Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
scribbles

Combat... 1 vs 1 or Zerg vs Zerg?

Recommended Posts

How much of MEANINGFUL combat do you all envision being on a 1v1 basis?

 

Every game I have played where landmark objectives were the common goal the typical flow of combat would be a zerg moving from one landmark to the next, followed by another zerg moving behind them doing the same.  Every now and then the zergs would meet up, one would fall, but a regroup would happen and the vicious cycle would repeat itself.  

 

How will Crowfall prevent this, or will this be the modus operandi for campaigns?

 

Also, in b4lawlPaxisaZergguildLawl.


[@--(o.O)@]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zergs will be more prevalent in the outer ring campaigns. It is unavoidable in faction type teams. The closer to the hunger though, the less likely zergs even CAN happen which is a good thing.

 

As far as Zergs being effective, I have seen small bands within zergs that make the difference in Z v Z, using the chaos of mass bodies to reek havoc on the opposing zerg. A little coordination and strategy can change the tide pretty quick.

 

Hopefully we do see the mechanics work in favor of limiting Zergs in the inner rings, and it hopefully is moot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully we will have a variety of combat opportunities. I am more afraid of the 1v1 dueling bs than gvg. The faction rule sets may set up more of the zvz stuff, but with 3 or 12 factions, hopefully that will make it more interesting.


CF_Hap.png

SCOTLAND!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By not having landmarks being taken that easy and designing them to not just change hands.

Do you envision folks taking a keep, building it's defenses, and then sitting around defending it in the off chance someone wants to take it?  As combat thirsty most of the folks I have seen are I don't see the community having that kind of patience.  The only possible solution would be some sort of bane system.


[@--(o.O)@]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you envision folks taking a keep, building it's defenses, and then sitting around defending it in the off chance someone wants to take it?  As combat thirsty most of the folks I have seen are I don't see the community having that kind of patience.  The only possible solution would be some sort of bane system.

Yep to the last part

 

Nope to the first part.

 

I do not expect people to gather resources, build up their infrastructure and then lose it in a 10 min zerg.


 

This game looks like a larger scale version of marvel heroes so far with forts.  - nephiral marts 7 2015

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crowfall already has systems in place that reduce the efficiency of zergs a lot. Naming them below in the order I feel is most relevant.

 

 - Collision detection: when you can't simply run through your friends nor the enemy, positioning matters. A couple people in your team that don't know how to move in groups will hold you back, make it so other members have to go around them etc. If you break a wall or go through any choking point the group has to come in slowly, making it easy for the enemies to AoE them down one by one. You cannot build balls of players on top of each other breaking everything with colision.

- Friendly Fire:  Similar to colision, if players group in a disorganized massive group (which is what a zerg is) they will kill each other. The bigger your group is the harder it is to avoid FF. This also discourages people grouping up in large balls of death and actually splitting their groups into smaller masses of 15 or so, even when they have a lot of people. Fighting in the same place with 30+ people with colision and FF should be hard.

- No "fire hose healer": Zergs are vulnerable to enemy AoE damage, because they are grouped up and too many. So they tend to rely on healers spaming AoE heals and topping people off, because of the mess a zerg is players barely see enemy AoEs on the ground and just kinda roll through everything. That will get them killed in Crowfall because there are no dedicated healers topping them off with big casts. Avoiding damage will be important in crowfall and zergs are terrible at doing it.

- FFA and GvG settings: Needless to say, in campaigns with those rule settings like the Dregs and Shadows we will not see much zerging, simply because groups will be guild based. You might get 3-4 guilds playing together at one given time, but changes are they will split up to attack different fronts in an organized way (see problems with massive groups above).

 

Overall, I am very hopeful that zerging in crowfall will just be a bad strategy.

--------------------

 

As for 1v1 combat, I think support classes and crafters might have a hard time with those, simply because of their focus. Crafters are not very oriented to combat, people will pick up crafting disciplines and be less efficient in combat. Support roles are more group oriented and while they shine in groups buffing others, preventing damage and providing utility they might not have the damage or survivability of a pure combat speced player. Other than those two roles, I believe it will come down to player skill and specific situations (who got the jump first, line of sight, terrain and overall archetype weaknesses).


KjUVOZg.png


Guild Leader/ High Elder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one thing I ask for in an action oriented combat system is a lock on system so we can actually duel each other or focus on a target.  Otherwise, it turns into a game of swinging our swords wildly in the air and hoping we run into each others attack cones in some sort of diabolical jousting match that everyone is participating in.  Legend of Zelda: Windwaker is able to do it just fine while still having aoe attacks and projectiles that can be dodged so why can't an MMO?

Edited by Colt47

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The possibility of zergs will depend heavily on the skills that are available to the support classes, if there are lots of wide area of affect shields or other damage mitigation and the availability of large aoe spells for the dps classes. The balance between the mitigation and the damage output will decide if zergs can work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 - Collision detection: when you can't simply run through your friends nor the enemy, positioning matters. A couple people in your team that don't know how to move in groups will hold you back, make it so other members have to go around them etc. If you break a wall or go through any choking point the group has to come in slowly, making it easy for the enemies to AoE them down one by one. You cannot build balls of players on top of each other breaking everything with colision.

- Friendly Fire:  Similar to colision, if players group in a disorganized massive group (which is what a zerg is) they will kill each other. The bigger your group is the harder it is to avoid FF. This also discourages people grouping up in large balls of death and actually splitting their groups into smaller masses of 15 or so, even when they have a lot of people. Fighting in the same place with 30+ people with colision and FF should be hard.

- No "fire hose healer": Zergs are vulnerable to enemy AoE damage, because they are grouped up and too many. So they tend to rely on healers spaming AoE heals and topping people off, because of the mess a zerg is players barely see enemy AoEs on the ground and just kinda roll through everything. That will get them killed in Crowfall because there are no dedicated healers topping them off with big casts. Avoiding damage will be important in crowfall and zergs are terrible at doing it.

- FFA and GvG settings: Needless to say, in campaigns with those rule settings like the Dregs and Shadows we will not see much zerging, simply because groups will be guild based. You might get 3-4 guilds playing together at one given time, but changes are they will split up to attack different fronts in an organized way (see problems with massive groups above).

 

Collision: 1v5 will lose, and I'm sure 5 people can get around a target (and that single target may actually jump over all 5 of them, who knows) so to me this does not prevent zerging at all (as those 5 will still chase you)

Friendly Fire: This helps thin a zerg, but not much. Again let's do some simple maths: 5 people crowd around 1 guy, they all activate a skill that hits a person adjacent to them. 5x damage done to one player, 2x damage done to yourself. Assuming every player can take 3-5 hits, zerging was not prevented in this scenario.

Lack of Healer: A healer doesn't create a zerg. (See GW2 for reference). So a lack of a healer doesn't break a zerg.

FFA and GvG settings: This implies that there will not be big giant zerg guilds already xP

 

In the end, I respect the possibilties you've pointed out, but I don't think they make or break a zerg really. And it's because in most games it's always easier to just have multiple people hit one person. Collision and friendly fire are discouraging it, but not actually breaking it. We'll have to see how they balance it out ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot is really going to depend on how painful dying really is.  If it's just something you can shrug off then people are going to be constantly zerging the other peoples fortifications (sort of like Planetside is)

 

If dying is a big deal I think we're going to end of seeing people more cautious of combat with a lot more smaller skirmishes as people are hunting resources to build up to less frequent but larger pushes on fortified positions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot is really going to depend on how painful dying really is. If it's just something you can shrug off then people are going to be constantly zerging the other peoples fortifications (sort of like Planetside is)

 

If dying is a big deal I think we're going to end of seeing people more cautious of combat with a lot more smaller skirmishes as people are hunting resources to build up to less frequent but larger pushes on fortified positions.

This doesn't prevent Eve players from zerging the biggest zergs in history.

 

Numbers will alway be advantageous for a single battle. So break up the battles such that they happen simultaneously but in different locations. Spread out the objectives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My concern isn't necessarily will there be zerg v zerg (there will be), it's at what scale the devs are going to choose to balance damage, health and healing/support.

 

If they balance it around small scale battles, then the zerg v zerg is going to be a mess and if they balance it around zerg v zerg, then small scale battles will be a mess.

 

If they can solve this, then they will be heroes.


kuZFoIM.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This doesn't prevent Eve players from zerging the biggest zergs in history.

 

Yes, however those are big battles that have been planned and prepared for.  There's not just some big zerg traveling around 24/7 killing everything in their path. It's a more focused application of force.  

 

Fact is, there's no good way to nullify the advantage outnumbering your enemy gives, nor do I think should their be.  

 

Don't get me wrong, having multiple objectives can be really fun, but when it comes to a 100 vs 10 battle, if you make 10 objectives your just splitting it up into ten 10 v 1 battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Collision: 1v5 will lose, and I'm sure 5 people can get around a target (and that single target may actually jump over all 5 of them, who knows) so to me this does not prevent zerging at all (as those 5 will still chase you)

Friendly Fire: This helps thin a zerg, but not much. Again let's do some simple maths: 5 people crowd around 1 guy, they all activate a skill that hits a person adjacent to them. 5x damage done to one player, 2x damage done to yourself. Assuming every player can take 3-5 hits, zerging was not prevented in this scenario.

Lack of Healer: A healer doesn't create a zerg. (See GW2 for reference). So a lack of a healer doesn't break a zerg.

FFA and GvG settings: This implies that there will not be big giant zerg guilds already xP

 

In the end, I respect the possibilties you've pointed out, but I don't think they make or break a zerg really. And it's because in most games it's always easier to just have multiple people hit one person. Collision and friendly fire are discouraging it, but not actually breaking it. We'll have to see how they balance it out ^_^

Discouraging zergs and making them frustrating against other organized groups is all you need. This scenario of "5 v 1" is a bad example. Yes, 5 people v 1 will win, it's easy to see that in an isolated situation. Now think 50 v 20, with 50 being the zerg and 20 being an organized group on Voice Chat. With friendly fire and collision the 20 have a chance. How longer do you think people will zerg if they keep losing to smaller groups that are more organized. I don't think it will last. In groups of 25 people I have wiped 60+ n ESO where there is no colision and no FF, simply with proper positioning and strategy. Anyone who plays in an organized guild knows that zergs are easy to wipe if the game has features that support it and proper skill balance.

Edited by LGAllastair

KjUVOZg.png


Guild Leader/ High Elder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it that it's always the people with fewer numbers that are the only ones being organized?

 

I don't understand these examples.

 

"Yes, but if a group of 20 meets a group of 50 and the group of 20 all have weapons and armor, then they would beat the naked group of 50"

 

Well, yeah. Maybe


 

This game looks like a larger scale version of marvel heroes so far with forts.  - nephiral marts 7 2015

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you envision folks taking a keep, building it's defenses, and then sitting around defending it in the off chance someone wants to take it?  As combat thirsty most of the folks I have seen are I don't see the community having that kind of patience.  The only possible solution would be some sort of bane system.

Pretty sure the point is to HOLD territory to win the Campaign. There are obviously other mechanics in play but the overall emphasis will be on holding territory. In past games the Capture was the most rewarding part so that why you saw keep flipping. But if the path to winning a Campaign is holding territory then you won't see such behavior or at least very minimal.

Edited by pang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, however those are big battles that have been planned and prepared for.  There's not just some big zerg traveling around 24/7 killing everything in their path. It's a more focused application of force.  

 

Fact is, there's no good way to nullify the advantage outnumbering your enemy gives, nor do I think should their be.  

 

Don't get me wrong, having multiple objectives can be really fun, but when it comes to a 100 vs 10 battle, if you make 10 objectives your just splitting it up into ten 10 v 1 battles.

 

Eve has many large, aimless, and sometimes open-to-the-public PvP roams. They aren't traveling around 24/7, but they do kill everything they come across until a bigger fleet shows up.

 

And those large "planned" battles are often not planned: they are a series of escalation attempts by both sides until someone runs out of super capitals. Basically giant games of chicken.

Edited by motstandet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...