Zerging is too profitable.

Zerging is too profitable.

in WvW

Posted by: Zenith.7301

Zenith.7301

This game needs some serious antizerg mechanisms. Most servers just runs scouts and then 2 or 3 giant blogs of 40+ people around a map. Either travel times through a map need to be decreased so smaller groups can do something without scouts summoning zergs in a a few minutes, or implement server mechanisms that introduce counters to zerging either by summoning more Siegerazer’s with their group boons and buubles/extra sieges and such.

AoE with these large zergs is also quite a problem. The combined aoe and cleaving on walls and at doors gets too much — you can’t repair doors because aoe spells are rained on it. It just seems that past a certain point of zerg numbers, your only alternative is to bring a similarly large zerg.

The server should detect smaller groups defending or assaulting and grant them reduced build costs on sieges so they build faster and give their sieges improved effects like more sturdiness and damage. The buffs scale so if more numbers join the buffs are phased out.

You should think of making lords and guards scale and have mechanics like the harder guild bounty targets to give zergs a harder time and consider splitting up.

Zerging is too profitable.

in WvW

Posted by: ionix.9054

ionix.9054

You have to understand that game companies want zergs because most customers are very casual and they will only ever run in zergs. They have never had any other experience and the art of small roaming gaming is dead and has been since sometime pre-2010. There is only a small niche of people that don’t want zergs. Just because you see 100 dedicated gamers post about anti-zerging on the forums doesn’t mean squat. I bet you at least 75% of people playing don’t even know these forums exist. Most paying customers want:

1) Blue team red team halo matches that this game calls PvP. (you know, like they can get on their xBox)

2) PvE scripted encounters (you know, like they can get on their xBox)

3) Fluff gear (thank you world of warcraft)

4) Ability to get everything EASILY (thank you world of warcraft)

5) To not get smoked in WvWvW. They hump a zerg. I bet you most players that play this game dont even play WvWvW. And out of the ones that do, think about how many people you see trying to roam. THEN look at the zerg! That ratio should describe how many players want to zerg and how many dont!

I dunno I guess ANET got to get paid too, ya know

Zerging is too profitable.

in WvW

Posted by: Draxis.6872

Draxis.6872

You can’t penalize people for being in a larger group, its counter to the design philosophy. You also can’t outright give smaller groups bonuses to be stronger against a larger force; its simply unfair. If i have 20 people and you have 5, you should not beat us unless you are godly.

However, I do think a nice subtle way to help promote small groups without bashing on zergs would be to make groups of a certain size (maybe 30?) visible on the map to opponents. When too many people congregate in the area, the enemy would be able to see the large groups and either rally against them or easily avoid them, and would promote the smaller groups which could move around somewhat undetected. At the same time, this wouldn’t be taking any raw power away from the larger armies. Just an idea, what do you think?

Zerging is too profitable.

in WvW

Posted by: Thrumdi.9216

Thrumdi.9216

You can’t penalize people for being in a larger group, its counter to the design philosophy. You also can’t outright give smaller groups bonuses to be stronger against a larger force; its simply unfair. If i have 20 people and you have 5, you should not beat us unless you are godly.

However, I do think a nice subtle way to help promote small groups without bashing on zergs would be to make groups of a certain size (maybe 30?) visible on the map to opponents. When too many people congregate in the area, the enemy would be able to see the large groups and either rally against them or easily avoid them, and would promote the smaller groups which could move around somewhat undetected. At the same time, this wouldn’t be taking any raw power away from the larger armies. Just an idea, what do you think?

A better way might be to make “Zerg Tracking” a WvW ability.

When equipped it allows you to ping the map with the location of any 20+ group of people (provided you have line of sight or proximity).

Thrumdi, Captain of The Tarnished Coastguard

The ultimate GW2 troll.

Zerging is too profitable.

in WvW

Posted by: Fiorrello.8126

Fiorrello.8126

you don’t get any experience or karma for buying and sitting to make sure that upgrades go though

but if you are part of a zerg going around flipping things then you gain money, karma, experience and now WvW exp.

i’ve actually had people yell at me for upgrading things, because it makes it slower for it to get flipped and therefore cuts into their farming.

i’ve stopped calling it a zerg, because they aren’t zerging any more. they are farming.

Zerging is too profitable.

in WvW

Posted by: Entropy.4732

Entropy.4732

I do think there should be simple rewards for smaller groups. Like, the less people you flip a camp with, the better loot is dropped. Something simple like that. There should be better rewards for upgrading keeps too.

C

Styx Hemlock – Sylvari Mesmer – TFG – NSP

Zerging is too profitable.

in WvW

Posted by: morrolan.9608

morrolan.9608

You have to understand that game companies want zergs

Yet the change to orange swords was to discourage large zergs. It hasn’t of course but thats because anet rarely think through the actual player behaviour.

Jade Quarry [SoX]
Miranda Zero – Ele / Twitch Zero – Mes / Chargrin Soulboom – Engi
Aliera Zero – Guardian / Reaver Zero – Necro