Unpopular opinion : Zergs are necessary and Castle sieges should not be fair

Now i’m a player that enjoys playing in small but well organized guilds so i’m not strange to been zerged and the frustration that brings, and I admit that in the current day and age content creators and streamers have a little bit too much power when it comes to creating zergs and running people over. However in a world where battles matter because they change the actual state of the world you can say those who win battles have the power to control the state of the world. I just don’t believe a small group of people should have all the power just because they are good at PvP and so increasing the number of people should be a valid response when you can’t win by skill alone.

In my mind the winner of the battle should be the side with the best combination of 4 things:

Skill (PvP players)
Equipment (PvE players)
Organization (Party leaders and/or shot callers)
Numbers (Guild leaders and politician)

The first 3 are fairly common in most MMOs while the fourth “Numbers”, there is usually not much to do other than recruiting more people for your guild.

In Ashes though, there is Politics too, given the way the nodes system works and the fact that there is no fast travel, most guilds will have a base in one city and do activities around that city which means guilds will be competing for limited resources which in turn lead to frictions and battles, but also alliances when it makes sense. And so Guild leaders will do well by keeping good relationships with other guilds with common interests so in case a zerg comes by you have someone to ask for help.

As i said, i don’t believe a small group of people should have all the power just because they are good at PvP because that usually turns to tyranny real quick. Zergs or the potential for a zerg keeps cocky PvPers in place. For this same reason I don't believe castle or node sieges should be instanced or player capped, since that would remove the political factor (Numbers) out of sieges which doesn’t make any sense to me given that the only reason for sieges is actual politics.

We can have fair guild vs guild matches in a coliseum or something i will be the first to sign up for it, but sieges are not the place to define which guild is better at pvp, it's the place to find out which side is more influential and can convince more people their vision for the world is the best.

Now there is a point in which zergs become a problem, this point in my mind is when the difference in number is so big that the fight doesn’t make sense anymore, specially when their only intention is trolling. I’m not arguing zergs are never a problem what i’m saying i guess is forcing equal numbers in fights is not the solution and recruiting more people/guilds to your side should be a valid strategy.

I would love to hear what if people agree or not with this take and please don’t be too harsh on me this is my first post in this forum and English is not my first language

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Ludullu

Aszkalon wrote: »

But how will that be enforced Engine-wise, if i may ask ?

Instances.

Aszkalon wrote: »

Will there be a "Phasing", like in WoW ? Will there be an invisible Wall that prevents everyone else than the Attackers from coming close to the Node ?

Will the Attackers be the only Ones who can attack the Node Infrastructure,
the Node-NPC's - and Node-Citizens/Players ?

And what should prevent any other Player nearby then from just running to the Node and start trying to steal, plunder and murder (lol) while the Node-Citizens and Node-NPC's are busy trying to fend off the Attackers ?
Hence the Question with the invisible Wall and so on.

I'm talking about castle sieges, not node sieges. There has been no word about node sieges being instanced.

oOKingOo

I play solo PvP most of the time, but I totally agree that zergs should exist. Almost losing a battle just to get zerg reinforcements feels great for everybody involved, especially since there is no fast travel so timing is actually important. To me, this is part of organization and makes guild wars more interesting.

Mag7spy

oOHadesOo wrote: »

I play solo PvP most of the time, but I totally agree that zergs should exist. Almost losing a battle just to get zerg reinforcements feels great for everybody involved, especially since there is no fast travel so timing is actually important. To me, this is part of organization and makes guild wars more interesting.

I feel like you are not imagining something that is not going to happen game wise.

First off you mention "Feels great" for zerg reinforcements, as in feels great because you just win because you have a zerg? How about losing as zerg reinforcements coming to attack you as well on top of everyone else.

People make these points without saying anything to back it up even though the reality is you re asking to lose because you are just out numbered as a gameplay mechanic.

Next up "No fast travel" Why on earth do you think people are not going to be at a war because there is no fast travel??????

Like i feel people are looking at this from a casual perspective where they are hardly on the game and when they log on they can't make it to a fight. You know people can plan things ahead of time and make it wherever they need to go, the same way people are in discord chats planning things a hour before war with game plans.

If there is a war people need to go to they will make it there and spend time to get where they need to be.

Like to me this is just a naïve take trying to make a point people can't zerg because for some reason they won't plan ahead of time even though people do that in every other game?!?!?! This is the most easy part it just takes some time.

Though I'd rather make it easier for casuals to get where they want to get and not have "zerg" wars where you just out number people to win. Else you are advocating for hardcore guilds to have more advantage.

Aszkalon

NiKr wrote: »

I'm talking about castle sieges, not node sieges. There has been no word about node sieges being instanced.

Oh. Apologies for thinking of Nodes all the Time and not really saying it right away. ^.^;"

Mag7spy

Zerging was so bad in T&L they are doing a change to make it GvG with limited numbers lmfao. Mind you this is the L2 successor, gamers have changed since those days. Ways to organize is too easy for players and just furthers the zerg issue of content.

Mag7spy

@Depraved

Depraved

Mag7spy wrote: »

@Depraved

i still hate you hahahahaha

Depraved

Mag7spy wrote: »

Zerging was so bad in T&L they are doing a change to make it GvG with limited numbers lmfao. Mind you this is the L2 successor, gamers have changed since those days. Ways to organize is too easy for players and just furthers the zerg issue of content.

I have to say things were chaotic in this last test, but they felt better in the previous test and also in Korea.

if you are talking about the faction system coming up, I don't like it. you gonna end up with your friends in the other side of the conflict and you have to fight each other. also, cant do betrayals anymore

there were zergs in ragnarok and l2, but the PVP was different. people played in a party more. i suppose tnl players are players from bdo, gw2, eso and other solo mmorpg, so they arent used to true party gameplay.

nikr has posted videos of 1 party killing a guild in l2, that is possible in tl to an extent (you can beat the zergs), but it requires a different way of playing.

edit: a counter argument to zergs vs skills. for example in tnl, there are weapons who can beat you by doing this: 12345, that's it. so the skill factor is gone. you just faceroll your keyboard and get a kill, so if we gonna get rid of zergs in favor of skills, then every weapon should be very very complicated and hard to use, in favor of skill ;3

Mag7spy

Depraved wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

@Depraved

i still hate you hahahahaha

Its not my fault I'm good at games lmao, i keep telling people.

Mag7spy

Depraved wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Zerging was so bad in T&L they are doing a change to make it GvG with limited numbers lmfao. Mind you this is the L2 successor, gamers have changed since those days. Ways to organize is too easy for players and just furthers the zerg issue of content.

I have to say things were chaotic in this last test, but they felt better in the previous test and also in Korea.

if you are talking about the faction system coming up, I don't like it. you gonna end up with your friends in the other side of the conflict and you have to fight each other. also, cant do betrayals anymore

there were zergs in ragnarok and l2, but the PVP was different. people played in a party more. i suppose tnl players are players from bdo, gw2, eso and other solo mmorpg, so they arent used to true party gameplay.

nikr has posted videos of 1 party killing a guild in l2, that is possible in tl to an extent (you can beat the zergs), but it requires a different way of playing.

edit: a counter argument to zergs vs skills. for example in tnl, there are weapons who can beat you by doing this: 12345, that's it. so the skill factor is gone. you just faceroll your keyboard and get a kill, so if we gonna get rid of zergs in favor of skills, then every weapon should be very very complicated and hard to use, in favor of skill ;3

ITs tab with limited mobility so its not highly skilled it is more about build factor.

I'm talking about for the boonstones or whatever where you need to dec and its one guild vrs one guild. So the better build will end up winning than zerging it down so one side doesn't have a chance.

You should have first had experience with zergs for sure and know there was no way we were winning

. To most people that is going to turn them off from doing that kind of content cause they can'[t win unless they get more numbers or join a bigger guild. Now with this change for the other type of content they can't automatically win just cause they have more numbers.

Depraved

Mag7spy wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Zerging was so bad in T&L they are doing a change to make it GvG with limited numbers lmfao. Mind you this is the L2 successor, gamers have changed since those days. Ways to organize is too easy for players and just furthers the zerg issue of content.

I have to say things were chaotic in this last test, but they felt better in the previous test and also in Korea.

if you are talking about the faction system coming up, I don't like it. you gonna end up with your friends in the other side of the conflict and you have to fight each other. also, cant do betrayals anymore

there were zergs in ragnarok and l2, but the PVP was different. people played in a party more. i suppose tnl players are players from bdo, gw2, eso and other solo mmorpg, so they arent used to true party gameplay.

nikr has posted videos of 1 party killing a guild in l2, that is possible in tl to an extent (you can beat the zergs), but it requires a different way of playing.

edit: a counter argument to zergs vs skills. for example in tnl, there are weapons who can beat you by doing this: 12345, that's it. so the skill factor is gone. you just faceroll your keyboard and get a kill, so if we gonna get rid of zergs in favor of skills, then every weapon should be very very complicated and hard to use, in favor of skill ;3

ITs tab with limited mobility so its not highly skilled it is more about build factor.

I'm talking about for the boonstones or whatever where you need to dec and its one guild vrs one guild. So the better build will end up winning than zerging it down so one side doesn't have a chance.

You should have first had experience with zergs for sure and know there was no way we were winning . To most people that is going to turn them off from doing that kind of content cause they can'[t win unless they get more numbers or join a bigger guild. Now with this change for the other type of content they can't automatically win just cause they have more numbers.

well, we will see how the faction update plays out, but for sure numbers will be more even.

regarding being outnumbered, our allies now were my enemies a while back and we beat them when they were more than us xD

Depraved

Mag7spy wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

@Depraved

i still hate you hahahahaha

Its not my fault I'm good at games lmao, i keep telling people.

I DID SOMETHING DUMB AND ENDED UP RUNNING FOR 1 MINUTE WITHOUT KILLING MOBS HAHHAHAHA
and I was doing the event with a support build ugh >_>

Dygz

Zerging is a feature in T&L.
That's pretty much the entire point of that game.

Mag7spy

Dygz wrote: »

Zerging is a feature in T&L.
That's pretty much the entire point of that game.

Zerg was ruining the pvp scene, devs are making things less zerg since it was a general issue for content by making some fights gvg. Instead of letting people bring like 300 people to win, they have to win with their own guild now alone.

Pretty much there was nothing you could do to win against numbers in the game. And from my own experience it feels really bad since u just get Cc'd forever until you die.

*edit when im talking about zerging I'm talking about mega alliance and winning fights by having much more numbers.

Ie100 vs 200

Dygz

Zerging is winning fights by bringing excessive numbers.

Again, that is pretty much the entire point of T&L.
The devs just weren't prepared for the monster they created.

Mag7spy

Dygz wrote: »

Zerging is winning fights by bringing excessive numbers.

Again, that is pretty much the entire point of T&L.
The devs just weren't prepared for the monster they created.

That is why its good they are bringing it back will make it more competitive for more guilds, and the fight less of a mess. So me and some of my other members are happy about the change.

Aszkalon

So apparently the Number of People who can join in a " NODE Siege " as Defenders OR Attackers is not limited ... ...

... ... at least if i understood this right. Which i am not sure.
All i have seen in the "Video Compilation of Points addressed in 2024" is, that the Siege will NOT START before a certain Number of Attackers are done being enrolled in the Scroll.

But People can join the Attackers if the Node they attack is not allied with them or their own.

People can not join the Defenders when their "Allies" attack the Node.

I think this is the correct Version.

Dygz

I think the goal is for the number of participants to be unlimited.
Has to be tested to see if the devs can achieve that goal.

Aszkalon

Dygz wrote: »

I think the goal is for the number of participants to be unlimited.
Has to be tested to see if the devs can achieve that goal.

I am so bold and dare say,
i think the upper Limit would be probably +750 to +750 People, up to +1000 People against +1000 People.

But who knows what for Miracles Unreal Engine Five can cast, actually. And also, one Day there may as well come Unreal Engine Six and be an even bigger Monster of Awesomeness.

Mag7spy

Aszkalon wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

I think the goal is for the number of participants to be unlimited.
Has to be tested to see if the devs can achieve that goal.

I am so bold and dare say,
i think the upper Limit would be probably +750 to +750 People, up to +1000 People against +1000 People.

But who knows what for Miracles Unreal Engine Five can cast, actually. And also, one Day there may as well come Unreal Engine Six and be an even bigger Monster of Awesomeness.

More players isn't always better, you will get to the point where you need to have different kinds of content for it to make sense.

IE world boss vrs 1000 people is a utter mess with no mechanics and no actual coordination is going to happen.

More numbers does not make a game better. 1000 people fighting in a tiny area would also feel like garbage.

Child Item