Disarray (Zerg Debuff)

    • Captainrussia wrote:

      Guilefulwolf wrote:

      Gank wrote:

      What do you mean expected a fix for today lmao? I expected three million yen to fall into my pocket today but it didn't happen, what are they waiting for?
      Did u miss the word "debuff" or u just dont leanr to read properly yet?
      does "debuff" in your language = "today"?
      Why is this forum full of clowns trying to make the funniest comments. I cant be clearer when i say that many of us expected a patch in the game to fix/change/implement the new zerg debuff system.
    • Guilefulwolf wrote:

      Captainrussia wrote:

      Guilefulwolf wrote:

      Gank wrote:

      What do you mean expected a fix for today lmao? I expected three million yen to fall into my pocket today but it didn't happen, what are they waiting for?
      Did u miss the word "debuff" or u just dont leanr to read properly yet?
      does "debuff" in your language = "today"?
      Why is this forum full of clowns trying to make the funniest comments. I cant be clearer when i say that many of us expected a patch in the game to fix/change/implement the new zerg debuff system.
      We understood that. We just didn't understand why you believed it was today.

      It makes more sense to think it will come live on the next reset, considering there is no determined date for it and there really isn't a determined week day in which patches are applied.
    • The ZvZ content is one of the things that makes Albion different to any other mmorpg. I've been playing pvp mmorpgs for 20 years since UO, there are tons of massive pvp games in these days...TESO, GW2, their content can be spectacular to watch but it's nothing comparing with AO, also our combat experience is 100 times better with the strategy and tactical movements. Those games are unorganized if u compare them with AO. AO zvz can be a mix between mmorpg and a strategy game like Total war...but this only could happens if the performance is optimum and when the battle is between 100 players or so.
    • Actually there are not MMORPG as Albion because of the isometric view and full loot pvp ( (only a few but quality is so much less compared to Albion).
      I like Albion a lot so of course we want the focus of the game not only on zvz pvp but also an at least equally game quality experience also for solo and small group ( less than 5) of gankers, so stop nerfing and start buffing stuff for solo and small group. And, by the way, I am not asking nothing incredible: this is in the Albion homepage screen where is told about the experience you will have regardless any career you will do, so i am asking just for what I am paying with real money every month, it's my right to have a nice game time as people who do zvz and similar.
      If this is not not true homepage has to be changed in a message that talks about a great game experience only if you are in a huge alliance and love zerg focused pvp.

      The post was edited 5 times, last by hypnoticshadow ().

    • Robinhoodrs wrote:

      Whin wrote:

      Haven't you forgotten a zero in each damage %?

      This numbers look ridiculous for me, the objective of that is to make the new zvz mechanics more even. If we go 25 guys, and you go 50 only losing 9% of the dmg... doesn't fix anything.

      Imagine a real scenario... you have to fight for a territory or something... you bring 25? or 50? I go 50 for sure, i don't care about losing 9% of the dmg, even 60 o 70, i don't care at all with those numbers.
      Yes it does, it's actually huge.
      Just look at City Plot GvG's, owner gets a 5% buff and that's only in a 5v5 and they're at a massive advantage over the other team.
      Nope a 9% debuff when you have 50 ppl vs 25 is RIDICULOUS and won't change the outcome of a fight. Debuff should be more drastic at first (low numbers) then progress slightly slower with big numbers.

      70 vs 25 and you only get 10% def debuff and 11% dmg debuff. R O F L
      /Arghun [SMM]
    • Arghun wrote:

      Robinhoodrs wrote:

      Whin wrote:

      Haven't you forgotten a zero in each damage %?

      This numbers look ridiculous for me, the objective of that is to make the new zvz mechanics more even. If we go 25 guys, and you go 50 only losing 9% of the dmg... doesn't fix anything.

      Imagine a real scenario... you have to fight for a territory or something... you bring 25? or 50? I go 50 for sure, i don't care about losing 9% of the dmg, even 60 o 70, i don't care at all with those numbers.
      Yes it does, it's actually huge.Just look at City Plot GvG's, owner gets a 5% buff and that's only in a 5v5 and they're at a massive advantage over the other team.
      Nope a 9% debuff when you have 50 ppl vs 25 is RIDICULOUS and won't change the outcome of a fight. Debuff should be more drastic at first (low numbers) then progress slightly slower with big numbers.
      70 vs 25 and you only get 10% def debuff and 11% dmg debuff. R O F L
      I don think developers aim to give different zergs size an equal chance of winning but to avoid the bigger zergs overwhelming the smaller ones.

      Let me explain this clearer; Currently in a 100 vs 50 battle of equally skilled players with the same IP, the whole 50 man zerg would die and would only manage to kill 10-15 of the other team. The target is the 50 man zerg being able to kill ~50 of the other team and not to have 1:1 winning odds.
    • Guilefulwolf wrote:

      Arghun wrote:

      Robinhoodrs wrote:

      Whin wrote:

      Haven't you forgotten a zero in each damage %?

      This numbers look ridiculous for me, the objective of that is to make the new zvz mechanics more even. If we go 25 guys, and you go 50 only losing 9% of the dmg... doesn't fix anything.

      Imagine a real scenario... you have to fight for a territory or something... you bring 25? or 50? I go 50 for sure, i don't care about losing 9% of the dmg, even 60 o 70, i don't care at all with those numbers.
      Yes it does, it's actually huge.Just look at City Plot GvG's, owner gets a 5% buff and that's only in a 5v5 and they're at a massive advantage over the other team.
      Nope a 9% debuff when you have 50 ppl vs 25 is RIDICULOUS and won't change the outcome of a fight. Debuff should be more drastic at first (low numbers) then progress slightly slower with big numbers.70 vs 25 and you only get 10% def debuff and 11% dmg debuff. R O F L
      I don think developers aim to give different zergs size an equal chance of winning but to avoid the bigger zergs overwhelming the smaller ones.
      Let me explain this clearer; Currently in a 100 vs 50 battle of equally skilled players with the same IP, the whole 50 man zerg would die and would only manage to kill 10-15 of the other team. The target is the 50 man zerg being able to kill ~50 of the other team and not to have 1:1 winning odds.
      When do you ever have large ZVZs of equally skilled/geared/speccd players?
    • GluttonySDS wrote:

      Guilefulwolf wrote:

      Arghun wrote:

      Robinhoodrs wrote:


      Whin wrote:

      Haven't you forgotten a zero in each damage %?

      This numbers look ridiculous for me, the objective of that is to make the new zvz mechanics more even. If we go 25 guys, and you go 50 only losing 9% of the dmg... doesn't fix anything.

      Imagine a real scenario... you have to fight for a territory or something... you bring 25? or 50? I go 50 for sure, i don't care about losing 9% of the dmg, even 60 o 70, i don't care at all with those numbers.
      Yes it does, it's actually huge.Just look at City Plot GvG's, owner gets a 5% buff and that's only in a 5v5 and they're at a massive advantage over the other team.
      Nope a 9% debuff when you have 50 ppl vs 25 is RIDICULOUS and won't change the outcome of a fight. Debuff should be more drastic at first (low numbers) then progress slightly slower with big numbers.70 vs 25 and you only get 10% def debuff and 11% dmg debuff. R O F L
      I don think developers aim to give different zergs size an equal chance of winning but to avoid the bigger zergs overwhelming the smaller ones.Let me explain this clearer; Currently in a 100 vs 50 battle of equally skilled players with the same IP, the whole 50 man zerg would die and would only manage to kill 10-15 of the other team. The target is the 50 man zerg being able to kill ~50 of the other team and not to have 1:1 winning odds.
      When do you ever have large ZVZs of equally skilled/geared/speccd players?
      As Eternal says almost never. But if u want to test the behavior of something u must take the other variable off. In this case those are the most relevant variables, the IP and the players´ skill. In real situaions everything together (players skills´, the IP, the terrain position, bandwidth ping, PC FPS´s etc) will determine the outcome of battles but thats not related to the zerg debuff system.
    • gmatagmis wrote:

      Arghun wrote:

      70 vs 25 and you only get 10% def debuff and 11% dmg debuff. R O F L
      Fuck no. 11% is not a rofl. It's fkin difference between T8.0 and T8.2.So when you facing 70 with 25, it's like SBI gives you few hundreds millions silver for you gear in current fight.
      I haven't tried to engage in a 25 vs 70 but I'm pretty sure no matter how good the shotcaller is in the 25 men group they don't stand a chance vs the same quality shotcaller who has 70 men and can flank on two sides while pushing frontal
      /Arghun [SMM]