Zerg warfare and tactics?

[Belomar]

Lately, there has been quite a controversy between the "FGvsFG community" and the "zerg community" (if you excuse the expression, I don't mean it in a derisive way). Being more a member of the former rather than the latter, my experience of zerg warfare is that compared to FGvsFG fights, all thoughts of tactics go out the window the moment a zerg encounters another zerg. Zerg participants seem to lack all kinds of teamwork and coordination, and the fight quickly seems to deteriorate into who can spam the most AE spells and leech the most RP. Rather, zerg tactics is on a higher level, i.e. where to move your force on the map, and not on a split-second tactical level.

Now, I am not trying to point out the weaknesses of zerg warfare, I am honestly curious about whether you think this is true. Are there any experienced "zerg leaders" (again, some bad connotations in that word, but I am not sure what the best alternative is) and do you employ any special tactics? For that matter, are there any guilds that have practiced playing in a larger force?

I realize that this thread might be akin to opening a can of worms, but I would like to see the other side of the coin; after all, large-scale RvR warfare is what Mythic seems to have primarily designed this game for.

 

[Flimgoblin]

There's probably more strategy involved usually than tactics to running a larger force in RvR (call it an army rather than a zerg maybe? less negative connotation) - e.g. mids hitting towers to slow albs down while their main target is a keep.

Or razing 3 towers might be a good way to dislodge an enemy rather than charge them head on for a big fight.

Tactics can probably come into play but it's much harder because tactics in a fight involves everyone paying attention/facing the same way more often than not.

That said we had a great moment once during a standoff at at eras 2 (tower razed) we had everyone move back into the water or sit down behind the ruins of the tower in order to appear to have given up and left provoke the mids into charging..

they did, we stood up/moved back and crushed em

 

[Yurka]

well I ae dotted about 50-70 mezzed hibs outside berks lastnight and we lost the zerg fight xD

on glastonbry that is

 

[rure]

I am no expert on this larg-scale warfare, but it seems to me that OF gave the "army leaders" more options and more diversity in relic raids, with the possibility of log out raids etc. NF have ofc given the "army leaders" a few more new options with boats/drop offs. But as you point out Belomar, the one that can mass the biggest zerg with ae spells wins. I might be and am prolly wrong

 

[Zede]

mids have no tactics, just log whorelock alts, pbaoe chambers, rinse, repeat.

utterly devoid of tactics and skill.

 

[illu]

well I ae dotted about 50-70 mezzed hibs outside berks lastnight and we lost the zerg fight xD

on glastonbry that is

I bet your mezzers loved you! :>

You're a wannabe Thane

Oli - Illu

 

[ebenezer]

i think there are a million tactics formed at a daily basis for everyone that doesnt run in a set fg vs fg.
The main difference being that since people that choose or cannot play inna set rvr group you cannot everytime on beforehand state a tactic for each run.
Therefor people in random groups are at that disadvantage when running and meeting another better prepared group. They dont know eachother....they might not be on same ts...or might not have it at all. So what do you do...well...you fight as good as you can with those circumstances. Try and adapt to what you see coming towards you. Which is i might imagine a lot harder then running with people you know well and their playstyles
I choose never to run in a set group cause i find the change of tactics and alt a fun thing for me. Sometimes i solo....sometimes i run with a better known guild group, and sometimes i run with a total random group which is sometimes sucsessfull or a total failiure
Sometimes you plan ahead with a couple of friends to take a tower and farm incomings...or a bridge. And then you use certain tactics which are based upon experience of other certain situasions.
On ocasions some leader organize a big raid....or a zerg. Which is actually a strange name tbh. Since the name come from berzerker i would guess. And like the viking berzerkers when they were in that state i doubt they had any tactics at all Whereas a zerg raid lead by one bg leader tries to follow the tactics of a few apointed leaders.
And thats a big challenge an something very hard to acomplish.
Thats my experience of the "zerging" side of the coin at least

 

[Bracken]

I am no expert on this larg-scale warfare, but it seems to me that OF gave the "army leaders" more options and more diversity in relic raids, with the possibility of log out raids etc. NF have ofc given the "army leaders" a few more new options with boats/drop offs. But as you point out Belomar, the one that can mass the biggest zerg with ae spells wins. I might be and am prolly wrong

I think that's pretty much true - with a few exceptions, such as in towers/keeps where certain abilities if used in the right way and with the right timing can swing it, or getting rams and siege weapons organised/working properly. Think Flim was pretty spot on when he said it's more about strategy rather than tactics for zerg leaders.

 

[Yurka]

I bet your mezzers loved you! :>

You're a wannabe Thane

Oli - Illu

was pure comedy value, about 2inches worth of scroll down ae dot hit spam xD

 

[Belomar]

The name "zerg" derives from Starcraft. Read more about it on Wikipedia's entry on the word.

To "zerg", a verb denoting the use of mass numbers to achieve an objective, has become a widely accepted term in a variety of other games, including Warcraft III, World of Warcraft, Dark Age of Camelot, and other multiplayer games. This references the ability of the Zerg race to generate combat units, particularly Zerglings, much more quickly and earlier than other races.

 

[ebenezer]

The name "zerg" derives from Starcraft. Read more about it on Wikipedia's entry on the word.

ahh played it alot in past and never made the conection^^

 

[Baron]

It's always hard to organize a large group of people
But I must admit that Beeks and Doxs did a great job of re-taking Eras recently.
A well known player with a strong personality and logistical and tactical understand with excellent typing skills is a must.
A lot of people have there own agenda so it can be very frustrating

A lot of it just comes down to locating the enemy zerg and coordinating a counter attack through the bg.
Alternatively just turn up in the iRvR area and hit any thing with a red name.
We are a helpful bunch when it comes to heals, cure and rezzes as well as assisting each other in kills
It's a great way to meet players who aren't in your guild or alliance.
It's not considered as skillful as 8v8 but it's still very exciting and challenging - you never really know where they are gonna come from or how many.

The big advantage is that you can just turn up join in and be welcomed by your fellow realm mates.
and if you're not op't, fully templated, ml'd, cl'd and high rr you're surrounded by buddy's in the same situation and not feel like a twat.

Roll a new toon (incognito) and try it some time - it's not that bad

Zerging aint an insult its a way of life

 

[Doom]

there have never been enough population on excalibur/cluster to make people organize fights of that scale which real tactics are needed.

 

[illu]

And zerg or large army fighting is funny :> What seems to usually happen is the wave theory.

10 PRINT"
The first big army builds up and runs along.
The enemy build up and run to meet them.
They both suddenely stop and think - "I don't want to die first!" :>
The stealthers stealth up and move towards each other.
The stealthers pop each other and the casters from the opposition team nuke the hell out of them (pent up aggression from year's of being PA'd and arrow'd :>)
Some casters / warlocks / ones with ML9'd pets get cheeky and get too close to the middle of the fight and there is a general 1for1 exchange.
Then there is a quick recount, one side suddenely starts to back off because it realises that it's healers are dead in the middle and there is no cover and they forgot to rezz them in the excitement of the initial clash.
The side with the most players then surges forward and destroys the other side suffering casualties, and then feels that "warm sensation" of having won the fight. While they are all yapping and feeling good, they forget that the people they just killed are now boofed up and charging at them at full force!
Chaaaaaaaarge!
*Cling!
*Clang!
*Zap Zap!
The previously dead are now the victors!
They regroup and run at full pace to where the enemy are building up anew."
20 GOTO 10
RUN


I prefer smaller fights myself, but the occasional zerg warfare is great fun :> Lots of little amounts of RPs slowly adds up. (This must be what it is like in Albion every day ) I've always liked the Braveheart scenarios of 2 or 3 huge armies running into each other - like the Bowl in Emain in OF - that's one of the best bits of this game :>

And then a 3-man hib group come along, a mezzer/stunner and 2 bainshees and they kill all, instading RR11 and live happily ever after :/ :>

Oli - Illu

 

[Vladamir]

I bet your mezzers loved you! :>

You're a wannabe Thane

Oli - Illu

MJOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLNIR!

 

[Chronictank]

Depends on your definition of zerg warfare really,
i came to the following conclusions from my experience:

In a fg your actions define the result of a fight, if you underperform then your whole grp faces the concequences of that. This ofc is more defined at low rr, and depends on your class but in general i think it holds true.
In zergs your particular actions matter less to the final outcome of a fight, as a result people go into the mentality "if i dont do it someone else will", so they are less willing to stick their neck out and charge when told to for example.

Tactics wise in a full group and in a zerg they are completely different disciplines, equally weighted imo. Example being in a fg you extend, in a zerg you have ambushes waiting as a group retreats with enemy forces in persuit.

Saying that the general zerg has little or no tactics at all, tactics only come into play when you are fighting numbers bigger than yourself.
Like on the relic raid in alb, i had a tower wrecking crew set fire to keeps along the route to beno so that the zerg would follow all the way to the top of the map. meaning even with Mach 5 you would take approximately 6 mins to get back to the relic (unless suiciding in which case i had cut port to all the towers so they had to run from CS/FS). Large scale tactics like that arent preasant in full group but are no less intricate.
A well formulated plan regardless of the circumstance will always beat a unorganised resistance.
But thats just personal preferance, i much prefer a small bg i have total control over who i can put where i want when i need them there to a bg who isnt listening and just running for the nearest target.

mids have no tactics, just log whorelock alts, pbaoe chambers, rinse, repeat.

utterly devoid of tactics and skill.

Prime example of someone who has little/no understanding of tactics, they will simply join a bg and do their own thing.
But then since OF noone in alb has really shown any tactics other than throw troops at a wall until it falls down. This is not a flame it is a fact, and tbh why should they? they have the numbers and they use them.
Makes it more interesting to defend against

 

[Haggus]

Zerging aint an insult its a way of life

DAoC is a game

 

[eggy]

If you scroll along enough pages, apparently this is a zerg:

I can't see a zerg of women rushing to see him tbh.

But I bet he zergs at least 3 times a day.

 

[Baron]

Haggus

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron

Zerging aint an insult its a way of life


DAoC is a game

Belomar was concerned that by calling it zerging he might be insulting us
I was letting him know he wasn't

But more importantly what's your point?
Surely not another pointless flame in order to ruin a pretty decent discussion...

 

[Vodkafairy]

best zerg is easy to point out, the one who has and uses ae most wins. on my eld i can stop 10-20 people if not more from charging by just spamming the lvl 2x aenuke.

was especially fun to take on the zerg on gorre with a fg, when we ran 1-2 sorcs, 2-3 firewizzies, 2 clerics, and me on matter caba (sometimes ).. just spamming nearsight and when we had to reposition, aedot + aedisease would hold most of them back for quite a while

as for leading a zerg, well, patience is the key and extremely careful planning with the strong fg's is necessary. usually the big mass of the zerg will get farmed by a single twf and some ae damage, its not to be rude but they really are cannonfodder most of the time. ofcourse cannonfodder in the form of warlocks, bainshees, animists, heretics with monster rez and generally any pbae are devastating no matter how poorly they are equipped, but lets not turn it into a class discussion.

 

[Belomar]

Some valid points here. I am going to take the liberty to quote myself, not out of self-inflated ego (I have that too), but out of sheer laziness:

The problem with zergs is that the IQ of the zerg combined is generally equal to its most stupid participant divided by its size. Zergers are prone to AFKing without warning, sticking the nearest person who shouts the loudest, lacking any form of coordination, and spamming AE spells, ML abilities and RAs like monkeys flinging shit.

I am not saying that zergs are bad. I am saying that maintaining "discipline" becomes exponentially harder for larger forces than a full group. Once surrounded by a large enough force of fellow realm members, most people tend to get complacent and play at half of their ability (at best). All tactics and coordination goes out the window the second an enemy is encountered. I imagine everyone would like large-scale battles much better if it was not so hard to do "properly" (i.e. group members fighting as a unit and with clear objectives and cohesion) in DAoC.

Another major problem with zerg warfare is that most zerg battles are uninteresting due to differences in the size of the combatant forces. Most of the time, one of the two battling zergs will have a considerable numerical advantage, leading to the other zerg being overrun quite quickly. Everyone remembers the huge, sweeping battles in the bowl of Emain Macha that went on for a long time, but those were only really possible when the armies were pretty evenly matched. At least you don't (generally) have that problem in FG vs FG warfare; you meet another FG of eight people, you fight them, and the outcome depends mostly on the skill and setup of the winning group. (Of course, a large portion of the whining going on from the FG camp is due to others "breaching" this "rule" of only bringing a full group to the fight.)

 

[Flimgoblin]

But then since OF noone in alb has really shown any tactics other than throw troops at a wall until it falls down. This is not a flame it is a fact, and tbh why should they? they have the numbers and they use them.
Makes it more interesting to defend against

Defending with 39 people vs 240 combined mids/hibs took a lot of tactics unfortunately in the end it was futile. Slowed them down a bit.

The "almighty alb zerg outnumbering everyone" is a myth - we have the biggest potential army I don't disagree there but it's rarely the case that there are more albs in RvR than anyone else.

There's been plenty of tactics and strategy employed by albion, but feel free to dismiss us all as wannabe field marshal hagues Just fling em over the wall doesn't work - especially not when 2 or 3 bainshees and a couple of animists + supporting cannon fodder will wipe any zerg. Same again with 5+ warlocks defending a lord room or a wall.

Not sure I'd agree that all zerg fights are extremely lopsided - knowing when to hold back and postpone a fight/delay the opponent and knowing when to charge can make a world of difference even when the numbers are uneven.

Of course if you have a "typical headless zerg" you don't get any of that - a BG made to do something is fun and interesting, the "pickup zergs" tend to be a bit mindless and rarely get anything done. Kinda like FG's I'm sure running in an opted built group that's organised you do a lot better than 8 people of random classes stuck in a group together and not listening to one another

 

[Bracken]

but feel free to dismiss us all as wannabe field marshal hagues

Some of us are more Captain Mannering

 

[santacruz]

Of course zergs in the general meaning don't utilize tactics like a FG that plays with each other reguraly etc. It's no diffrence with other games such as CS in where clangames and public games often are very diffrent in forms of tactic. I usually go with the zerg since I don't have time to get into a group(or I can't because no one wanna invites me ;( ) or just wanna play maybe a shorter time and I don't expect to get the best teamwork. However leading a zerg(not the kind of zerg that just pops up everyday outside of a random keep) must surely be just as difficult or even more difficult than leading a FG. Since all my characters are pretty low RR running with the zerg is a viable option since I'm having trouble getting into groups with my scout and cleric.

 

[Chronictank]

Defending with 39 people vs 240 combined mids/hibs took a lot of tactics unfortunately in the end it was futile. Slowed them down a bit.

The "almighty alb zerg outnumbering everyone" is a myth - we have the biggest potential army I don't disagree there but it's rarely the case that there are more albs in RvR than anyone else.

There's been plenty of tactics and strategy employed by albion, but feel free to dismiss us all as wannabe field marshal hagues Just fling em over the wall doesn't work - especially not when 2 or 3 bainshees and a couple of animists + supporting cannon fodder will wipe any zerg. Same again with 5+ warlocks defending a lord room or a wall.

Not sure I'd agree that all zerg fights are extremely lopsided - knowing when to hold back and postpone a fight/delay the opponent and knowing when to charge can make a world of difference even when the numbers are uneven.

Of course if you have a "typical headless zerg" you don't get any of that - a BG made to do something is fun and interesting, the "pickup zergs" tend to be a bit mindless and rarely get anything done. Kinda like FG's I'm sure running in an opted built group that's organised you do a lot better than 8 people of random classes stuck in a group together and not listening to one another

yet these "tactics" never seem to materialise in relic takes, so excuse me if i remain skeptical.
But there was no postpone/holding back of opponents in any of the bg's i joined on my cleric whatsoever, there was no organisation there was simply there is the keep. of you go and "fling yourselves at it".
With the usual run into the lord room die and be heretic rezed to take the keep.
Thats not largescale tactics in any stretch of the imagination tbh

 

[Aran Thule]

It can be very frustrating and exhausting.
You do a /bg count and work out that you have 10 groups and lots of solo/duos.
You try to move to find you only have 3 groups with you as the rest are waiting for afk or l/d or just dont want to work with you.
As mentioned the mentality changes a bit when on large numbers compared to a full group, there is often the 'someone else will do it' mentality.
I dont want to remember how many times ive joined a /bg or arrived at a siege and found people acting like headless chickens.
Worse bit is that when you try to get things organised its hard to get people to cooperate, often found that i have had to direct animists, build siege, shoot door, setup palins to take out oil ect.
When people work together its great and makes it fun and worthwhile, when you have people arguing and not cooperating then i find it depressing, when you get depressed too much you reach the 'whats the point' stage.
Ive tried my best to avoid that by only really running stuff occationally so people are more likely to turn up and try to make an effort, also due to the time and effort needed to coordinate large scale battles.

 

[Glorien]

Maybe I'm wrong but didn't fg vs. fg combat get born out of the fact people got sick of "zerg warfare"?

I for one hate fighting in zergs for the reasons Belomar outlines, fg vs. fg, in my opinion atleast, is the better out the two and I would argue even the biggest of "zerglings" would prefer fg vs. fg if they tried it with a "decent group." The only reason to zerg is if you either cant get a good group together, or you cannot win.

P.S - I'm sure some people will dispute what I say but I believe it's true for the majority of players.

 

[Chronictank]

Maybe I'm wrong but didn't fg vs. fg combat get born out of the fact people got sick of "zerg warfare"?

I for one hate fighting in zergs for the reasons Belomar outlines, fg vs. fg, in my opinion atleast, is the better out the two and I would argue even the biggest of "zerglings" would prefer fg vs. fg if they tried it with a "decent group." The only reason to zerg is if you either cant get a good group together, or you cannot win.

P.S - I'm sure some people will dispute what I say but I believe it's true for the majority of players.

thread is between the tactics in the 2/if there are any
not what people prefer
lets try stay on topic please before this turns into a flame fest of fg vs "randoms"

 

[Zede]

Depends on your definition of zerg warfare really,
i came to the following conclusions from my experience:

In a fg your actions define the result of a fight, if you underperform then your whole grp faces the concequences of that. This ofc is more defined at low rr, and depends on your class but in general i think it holds true.
In zergs your particular actions matter less to the final outcome of a fight, as a result people go into the mentality "if i dont do it someone else will", so they are less willing to stick their neck out and charge when told to for example.

Tactics wise in a full group and in a zerg they are completely different disciplines, equally weighted imo. Example being in a fg you extend, in a zerg you have ambushes waiting as a group retreats with enemy forces in persuit.

Saying that the general zerg has little or no tactics at all, tactics only come into play when you are fighting numbers bigger than yourself.
Like on the relic raid in alb, i had a tower wrecking crew set fire to keeps along the route to beno so that the zerg would follow all the way to the top of the map. meaning even with Mach 5 you would take approximately 6 mins to get back to the relic (unless suiciding in which case i had cut port to all the towers so they had to run from CS/FS). Large scale tactics like that arent preasant in full group but are no less intricate.
A well formulated plan regardless of the circumstance will always beat a unorganised resistance.
But thats just personal preferance, i much prefer a small bg i have total control over who i can put where i want when i need them there to a bg who isnt listening and just running for the nearest target.


Prime example of someone who has little/no understanding of tactics, they will simply join a bg and do their own thing.
But then since OF noone in alb has really shown any tactics other than throw troops at a wall until it falls down. This is not a flame it is a fact, and tbh why should they? they have the numbers and they use them.
Makes it more interesting to defend against

Your rvr-peen just went through the roof m8. Stop pontificating and wake up to a few oh so bloody obvious facts. Under ANY seige situation with mid, the Warlock Alts come out. Any Alb involved in the constant taking/retaking of the Fens towers a few months back would know what Im talking about.

Why do you think alarm clock raids are so popular ? Because tactics mean shit at the end of the day. You can be as organised as you like, but the fact is albs can outnumber mids 2/1 and mids can still clean up easily. During a fens retake attempt, AoD went on intercept runs to stop mids getting into Fens - in 20 mins we killed 15 warlocks, but lots still got through. We died and went back to Fens, and ofc we saw the army of whores, and albs just left - realising it was a pointless exercise.

 

[Glorien]

thread is between the tactics in the 2/if there are any
not what people prefer
lets try stay on topic please before this turns into a flame fest of fg vs "randoms"

Just trying to point out that, I believe, there's more tactics involved with fg vs. fg combat - I mentioned it being born out of the fact people got sick of the "mindless zerg". Also, the fact that even most "army leaders" would probably go for fg vs. fg combat, if they could, as it requires the most "skill." I suppose when I said fg vs. fg was the "better of the two" I should have said requires more tactics/skill.

Sorry if my post is considered off-topic but it does add to the debate, I guess I'll just have to spell it out more next time.