Guild Wars 2

Zerging isnt a new phenominon but it also isnt that old in the world of MMO’s.

In the real world, armies use to Zerg.

They would line up across from each other and just open fire and whoever had more people won. Or they would roam in large warbands and decimate any smaller force they encountered unprepared.

This all stopped the first time the smaller force said, “You know what, lining up is stupid. Roaming about till we encounter someone with more numbers than us is stupid”

Then they made ambushes. They hid in trees, held choke points, and decimated larger forces with a small organized band.

And it worked because when you shot someone with a bow/rifle, or stuck them with a sword/bayonet, it was over.

They didnt slow down for 15 seconds. They didnt rush back to the battle because their spawn point was close.

Till the nature of injuries in MMO change, the zerg will always be, because it is the best way to win once more.

A number of people enjoy the zerg. And more importantly, many people hate more realistic combat, saying it is not fun.

So till you are ready to accept realistic injuries, zerging will continue, its just the nature of the beast.

Zerging can mean quite a few things but the most common use of it I’ve seen is to describe the situation where one side simply outnumbered another. This is hardly a problem.

Every time you see someone complaining about a zerg replace it with some variation of outnumbered and see how silly the complaint is. I mean seriously, who goes into a fight willingly with fewer people? And no, the Clans from BattleTech don’t count!

The ironic thing is that the term zerg in this context was not originally meant to be derogatory, it was a legitimate tactic. These days its just an excuse for losing.

But if it was “real life” and you had a small party of 10 on cliffsides above a group of 100 and your small party had element of surprise and ranged weapons, when you hit people, they would not keep coming.

They would go down, and now its 10 v 90. And those 90 have to go over or around the 10 of their buddies down. And the second volley looses, etc. And that assuming no AoE weapons like machine guns or mortor/grenades.

When you implement a system that support mass groups because it takes so long to take someone out WITHOUT a mass group, then you support the zerg and all the tactics that come with it.

People do not want pvp fights to be over in 5 seconds when it is 1v1, so we get this insane mechanics where mortal blows are not mortal blows, and fights last 30 seconds or more. With the zerg, they still mow you down in 5 seconds, but you cannot take out even 1 member of the zerg in the same time.

It makes your life pointless.

In case you’re saying that this game should be made over into a medieval version of ArmA – don’t. Real warfare sucks – you get shot to the chest, get blood in your lungs and then lay in the hospital for a month or two before getting conscripted into an other suicide mission like WW2’s Normandy. This is supposed to be a game, not a simulation, but if you want it to be one – just stop playing after you see any number of damage dealt to your character and come back a few weeks later for an other try.

Zerg is not the best way to win tho :/ atleast not uncontrolled zergs where they just run into walls without even a ram :/

One side will always outnumber the other.

One side probably will outnumber the other, but tactics and self sacrifice are made meaningless by the health mechanics in play in modern MMO.

Look how popular BF3 is. You get shot in it, you dont just keep going. A small squad can easily take out an entire platoon with tactics, ambush, mortor/grenades and air support.

In our modern MMOs, if a small squad (say 5-10 people) attack a 40 person zerg, all that will happen is the zerg turns to engage the squad because even with 100% surprise and best tactics, the zerg is at most down 1-2 people if the 10 focus fired em down.

This is what people have asked for, so it must be what they want, but it does support and encourage the zerg mentality and mechanic.

Just saying other forms of gaming combat has been shown to be popular and fun as well.

Zerging will continue until….. AoE player caps are removed :-)

The thing about the zerging complaints is that is such an incredibly sliding scale. I’ve seen things like “my team of 5 was zerged by 15” and “my team of 30 was zerged by 50”. So what is this magic number that indicates a) its a zerg rather than just more people, and b) its bad.

Its not like teams really plan on how many people they will take to a battle, or that they even know how many enemies they will face. They take what they have and face what they find. If one team outnumbers the other then thats just the way the cookie crumbles. Its not an indication of lack of skill or anything of the like.

As for WvWvW, it encourages map-wide strategy. If you bum-rush one point with everything you have then you’ll probably take it….and lose everything else. The individual battles in WvWvW are unimportant.

I’ve seen many occasions where a smaller group can defeat or chase off a larger one. An unorganised zerg group breaks pretty easily once a few start to die and it isn’t long before they start running.

The Romans were always outnumbered by the Celts – they didn’t resort hit and run, guerrilla style tactics, they were extremely organized, and tenacious. Organization, discipline, and good tactics will beat an uncontrolled mob 9 times out of 10

But an organized zerg vs and organized, ambush placed, artillary support, small unit, the small unit will lose under our current mechanics.

I am not saying things need to change, just that this is the reason that zergs work so well, and hence, why they will keep occuring.

I’m getting so tired of people crying zerg.

Not only is it a problem because it has such an ambiguous definition, but it’s a problem because it’s the first excuse players look for when they get stomped.

If we’re referring to a large group of players moving en masse, I’ve been a part of the zerg- — and so have you. If we’re refering to being a part of one force larger than the other (no matter by how much!) I’m sure we’ve all been referred to as being part of something called “a zerg”.

At the moment, every server seems to have different periods of activity. This will continue to change. Keep in mind the game is still VERY new. That said, every server has it’s own zergs that crop up from time to time.

But please…just stop. Stop crying like little babies about ZERG’s every time you’re outnumbered. Because chances are, your server has a queue and for a majority of the time you have the opportunity to organize the numbers in the best way possible to deal with the challenges your server’s facing.

If you’re outnumbered, organize a group that can handle it. Whether that means finding equal numbers or setting up siege in a choke point, that’s the way the game is meant to be played. Not this passive, lazy crybaby kitten.

Also…the following is 100% NOT true. I’ve seen guilds with 10-15 members hold off groups of around 30 at supply camps, just with carefully placed siege.

Archaeneoso.8461:

But an organized zerg vs and organized, ambush placed, artillary support, small unit, the small unit will lose under our current mechanics.

I am not saying things need to change, just that this is the reason that zergs work so well, and hence, why they will keep occuring.

[Edit]

oops, just reread your original comment. Thought you meant unorganized zerg, versus small organized group with siege. I agree with you somewhat, but that’s just thew ay it is.

Larger Unorganized zerg versus small organized group — it could go either way, my money’s on the organized group

Large organized group versus small organized group — it all comes down to skill, but the odds are in the favor of the numbers

Ummm where did you take history? Wars were fought in line formations with varying tactics until a certain invention made this impractical, not ambushes or choke points. For those of you interested this was the invention of the machine gun. It took several decades after the initial invention to be come a practical battlefield weapon but once it was made effective it completely changed the way people fought.

So unless your suggestion is to add machine guns to WvWvW, There will be paving packs. Having said that, I think we are already starting to see the impact of well used siege weapons hold off far superior numbers or being able to assault a keep without even being near the doors.
Frankly myself and I’m certain a great number of others have already scoured the map for proper treb placements and counter placements of Mortars. This Hasn’t escaped you has it? I know, I know, I’m a pompuskitten and you shouldn’t listen to a word I say. Take care guy.

Hux.8739:

Ummm where did you take history? Wars were fought in line formations with varying tactics until a certain invention made this impractical, not ambushes or choke points. For those of you interested this was the invention of the machine gun. It took several decades after the initial invention to be come a practical battlefield weapon but once it was made effective it completely changed the way people fought.

So unless your suggestion is to add machine guns to WvWvW, There will be paving packs. Having said that, I think we are already starting to see the impact of well used siege weapons hold off far superior numbers or being able to assault a keep without even being near the doors.
Frankly myself and I’m certain a great number of others have already scoured the map for proper treb placements and counter placements of Mortars. This Hasn’t escaped you has it? I know, I know, I’m a pompuskitten and you shouldn’t listen to a word I say. Take care guy.

Oh man, I am all for giving Engineers a Vickers machine gun!!

We have ballistas, who needs a machine gun? Plant 4 ballistas on a choke point and see 50 man zerg die in 50 seconds.

Archaeneoso.8461:

But an organized zerg vs and organized, ambush placed, artillary support, small unit, the small unit will lose under our current mechanics.

I am not saying things need to change, just that this is the reason that zergs work so well, and hence, why they will keep occuring.

You first need to properly define the term zerg first. That word, along with other words that are used way, way, way too often in PvP discussions, have lost all meaning, becoming cliches that people yell without thinking. Zerg. Skill. Fairness. Unbalanced. Organization. If you don’t present the context, those terms have no meaning.

I have known groups of 10 people continue to hold off a group of 25 players, because they formed a pincer formation and forced the enemy to attack with groups of 8 or less.

I have seen a group of 16 people split into two groups of 8 to fight a group of 12, meeting in the middle and forcing the enemy to fight a two-front battle.

I have seen lone scouts following enemy guerrilla forces, guiding a response team to intercept their location.

I have seen pairs of players acting a lures to drag a group of enemies across the shores into the range of artillery and reinforcements.

I have seen players trying to divide an assault group through the middle, only to realize their mistake as the group parted aside, then came back together into one group, obliterating any poor soul caught in between.

I have seen battles won simply because a group attacked by utilizing as many combos (fields+finishers) as possible to force the enemy to scatter, and then bunker and hold their positions.

It is too easy to lop a team’s composition, formation, movement, skill usage, and planning into a couple of loose terms. Don’t do it. Discussions and complaints about any group of players should involve proper evaluation of the events taken place in each battle. Discussions fuelled by gut reactions are never productive, and form the worst kind of threads: ones where nobody learns anything.

Since when is zerging the best way to win? Id rather take 100-150 out with a 12-20 man group and a few mesmers.

tehehehehe