Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Mentality of DFUW Zergs when it comes to PvP and sieging

Aragon100Aragon100 OsloPosts: 2,224Member Uncommon

You can take pretty much all clans on EU, with a few exceptions, and you find this kind of behaviour. Guilds zerg up and sit inside their zaptower cities looking at each other. Doing just about nothing that would add some flavor to PvP and add some fun ingame.

And god forbid if anyone break this "safezone" gameplay and siege during primetime hours! Then the zergs get together and with pure numbers set the agenda of continuing this safezone gameplay.

A good example is Pandora that lost their city in a prime time siege (standard for EU is off-hour sieges) even though they were 2:1 up against The Blackhand Order and Liandrii (2 guilds that actually have some balls). Pandora then resieged after getting SUN and KDS together with Friendly Fire, Red Army to join them to get a whopping 6:1 advantage. 

That could some call politics but i call it pure lameness and a game where numbers mean just about everything and player skill mean very little. 

This kind of behavior tell us alot about the "safezone" mentality that even the self-preclaimed "hardcore" guilds practice when it comes to reality. Talking big wont change this.

Some could claim game is boring cause there is so little content, which it is, but why then Zerg jump the clans that try to bring some fun to the game?

Here is a thread that describe the lameness of DFUW EU sieges pretty well -

https://forums.darkfallonline.com/showthread.php?371490-SUN-KDS-Pandora-Friendly-Fire-Red-Army-bring-133-to-the-gates-of-Erinthel

And here we have 2 good examples of what type of PvP these Zergs (Lux Arcana and SUN in this case) prefer, they call it events inside their city limit where they all are binded and with full access to guildbanks for fast reequipping, just amazing -

https://forums.darkfallonline.com/showthread.php?372422-MarShral-Red-Wedding-event-Saturday-8-6

https://forums.darkfallonline.com/showthread.php?372440-Server-PvP-event-question-who-would-turn-up

Why not take a hundred of your guild/alliance mates out of your zap tower cities and actually do something? Or would it be to few?

 

Edit - 3 biggest zergs on EU had a protection pact. Been revealed after Zerg Mercs recently imploded.

SUN (huge carebear guild), Zerg Mercs (added anyone that wanted to join) and Celiahs.

It's the mentality of clans like these that destroy DFUW not the lack of content.

 

«13

Comments

  • SysFailSysFail LondonPosts: 375Member

    Until there is something worth fighting for, i don't see any of the big clans going to war. AV have failed miserably in this aspect so far, but hopefully by the time summer is over, the game might have added some content that gives incentives to siege, but with AV already falling behind with their roadmap, it may be longer...

  • Aragon100Aragon100 OsloPosts: 2,224Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by SysFail

    Until there is something worth fighting for, i don't see any of the big clans going to war. AV have failed miserably in this aspect so far, but hopefully by the time summer is over, the game might have added some content that gives incentives to siege, but with AV already falling behind with their roadmap, it may be longer...

    You can fight for the reason having some fun. Ok i agree that it is better if you have something worth fighting for but i just dont understand the mentality of these zergs. Sitting inside zap tower cities doing nothing is a mentality that will bring doom to this game.

    Get out in the open world and create your own content if Aventurine fail to deliver.

     

  • ste2000ste2000 londonPosts: 4,706Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Aragon100
    Originally posted by SysFail

    Until there is something worth fighting for, i don't see any of the big clans going to war. AV have failed miserably in this aspect so far, but hopefully by the time summer is over, the game might have added some content that gives incentives to siege, but with AV already falling behind with their roadmap, it may be longer...

    You can fight for the reason having some fun. Ok i agree that it is better if you have something worth fighting for but i just dont understand the mentality of these zergs. Sitting inside zap tower cities doing nothing is a mentality that will bring doom to this game.

    Get out in the open world and create your own content if Aventurine fail to deliver.

     

    No, that's not a MMORPG.

    If I want to PvP "just for fun" I'll play Battlefield or COD...........no need to pay $15 a month.

    AV needs to make owing a city worthwhile, it is not player fault.

    In the NA server there is more vitality, but I guess Euros and Americans have different approaches on this subject.

    Europeans need a reason to move their ass, while Americans PvP "just for fun" (and the $15 which come with it)

  • SysFailSysFail LondonPosts: 375Member

    I agree with the poster above. I play PS2 for that quick rush of arena style play, but for DF i think the majority like to have the factors that made DF1's meta game so entertaining and of course rewarding when successful. 

    As for server difference, I think the reason the NA server has more sieges than the EU server is down to culture, NA players tend to be more egocentric, where as EU players tend to need a reason for war as the above poster said.

  • BattlerockBattlerock Youngstown, OHPosts: 1,393Member
    Zergs are not9t fun this is why instanced is better. Instanced with equal sides.
  • SysFailSysFail LondonPosts: 375Member
    Originally posted by Battlerock
    Zergs are not9t fun this is why instanced is better. Instanced with equal sides.

    Instances have their place in other games, but i highly doubt theres a single darkfaller that would advocate instances. This thread however is more about the large guilds no doing anything, which is a catch 22 situation until AV encourages large scale conflicts through means that we took for granted in DF1, but shockingly was forgotten with UW's launch.

  • xpiherxpiher Indianapolis, INPosts: 3,311Member
    Originally posted by SysFail

    Until there is something worth fighting for, i don't see any of the big clans going to war. AV have failed miserably in this aspect so far, but hopefully by the time summer is over, the game might have added some content that gives incentives to siege, but with AV already falling behind with their roadmap, it may be longer...

    The way the safe zones are designed affect all aspects of the game in a negative way. 

    image
    Games:
    Currently playing:Nothing
    Will play: Darkfall: Unholy Wars
    Past games:
    Guild Wars 2 - Xpiher Duminous
    Xpiher's GW2
    GW 1 - Xpiher Duminous
    Darkfall - Xpiher Duminous (NA) retired
    AoC - Xpiher (Tyranny) retired
    Warhammer - Xpiher

  • LustmordLustmord Mt. Gilead, OHPosts: 1,095Member Uncommon
    We're all still building our cities. Once all the cities are built, I'm sure AV will release the toys to destroy them... Big boats, warhulks, etc.
  • DamediusDamedius Calgary, ABPosts: 346Member
    Originally posted by xpiher
    Originally posted by SysFail

    Until there is something worth fighting for, i don't see any of the big clans going to war. AV have failed miserably in this aspect so far, but hopefully by the time summer is over, the game might have added some content that gives incentives to siege, but with AV already falling behind with their roadmap, it may be longer...

    The way the safe zones are designed affect all aspects of the game in a negative way. 

    Except the one that matters, new player retention.

    Let the whiny vets quit and let the new blood replace them.

  • xpiherxpiher Indianapolis, INPosts: 3,311Member
    Originally posted by Damedius

    Originally posted by xpiher
    Originally posted by SysFail
    Until there is something worth fighting for, i don't see any of the big clans going to war. AV have failed miserably in this aspect so far, but hopefully by the time summer is over, the game might have added some content that gives incentives to siege, but with AV already falling behind with their roadmap, it may be longer...

    The way the safe zones are designed affect all aspects of the game in a negative way. 

    Except the one that matters, new player retention.

    Let the whiny vets quit and let the new blood replace them.

     

    Until the new players realize theres no point in building or ownin g a city

    image
    Games:
    Currently playing:Nothing
    Will play: Darkfall: Unholy Wars
    Past games:
    Guild Wars 2 - Xpiher Duminous
    Xpiher's GW2
    GW 1 - Xpiher Duminous
    Darkfall - Xpiher Duminous (NA) retired
    AoC - Xpiher (Tyranny) retired
    Warhammer - Xpiher

  • KellerKeller UtrechtPosts: 254Member

    People claim that DF:UW is a sandbox game. Politics is part of the "sand". Getting on friendly terms with other guilds never hurts. Pissing of players and their guilds will eventually bite you in the ass. If you want to siege someone, you should know who their friends are and who your friends are. Friends does not mean they should help you zerg, they can also be asked to sit this one out.

    Playing a MMORPG does involve other players. You cannot tell other players what they should do. If they want to hold events for their own members, that is their right. If they want to scroach at sieges, that is their right. If they choose not to leave their city that is their right. It's up to you to trick/pursuade them in having pvp with you. You want something from them, they do  not need you in order to have fun ;) Sandbox is a double edged sword, no forced mechanics to have pvp.

     

    Sieges are broken at this moment. The servers do not handle big battles. There is no reason siege, well that is the general opinion which I personally do not share. A lot of siege equipment is not ingame.

     

    Personally I do not see anything out of order in DF:UW. Guilds and most players are enjoying themselves. They know what DF:UW can give them and they make the best out of it.

  • DamediusDamedius Calgary, ABPosts: 346Member
    Originally posted by xpiher

     

    Until the new players realize theres no point in building or ownin g a city

    Or maybe you and the other vets will finally move on.

    This might come as a shock to you but I think the game will be fine without you guys.

  • SysFailSysFail LondonPosts: 375Member
    Originally posted by Damedius
    Originally posted by xpiher
    Originally posted by SysFail

    Until there is something worth fighting for, i don't see any of the big clans going to war. AV have failed miserably in this aspect so far, but hopefully by the time summer is over, the game might have added some content that gives incentives to siege, but with AV already falling behind with their roadmap, it may be longer...

    The way the safe zones are designed affect all aspects of the game in a negative way. 

    Except the one that matters, new player retention.

    Let the whiny vets quit and let the new blood replace them.

    Yes, we must not overlook the hordes of new players chomping at the bit to play this games ruleset.

  • DamediusDamedius Calgary, ABPosts: 346Member
    Originally posted by SysFail
     

    Yes, we must not overlook the hordes of new players chomping at the bit to play this games ruleset.

    The game is more populated than I have ever seen it. People are out in the world and PvP is easy to find.

    The original Darkfall was never like this. Even when the pop was high, people were all standing around macroing 90% of the time at this point in the game.

  • GreymoorGreymoor ManchesterPosts: 801Member
    Originally posted by SysFail
    Originally posted by Damedius
    Originally posted by xpiher
    Originally posted by SysFail

    Until there is something worth fighting for, i don't see any of the big clans going to war. AV have failed miserably in this aspect so far, but hopefully by the time summer is over, the game might have added some content that gives incentives to siege, but with AV already falling behind with their roadmap, it may be longer...

    The way the safe zones are designed affect all aspects of the game in a negative way. 

    Except the one that matters, new player retention.

    Let the whiny vets quit and let the new blood replace them.

    Yes, we must not overlook the hordes of new players chomping at the bit to play this games ruleset.

    There are so many new players in the game right now it's pretty amazing.

  • GroovyFlowerGroovyFlower RdamPosts: 1,245Member
    Originally posted by Aragon100

    You can take pretty much all clans on EU, with a few exceptions, and you find this kind of behaviour. Guilds zerg up and sit inside their zaptower cities looking at each other. Doing just about nothing that would add some flavor to PvP and add some fun ingame.

    And god forbid if anyone break this "safezone" gameplay and siege during primetime hours! Then the zergs get together and with pure numbers set the agenda of continuing this safezone gameplay.

    A good example is Pandora that lost their city in a prime time siege (standard for EU is off-hour sieges) even though they were 2:1 up against The Blackhand Order and Liandrii (2 guilds that actually have some balls). Pandora then resieged after getting SUN and KDS together with Friendly Fire, Red Army to join them to get a whopping 6:1 advantage. 

    That could some call politics but i call it pure lameness and a game where numbers mean just about everything and player skill mean very little. 

    This kind of behavior tell us alot about the "safezone" mentality that even the self-preclaimed "hardcore" guilds practice when it comes to reality. Talking big wont change this.

    Some could claim game is boring cause there is so little content, which it is, but why then Zerg jump the clans that try to bring some fun to the game?

    Here is a thread that describe the lameness of DFUW EU sieges pretty well -

    https://forums.darkfallonline.com/showthread.php?371490-SUN-KDS-Pandora-Friendly-Fire-Red-Army-bring-133-to-the-gates-of-Erinthel

    And here we have 2 good examples of what type of PvP these Zergs (Lux Arcana and SUN in this case) prefer, they call it events inside their city limit where they all are binded and with full access to guildbanks for fast reequipping, just amazing -

    https://forums.darkfallonline.com/showthread.php?372422-MarShral-Red-Wedding-event-Saturday-8-6

    https://forums.darkfallonline.com/showthread.php?372440-Server-PvP-event-question-who-would-turn-up

    Why not take a hundred of your guild/alliance mates out of your zap tower cities and actually do something? Or would it be to few? 

     

    zerg already make DF1 failing from day one first 3 months where terible, you had HUGE zergs it was rediculous it never worked and never will

    When smaller clans try attack some other clan they just call there alliance and BAM clan lose all becouse 200 players zerg alliance took it back this small clan from the map.

    Also this rediculous all race calns i never understood some in beginning try play the lore mahirim only clans or ork clans try fight the humans or alfar it never worked.

    Darkfall should have gone Asheron's call system ala Darktide or race wars like lore said. Penalty for other races to join enemy allaince like mahirim or orks could never join filthy humans/dwarfs/elfs(mirdain) or alfar.

    Would have all be alot deeper and interesting.

    Sure in beginning The Mercs where mahirim clan but the exploited and cheated so much they where not worthy clan for darkfall.

  • aesperusaesperus Hamshire, NVPosts: 5,128Member Uncommon

    Welcome to human nature.

    People will ALWAYS gather together when given the option. Even if it's not necessarily in their best interests. Zerging is always assumed to be the safest option, and thus people will do it when they can.

    There's really no point crying about it.

    Even in games that have mechanics that are specifically designed to break up or kill zergs, people will still do it. Unless you want heavily instanced MMOs, this will always be an issue in this genre. It's also one of the most common reasons systems fail, get scrapped, or seem lackluster in an MMO; because they have to be built in a way that can accomodate large groups of players.

  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,281Member Uncommon

    Is there am alliance system in place or is it just "Hey let's be friends"? Are these alliances formal?

     

    In Wushu a guild can have up to 3 formal alliances. Only these 3 can enter your wars. The kicker is they may have a war themselves with someone else. 

  • B1mbleB1mble WalesPosts: 148Member

    Sounds to me like they constructed all that was necessary for mass battles and sieges but gave little though to any kind of political structure or social law to give it direction.

     

  • KshahdooKshahdoo MoscowPosts: 553Member


    Originally posted by bcbully
    Is there am alliance system in place or is it just "Hey let's be friends"? Are these alliances formal? In Wushu a guild can have up to 3 formal alliances. Only these 3 can enter your wars. The kicker is they may have a war themselves with someone else. 

    Yes, sure, that wushu crap is a good example what way sandbox MMO should work.

  • KshahdooKshahdoo MoscowPosts: 553Member


    Originally posted by B1mble
    Sounds to me like they constructed all that was necessary for mass battles and sieges but gave little though to any kind of political structure or social law to give it direction.

     


    It works the same way in EVE. Small PvP corporations and aliances have skill, but they can't stand up against giant blobs. 15 Nagas with a few logistics can destroy 2-3 times more powerful fleet without losing a single ship. But they can't do anything to a fleet of 10 titans, 30 supercarriers and 100 dreds with hundreds supports.

  • SysFailSysFail LondonPosts: 375Member
    Originally posted by Damedius
    The original Darkfall was never like this. Even when the pop was high, people were all standing around macroing 90% of the time at this point in the game.

    We all know that's just not true. 

  • DamediusDamedius Calgary, ABPosts: 346Member
    Originally posted by SysFail
    Originally posted by Damedius
    The original Darkfall was never like this. Even when the pop was high, people were all standing around macroing 90% of the time at this point in the game.

    We all know that's just not true. 

    Who is we?

    I never have trouble finding people or PvP in the game.

  • B1mbleB1mble WalesPosts: 148Member
    Originally posted by Kshahdoo

     


    Originally posted by B1mble
    Sounds to me like they constructed all that was necessary for mass battles and sieges but gave little though to any kind of political structure or social law to give it direction.

     

     


     

    It works the same way in EVE. Small PvP corporations and aliances have skill, but they can't stand up against giant blobs. 15 Nagas with a few logistics can destroy 2-3 times more powerful fleet without losing a single ship. But they can't do anything to a fleet of 10 titans, 30 supercarriers and 100 dreds with hundreds supports.

    I am not familiar with EVE, but with the mention of corporations would it be fair to say that a limiter on players actions is economics?

    What I was referring to with this game is that the devs created a world, dumped everyone in it with the message 'go kill and loot' and forgot to put any kind of breaks or limiters in to prevent it descending into anarchy.

    E.g.

    Can a singular player be elected to rule over a city by that election set city taxes on goods crafted and sold?

    Can he/she select from the population players to be a lower council that decides on what should be built/researched or created to possibly benefit the whole?

    Can players be citizens of a town or city and thus be affected by those elected decisions?

    Can smaller settlements near the city become part of a protectorate and thus not only be protected by the city but also pay tax and provide resources?

    Can anyone declare a player outlaw and place a bounty on their head?

    Can a ruler/clan leader set up trade agreements with other player cities and arrange for caravans to not be attacked by citizens of the other city?

    Can a player become a merchant and trade with other cities, possibly hiring clan mates to act as caravan guards?

    Can anyone from cities with peace treaties who attacks another citizen be declared outlaw?

    Can players set up guild houses within cities, these guild houses being seperate from those who built the place?

    Can cities be raided for specific items such as building plans and other resources by stealth and theavery rather than outright assaults?

    etc etc

    Some of the above can be agreed on verbally and broken just as easily but without the facilities in the game to say cast a vote which affects the majority then players have nothing to lose that can't be replaced and as such they dont care.

    TL;DR

    If you want Game of Thrones the mechanics have to be there in the game to allow it to happen.  At the moment Darkfall comes across as just mindless barbarism which is a turnoff. 

  • SysFailSysFail LondonPosts: 375Member
    Originally posted by Damedius
    Originally posted by SysFail
    Originally posted by Damedius
    The original Darkfall was never like this. Even when the pop was high, people were all standing around macroing 90% of the time at this point in the game.

    We all know that's just not true. 

    Who is we?

    I never have trouble finding people or PvP in the game.

    We being those that played DF during the heady days of a high population. 

«13
Sign In or Register to comment.