. Most talented generals in history rarely were good in battle.

    If you fight the Mongol Horde in the open fields where their horseback archers can black ball you, you deserve the loss.

    You talking about modern wars tho.... In sword fights skill do matter, and yes tactics and position matters also, but skill is not less of an factor

    You miss the point. At a certain size of combatants - like in the EVE Online 500v500, only tactics and target calling win you the fight. If a healer, has 1000 hp and 50% mitigation they have an estimated 2000 HP. If 1 player can deliver 100 damage on a hit, then 20 players will DELETE the healer in one coordinated attack.

    If the leader can actually do target calling, that wins the battle. If the tanks body block poking from archers, that wins the battle.


    If your raid leader cannot say "archers on the back, tanks on the front" ... then good luck with your mad skills in 1v1. 🤷‍♂️

    In those 500 vs 500 only the shot caller can have some fun, and this is coz his action matters, all other 499 are sheep with no skill.

    And if i wanted to command an army - i would go play some strategy game like Command and Conquer / Empire Earth / starcraft or something like this. No reason to play MMO
  • Solid_SneakSolid_Sneak Member
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »

    16 isn't a zerg. Its less than half of a raid.

    If that is the size you are thinking this.kind of thing is for, then I change my opinion from "it won't work" to "it won't work and it isn't needed".

    A zerg is 50 at a minimum. The 30 in the example above was enough to point out that it wouldn't work, but 30 is still less than a fill raid.

    If you have 8 and are going uo against 16, the appropriate solution is to get more people, not to expect the game to provide you with leverage

    And then we are back to square one and zergs remain the default instead of "hey we might be fewer, but if we are smart with our timing, positioning and abilities, we might have a fighting chance."

    And my example using numbers could be literally any number. I think in a scenario where its 2:1 numerical disadvantate, the only solutions should be "just get more". It should be A solution, sure, but not the only one. Thats boring. Something where you could leverage a handful of powerful AoEs + surprise + terrain/geography would be more interesting.

    Literally saying "just get more" is the logic of the zerg/deathball.

    I have had situations in WOW back in the days when i was playing it (Wotlk expansion) where in arena my partner disconnects at start of fight, and i win 1v2 (well they were 2 dps, no healers, but still both had better gear than me), and these fights are 1 of the most interesting things that can happen when you have chance even in 1v2

    I used to play in BFA with my prot pala in arena, and the amount of hate when you win 1v2 is unreal.

    Oops, I guess we should disable arenas for tanks in Ashes. We would not want them "rouge" players getting angry.

    The thing is - SKILL SHOULD MATTER. And if you win 1v2 then you deserve the win. But in zerg fight, your skill means nothing. Even if 1 person is afk the whole fight this wont change anything

    Sadly, skill rarely affects a battle. Tactics do. Choke points, terrain, the high ground for them bowboys and dress-wearers. Most talented generals in history rarely were good in battle.

    If you fight the Mongol Horde in the open fields where their horseback archers can black ball you, you deserve the loss.

    You talking about modern wars tho.... In sword fights skill do matter, and yes tactics and position matters also, but skill is not less of an factor

    You miss the point. At a certain size of combatants - like in the EVE Online 500v500, only tactics and target calling win you the fight. If a healer, has 1000 hp and 50% mitigation they have an estimated 2000 HP. If 1 player can deliver 100 damage on a hit, then 20 players will DELETE the healer in one coordinated attack.

    If the leader can actually do target calling, that wins the battle. If the tanks body block poking from archers, that wins the battle.


    If your raid leader cannot say "archers on the back, tanks on the front" ... then good luck with your mad skills in 1v1. 🤷‍♂️

    In those 500 vs 500 only the shot caller can have some fun, and this is coz his action matters, all other 499 are sheep with no skill.

    And if i wanted to command an army - i would go play some strategy game like Command and Conquer / Empire Earth / starcraft or something like this. No reason to play MMO

    Ah yes, the defeated side argument, sheep for playing in an organised, doctrine following, player ran military force.

    I wonder what is your opinion on people who will scout your turf for caravan protection detail, join caravans to scout routes and then live update their pirate or raider buddies on your location.

    As I said earlier, this whole thread reeks of people who cannot follow simple orders in a group. You are just before the "my subscription my game, don't tell me how to play" as an argument.

    If you want fair fights, Ashes has an Arena system planned afaik. Seems to me large scale PVP is not your cup of tea.
  • GithalGithal Member
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    I wonder what is your opinion on people who will scout your turf for caravan protection detail, join caravans to scout routes and then live update their pirate or raider buddies on your location.

    Think this will make the game more dynamic and interesting.
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    As I said earlier, this whole thread reeks of people who cannot follow simple orders in a group. You are just before the "my subscription my game, don't tell me how to play" as an argument.

    It reeks of PVE players that cant PVP, But since Ashes will be PVX they advocate for zergs so skill wont matter and they can still win with no skill
  • GithalGithal Member
    edited July 22
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    If you want fair fights, Ashes has an Arena system planned afaik. Seems to me large scale PVP is not your cup of tea.

    I dont agree with this, I think i will enjoy siege wars for example, but not because i think that facing 250 vs 250 players will be enjoyable experience, But because siege will be war with many small objectives. So you will see small groups splitting to contest the objectives.

    Same for node wars, They wont be melee fight, they are objective oriented, so even if 1 play as zerg group - they will lose from the objectives
  • SaabynatorSaabynator Member
    Veeshan wrote: »
    Saabynator wrote: »
    Maybe AOC already has some systems in place, that can stop a huge zergy guild. I know there is a limit in the guild, but you could make sister builds and ally up, i suppose. But I think we should have the question on a Q&A, before everyone runs amok.

    lack of fast travel kinda hamper them to a degree too it makes it so much harder for zerg guilds to react to anything that isnt close to their main force location

    True. It also is hard to dominate big areas, if the travel is manual all the way. They might able to dominate a big dungeon. But still, unless they are all willing to take faction hits, they will have to goto way with everyone.
  • VeeshanVeeshan Member, Alpha Two
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Veeshan wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Solid_Sneak wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »

    16 isn't a zerg. Its less than half of a raid.

    If that is the size you are thinking this.kind of thing is for, then I change my opinion from "it won't work" to "it won't work and it isn't needed".

    A zerg is 50 at a minimum. The 30 in the example above was enough to point out that it wouldn't work, but 30 is still less than a fill raid.

    If you have 8 and are going uo against 16, the appropriate solution is to get more people, not to expect the game to provide you with leverage

    And then we are back to square one and zergs remain the default instead of "hey we might be fewer, but if we are smart with our timing, positioning and abilities, we might have a fighting chance."

    And my example using numbers could be literally any number. I think in a scenario where its 2:1 numerical disadvantate, the only solutions should be "just get more". It should be A solution, sure, but not the only one. Thats boring. Something where you could leverage a handful of powerful AoEs + surprise + terrain/geography would be more interesting.

    Literally saying "just get more" is the logic of the zerg/deathball.

    I have had situations in WOW back in the days when i was playing it (Wotlk expansion) where in arena my partner disconnects at start of fight, and i win 1v2 (well they were 2 dps, no healers, but still both had better gear than me), and these fights are 1 of the most interesting things that can happen when you have chance even in 1v2

    I used to play in BFA with my prot pala in arena, and the amount of hate when you win 1v2 is unreal.

    Oops, I guess we should disable arenas for tanks in Ashes. We would not want them "rouge" players getting angry.

    The thing is - SKILL SHOULD MATTER. And if you win 1v2 then you deserve the win. But in zerg fight, your skill means nothing. Even if 1 person is afk the whole fight this wont change anything

    Sadly, skill rarely affects a battle. Tactics do. Choke points, terrain, the high ground for them bowboys and dress-wearers. Most talented generals in history rarely were good in battle.

    If you fight the Mongol Horde in the open fields where their horseback archers can black ball you, you deserve the loss.

    Do a china build a wall to stand on :P

    Cross fingers, Tank/Tank is like able to build 50 Walls in a row 🤣

    Well they have that wall skill already just use that in a tunnel :P good luck getting past :p
  • AszkalonAszkalon Member, Alpha Two
    Won't our Guild-Alliances be our "Factions" ?



    How could We even possibly being busy with "more Factions" ? When we have already our Hands full with our Alliances with other Players ?!
    a50whcz343yn.png
    ✓ Occasional Roleplayer
    ✓ Guild is " Balderag's Garde " for now. (German)
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    @Depraved you play the beta?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZfqaW5klpg
  • Uncommon SenseUncommon Sense Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    AOC does have factions. It has the small puppy pet and small kitten pet factions...

    But as for the OP regarding scripted factions...No

    Let the players decide what's worth fighting for.
Sign In or Register to comment.