Not liking a zerg is understandable, but saying its not gameplay....... heh
Ok, I actually agree with you. Saying it is not gameplay is silly of me.
Very silly as are most of your posts.
Zerg is a term coined from Starcraft. A weaker enemy that uses greater numbers to balance.
A viable tactic in any battle.
Mass numbers of PvP players in an MMO = Zerg according to practically everyone here.
So what is your point?
Oh and the only difference between this and the EQ vid would be the amount of graphics on screen. BD is obviously more cluttered due to the modern graphics and effects. A bit overdone in my book but hey, that what the eastern gamers like.
Lets face it here. This game wasn't designed with western gamers in mind. In fact I don't think any game is anymore.
Because every single one of you here wants something different.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
People be zerging back in UO with the Faction Wars in Felucca.
People be zerging today in a bunch of MMOs with "open world" style PvP - including RvR types.
Realistically, any open field conflict between two or more large factions could be called a zerg, but honestly that is the nature of melee combat.
Even if it is two large armies clashing on the field, it's "rush each other and hack to bits."
Best way to anti-zerg is to require siege, coordinated attacks against fortified structures. But even then, once the gate/wall goes down, it's "rush in and hack to bits." Zerg.
So unless you want a civil war-esque "line up and shoot each other" MMO - the "zerg" will always be a part of large scale open world PvP. Hell even then you'd have bayonet charges (zerg).
Not having a damage/target cap on AoE certainly does help, but so does removing most if not ALL AoE completely from PvP outside of dedicated siege weaponry.
The real problem is magic. And AoE. And a lack of collision detection / active blocking of projectiles.
Not liking a zerg is understandable, but saying its not gameplay....... heh
Ok, I actually agree with you. Saying it is not gameplay is silly of me.
Very silly as are most of your posts.
Zerg is a term coined from Starcraft. A weaker enemy that uses greater numbers to balance.
A viable tactic in any battle.
When a game is designed in a way where Tactics are not a better option then Zergs, then you have a problem. Viable but not desirable.
Oh and the only difference between this and the EQ vid would be the amount of graphics on screen. BD is obviously more cluttered due to the modern graphics and effects. A bit overdone in my book but hey, that what the eastern gamers like.
This would be the words of someone who has never played EQ or Vanguard past newbe areas. These types of games had everyone working as a unit. No one was out of place and if you were, everyone knew it. EQ and Vanguard had zero zerg game play.
Not liking a zerg is understandable, but saying its not gameplay....... heh
Ok, I actually agree with you. Saying it is not gameplay is silly of me.
Very silly as are most of your posts.
Zerg is a term coined from Starcraft. A weaker enemy that uses greater numbers to balance.
A viable tactic in any battle.
When a game is designed in a way where Tactics are not a better option then Zergs, then you have a problem. Viable but not desirable.
Oh and the only difference between this and the EQ vid would be the amount of graphics on screen. BD is obviously more cluttered due to the modern graphics and effects. A bit overdone in my book but hey, that what the eastern gamers like.
This would be the words of someone who has never played EQ or Vanguard past newbe areas. These types of games had everyone working as a unit. No one was out of place and if you were, everyone knew it. EQ and Vanguard had zero zerg game play.
No I did not play EQ, I will admit that.
So you tell me that everyone back in 1999 knew exactly where to be and what to do in a battle, through what? Texting in chat?
Or did they just spend weeks choreographing the whole event?
Or was it just that people and the game played a little slower than they do now, and it looked more organized?
So tell me, exactly how was it done in EQ and why can't it be done now?
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
People be zerging back in UO with the Faction Wars in Felucca.
People be zerging today in a bunch of MMOs with "open world" style PvP - including RvR types.
Realistically, any open field conflict between two or more large factions could be called a zerg, but honestly that is the nature of melee combat.
Even if it is two large armies clashing on the field, it's "rush each other and hack to bits."
Best way to anti-zerg is to require siege, coordinated attacks against fortified structures. But even then, once the gate/wall goes down, it's "rush in and hack to bits." Zerg.
So unless you want a civil war-esque "line up and shoot each other" MMO - the "zerg" will always be a part of large scale open world PvP. Hell even then you'd have bayonet charges (zerg).
Not having a damage/target cap on AoE certainly does help, but so does removing most if not ALL AoE completely from PvP outside of dedicated siege weaponry.
The real problem is magic. And AoE. And a lack of collision detection / active blocking of projectiles.
In an MMO a large number of players running together is not what defines a zerg. Its where a large number of players need no plan and can win just because they are heading in the same direction. In the case you bring up, they break down a keep door and just run in. Well if there is no plan needed to win you are right but in DAoC, you needed a part of the people that broke down the door to stay behind and defend and rebuild. A common tactic was to let a keep get taken and wipe out the force as they took out the commander (npc) of the base. So 10% needed to stay by the door. Scouts often needed to patrol as the keep was taken out. Most people in a keep raid in DAoC knew their job and would switch with players to take turns doing them. You learned them all. In the end, you felt needed. Not once in GW2 WvW have I felt needed. I follow the train and win. In my 2 years of playing I have only seen smart playing win the battle a handful of times. Numbers is all you need.
How can anyone compare a large scale PvP fight to a PvE boss fight? PvE boss fights are completely predictable, the boss follows a script. Everyone stands in a certain position and moves when the warning bell tells them to. Boss fights can be rehearsed over and over again. PvP fights are very unpredictable. There's no threat meters, no script to follow, no mods to tell you when to act, no exploiting weak AI or anything of the kind. No two PvP fights are ever the same. Human players will do some crazy and strange things. Naturally PvP fights will look more chaotic.
People be zerging back in UO with the Faction Wars in Felucca.
People be zerging today in a bunch of MMOs with "open world" style PvP - including RvR types.
Realistically, any open field conflict between two or more large factions could be called a zerg, but honestly that is the nature of melee combat.
Even if it is two large armies clashing on the field, it's "rush each other and hack to bits."
Best way to anti-zerg is to require siege, coordinated attacks against fortified structures. But even then, once the gate/wall goes down, it's "rush in and hack to bits." Zerg.
So unless you want a civil war-esque "line up and shoot each other" MMO - the "zerg" will always be a part of large scale open world PvP. Hell even then you'd have bayonet charges (zerg).
Not having a damage/target cap on AoE certainly does help, but so does removing most if not ALL AoE completely from PvP outside of dedicated siege weaponry.
The real problem is magic. And AoE. And a lack of collision detection / active blocking of projectiles.
In an MMO a large number of players running together is not what defines a zerg. Its where a large number of players need no plan and can win just because they are heading in the same direction. In the case you bring up, they break down a keep door and just run in. Well if there is no plan needed to win you are right but in DAoC, you needed a part of the people that broke down the door to stay behind and defend and rebuild. A common tactic was to let a keep get taken and wipe out the force as they took out the commander (npc) of the base. So 10% needed to stay by the door. Scouts often needed to patrol as the keep was taken out. Most people in a keep raid in DAoC knew their job and would switch with players to take turns doing them. You learned them all. In the end, you felt needed. Not once in GW2 WvW have I felt needed. I follow the train and win. In my 2 years of playing I have only seen smart playing win the battle a handful of times. Numbers is all you need.
We wiped endless number of zerglings who were standing in circle (commander down) of tower/keep/SM with way less people with exact same tactics you described.
Im sorry (not really) that you were always on receiving end of that.
Or did they just spend weeks choreographing the whole event?
Or was it just that people and the game played a little slower than they do now, and it looked more organized?
So tell me, exactly how was it done in EQ and why can't it be done now?
Both of the above. Wiping and setting up could take an hour or more, so you had time to discuss. Gameplay is slower. It doesn't just look more organized, it was more organized.
Why can't it be done now? Probably because it would be too hard, people complain about having to group, let alone having complex raids that require organisation.
More organised MMO are possible though, but the current MMO are mostly DPS+Dodge, because people prefer the challenge of SKILL over STRATEGY. And by skill, I mean the same skill games like street fighter have.
The skill required in MMO now is more about retention of button combinations, about dodges, about action in general, before it was more about strategy, community, organisation, control.
Not liking a zerg is understandable, but saying its not gameplay....... heh
Ok, I actually agree with you. Saying it is not gameplay is silly of me.
Very silly as are most of your posts.
Zerg is a term coined from Starcraft. A weaker enemy that uses greater numbers to balance.
A viable tactic in any battle.
When a game is designed in a way where Tactics are not a better option then Zergs, then you have a problem. Viable but not desirable.
Oh and the only difference between this and the EQ vid would be the amount of graphics on screen. BD is obviously more cluttered due to the modern graphics and effects. A bit overdone in my book but hey, that what the eastern gamers like.
This would be the words of someone who has never played EQ or Vanguard past newbe areas. These types of games had everyone working as a unit. No one was out of place and if you were, everyone knew it. EQ and Vanguard had zero zerg game play.
No I did not play EQ, I will admit that.
So you tell me that everyone back in 1999 knew exactly where to be and what to do in a battle, through what? Texting in chat?
Or did they just spend weeks choreographing the whole event?
Or was it just that people and the game played a little slower than they do now, and it looked more organized?
So tell me, exactly how was it done in EQ and why can't it be done now?
Yes, on a new raid boss we could spend sometimes 30 min or more as the raid leader typed out instructions for each team and member. After we had done the raid a few times and got it down, they would make macros of the instructions and we would read them over depending on what we were doing because of what members and classes showed up. So 5-10 min prep time was needed once we knew it and the raid leader had his macros set up with the instructions.
Why cant it be done now? EQ1 and Vanguard were class/roll games. Each class was needed to fill a roll. Even DPS classes had jobs. As a necro a pure DPS class I had a few very important rolls to fill in many raids. Most MMOs now have made classes go generic that almost class is a hybrid class. You get 40 players together and no one knows what they are able to do. So a raid leader would need to ask each player of every class what they can do and are speced for. If BD has a real trinity game. I will play it. I love the old days where a Wizard joined the team and you knew what his job was. Could be speced different and have his onw way of doing things, but in the end. He knew his job or quickly got a bad name and didnt find teams.
Sure now you get tones of players all playing hybrid classes that can do almost anything but that lends to everyone trying to be everything. No tactics and mostly zergs.
People be zerging back in UO with the Faction Wars in Felucca.
People be zerging today in a bunch of MMOs with "open world" style PvP - including RvR types.
Realistically, any open field conflict between two or more large factions could be called a zerg, but honestly that is the nature of melee combat.
Even if it is two large armies clashing on the field, it's "rush each other and hack to bits."
Best way to anti-zerg is to require siege, coordinated attacks against fortified structures. But even then, once the gate/wall goes down, it's "rush in and hack to bits." Zerg.
So unless you want a civil war-esque "line up and shoot each other" MMO - the "zerg" will always be a part of large scale open world PvP. Hell even then you'd have bayonet charges (zerg).
Not having a damage/target cap on AoE certainly does help, but so does removing most if not ALL AoE completely from PvP outside of dedicated siege weaponry.
The real problem is magic. And AoE. And a lack of collision detection / active blocking of projectiles.
In an MMO a large number of players running together is not what defines a zerg. Its where a large number of players need no plan and can win just because they are heading in the same direction. In the case you bring up, they break down a keep door and just run in. Well if there is no plan needed to win you are right but in DAoC, you needed a part of the people that broke down the door to stay behind and defend and rebuild. A common tactic was to let a keep get taken and wipe out the force as they took out the commander (npc) of the base. So 10% needed to stay by the door. Scouts often needed to patrol as the keep was taken out. Most people in a keep raid in DAoC knew their job and would switch with players to take turns doing them. You learned them all. In the end, you felt needed. Not once in GW2 WvW have I felt needed. I follow the train and win. In my 2 years of playing I have only seen smart playing win the battle a handful of times. Numbers is all you need.
We wiped endless number of zerglings who were standing in circle (commander down) of tower/keep/SM with way less people with exact same tactics you described.
Im sorry (not really) that you were always on receiving end of that.
So you support zerg tactics in MMOs as the main way a game should be designed? Because your post make no sense. I talking on one type of plans we used to deal with zergs and how they were not the I win game plan in DAoC.
I prefer Large Scale Zerg PVP over Smal Scale Rock-Paper-Scissors PVP any day of the week. While, yes, I'd rather have a PVP that is more tactical than zerg; you have to take what you get. Since most games are not tactical in origin, that means Zerg or Rock-Paper-Scissors.
Raquelis in various games Played: Everything Playing: Nioh 2, Civ6 Wants: The World Anticipating:Everquest NextCrowfall, Pantheon, Elden Ring
Originally posted by BadSpockPeople be zerging back in UO with the Faction Wars in Felucca.People be zerging today in a bunch of MMOs with "open world" style PvP - including RvR types.Realistically, any open field conflict between two or more large factions could be called a zerg, but honestly that is the nature of melee combat.Even if it is two large armies clashing on the field, it's "rush each other and hack to bits."Best way to anti-zerg is to require siege, coordinated attacks against fortified structures. But even then, once the gate/wall goes down, it's "rush in and hack to bits." Zerg.So unless you want a civil war-esque "line up and shoot each other" MMO - the "zerg" will always be a part of large scale open world PvP. Hell even then you'd have bayonet charges (zerg).Not having a damage/target cap on AoE certainly does help, but so does removing most if not ALL AoE completely from PvP outside of dedicated siege weaponry.The real problem is magic. And AoE. And a lack of collision detection / active blocking of projectiles.
In an MMO a large number of players running together is not what defines a zerg. Its where a large number of players need no plan and can win just because they are heading in the same direction. In the case you bring up, they break down a keep door and just run in. Well if there is no plan needed to win you are right but in DAoC, you needed a part of the people that broke down the door to stay behind and defend and rebuild. A common tactic was to let a keep get taken and wipe out the force as they took out the commander (npc) of the base. So 10% needed to stay by the door. Scouts often needed to patrol as the keep was taken out. Most people in a keep raid in DAoC knew their job and would switch with players to take turns doing them. You learned them all. In the end, you felt needed. Not once in GW2 WvW have I felt needed. I follow the train and win. In my 2 years of playing I have only seen smart playing win the battle a handful of times. Numbers is all you need.
Sorry but you know nothing about WvW in Guild Wars 2. I can easily say that you're just a typical pug player with just reading your posts. In Guild Wars 2 there are 2 types of WvW players.
1. Pug players who knows nothing about WvW and just follows the blue tag on the ebg or home border.
2. Hardcore players who plays with their guilds on other enemy borders and mostly does gvg and tactical plays.
I'm in a very good and well known WvW guild like 1 year now. We have 4 commanders with 4 different teams that do different jobs on border. 1 purple tag with 15-16 players behind him for main fights, 2 yellow tags with 2 more players for each of them for scouting and 1 red tag with 3 thiefs and 1 mesmer for snipe. They all do different things in WvW. We can easily destroy huge pug raids with just 15-16 people in our raid with right commands and tactical play. All hardcore players do the same thing in Guild Wars 2. Those pug raids nothing but trash and home for casual players. If you play with a real WvW guild in Gw2 you will understand what it means to be a good player in WvW. Even if you have 15-20 people in your raid and you're facing an enemy with 40-50 people, you can beat them easily if you want. One amazing portal or veil from your mesmer or only one smart move from your commander can change everything instantly in a battle.
People be zerging back in UO with the Faction Wars in Felucca.
People be zerging today in a bunch of MMOs with "open world" style PvP - including RvR types.
Realistically, any open field conflict between two or more large factions could be called a zerg, but honestly that is the nature of melee combat.
Even if it is two large armies clashing on the field, it's "rush each other and hack to bits."
Best way to anti-zerg is to require siege, coordinated attacks against fortified structures. But even then, once the gate/wall goes down, it's "rush in and hack to bits." Zerg.
So unless you want a civil war-esque "line up and shoot each other" MMO - the "zerg" will always be a part of large scale open world PvP. Hell even then you'd have bayonet charges (zerg).
Not having a damage/target cap on AoE certainly does help, but so does removing most if not ALL AoE completely from PvP outside of dedicated siege weaponry.
The real problem is magic. And AoE. And a lack of collision detection / active blocking of projectiles.
In an MMO a large number of players running together is not what defines a zerg. Its where a large number of players need no plan and can win just because they are heading in the same direction. In the case you bring up, they break down a keep door and just run in. Well if there is no plan needed to win you are right but in DAoC, you needed a part of the people that broke down the door to stay behind and defend and rebuild. A common tactic was to let a keep get taken and wipe out the force as they took out the commander (npc) of the base. So 10% needed to stay by the door. Scouts often needed to patrol as the keep was taken out. Most people in a keep raid in DAoC knew their job and would switch with players to take turns doing them. You learned them all. In the end, you felt needed. Not once in GW2 WvW have I felt needed. I follow the train and win. In my 2 years of playing I have only seen smart playing win the battle a handful of times. Numbers is all you need.
We wiped endless number of zerglings who were standing in circle (commander down) of tower/keep/SM with way less people with exact same tactics you described.
Im sorry (not really) that you were always on receiving end of that.
So you support zerg tactics in MMOs as the main way a game should be designed? Because your post make no sense. I talking on one type of plans we used to deal with zergs and how they were not the I win game plan in DAoC.
Its quite fun to wipe zerglings so yes, i support it. Zerg was always a part of massive MMOs and always will be. And its your choice to zerg or not zerg, and its quite obvious which way you picked so its really funny you complain about YOUR OWN choice.
Originally posted by BadSpockPeople be zerging back in UO with the Faction Wars in Felucca.People be zerging today in a bunch of MMOs with "open world" style PvP - including RvR types.Realistically, any open field conflict between two or more large factions could be called a zerg, but honestly that is the nature of melee combat.Even if it is two large armies clashing on the field, it's "rush each other and hack to bits."Best way to anti-zerg is to require siege, coordinated attacks against fortified structures. But even then, once the gate/wall goes down, it's "rush in and hack to bits." Zerg.So unless you want a civil war-esque "line up and shoot each other" MMO - the "zerg" will always be a part of large scale open world PvP. Hell even then you'd have bayonet charges (zerg).Not having a damage/target cap on AoE certainly does help, but so does removing most if not ALL AoE completely from PvP outside of dedicated siege weaponry.The real problem is magic. And AoE. And a lack of collision detection / active blocking of projectiles.
In an MMO a large number of players running together is not what defines a zerg. Its where a large number of players need no plan and can win just because they are heading in the same direction. In the case you bring up, they break down a keep door and just run in. Well if there is no plan needed to win you are right but in DAoC, you needed a part of the people that broke down the door to stay behind and defend and rebuild. A common tactic was to let a keep get taken and wipe out the force as they took out the commander (npc) of the base. So 10% needed to stay by the door. Scouts often needed to patrol as the keep was taken out. Most people in a keep raid in DAoC knew their job and would switch with players to take turns doing them. You learned them all. In the end, you felt needed. Not once in GW2 WvW have I felt needed. I follow the train and win. In my 2 years of playing I have only seen smart playing win the battle a handful of times. Numbers is all you need.
Sorry but you know nothing about WvW in Guild Wars 2. I can easily say that you're just a typical pug player with just reading your posts. In Guild Wars 2 there are 2 types of WvW players.
1. Pug players who knows nothing about WvW and just follows the blue tag on the ebg or home border.
2. Hardcore players who plays with their guilds on other enemy borders and mostly does gvg and tactical plays.
I'm in a very good and well known WvW guild like 1 year now. We have 4 commanders with 4 different teams that do different jobs on border. 1 purple tag with 15-16 players behind him for main fights, 2 yellow tags with 2 more players for each of them for scouting and 1 red tag with 3 thiefs and 1 mesmer for snipe. They all do different things in WvW. We can easily destroy huge pug raids with just 15-16 people in our raid with right commands and tactical play. All hardcore players do the same thing in Guild Wars 2. Those pug raids nothing but trash and home for casual players. If you play with a real WvW guild in Gw2 you will understand what it means to be a good player in WvW. Even if you have 15-20 people in your raid and you're facing an enemy with 40-50 people, you can beat them easily if you want. One amazing portal or veil from your mesmer or only one smart move from your commander can change everything instantly in a battle.
It's aways nice to see one DAoC player who understood how to play GW2 WvW.
The first year I tried the top 10 PvP servers in GW2 and never seen this on any of them. What server are you on now? I will come see what WvW is on your server. My guess it will be more of the same.
Originally posted by BadSpockPeople be zerging back in UO with the Faction Wars in Felucca.People be zerging today in a bunch of MMOs with "open world" style PvP - including RvR types.Realistically, any open field conflict between two or more large factions could be called a zerg, but honestly that is the nature of melee combat.Even if it is two large armies clashing on the field, it's "rush each other and hack to bits."Best way to anti-zerg is to require siege, coordinated attacks against fortified structures. But even then, once the gate/wall goes down, it's "rush in and hack to bits." Zerg.So unless you want a civil war-esque "line up and shoot each other" MMO - the "zerg" will always be a part of large scale open world PvP. Hell even then you'd have bayonet charges (zerg).Not having a damage/target cap on AoE certainly does help, but so does removing most if not ALL AoE completely from PvP outside of dedicated siege weaponry.The real problem is magic. And AoE. And a lack of collision detection / active blocking of projectiles.
In an MMO a large number of players running together is not what defines a zerg. Its where a large number of players need no plan and can win just because they are heading in the same direction. In the case you bring up, they break down a keep door and just run in. Well if there is no plan needed to win you are right but in DAoC, you needed a part of the people that broke down the door to stay behind and defend and rebuild. A common tactic was to let a keep get taken and wipe out the force as they took out the commander (npc) of the base. So 10% needed to stay by the door. Scouts often needed to patrol as the keep was taken out. Most people in a keep raid in DAoC knew their job and would switch with players to take turns doing them. You learned them all. In the end, you felt needed. Not once in GW2 WvW have I felt needed. I follow the train and win. In my 2 years of playing I have only seen smart playing win the battle a handful of times. Numbers is all you need.
Sorry but you know nothing about WvW in Guild Wars 2. I can easily say that you're just a typical pug player with just reading your posts. In Guild Wars 2 there are 2 types of WvW players.
1. Pug players who knows nothing about WvW and just follows the blue tag on the ebg or home border.
2. Hardcore players who plays with their guilds on other enemy borders and mostly does gvg and tactical plays.
I'm in a very good and well known WvW guild like 1 year now. We have 4 commanders with 4 different teams that do different jobs on border. 1 purple tag with 15-16 players behind him for main fights, 2 yellow tags with 2 more players for each of them for scouting and 1 red tag with 3 thiefs and 1 mesmer for snipe. They all do different things in WvW. We can easily destroy huge pug raids with just 15-16 people in our raid with right commands and tactical play. All hardcore players do the same thing in Guild Wars 2. Those pug raids nothing but trash and home for casual players. If you play with a real WvW guild in Gw2 you will understand what it means to be a good player in WvW. Even if you have 15-20 people in your raid and you're facing an enemy with 40-50 people, you can beat them easily if you want. One amazing portal or veil from your mesmer or only one smart move from your commander can change everything instantly in a battle.
It's aways nice to see one DAoC player who understood how to play GW2 WvW.
The first year I tried the top 10 PvP servers in GW2 and never seen this on any of them. What server are you on now? I will come see what WvW is on your server. My guess it will be more of the same.
You didn't understand what he said, obviously.
You can either be part of the random groups, which are mostly zergs, or join a PvP guild and enjoy organized PvP with strategy and objectives. And then, you will also enjoy destroying those zerg, because despite what the people who don't even play GW2 say, strategy and organisation is superior to zerging in that game.
It's actually exactly like DAoC or any other "RvR" style PvP game.
Yes ...yes ..organized Zerg is much better that just plain old Zerg .. lmao aint that rich
Originally posted by BadSpockPeople be zerging back in UO with the Faction Wars in Felucca.People be zerging today in a bunch of MMOs with "open world" style PvP - including RvR types.Realistically, any open field conflict between two or more large factions could be called a zerg, but honestly that is the nature of melee combat.Even if it is two large armies clashing on the field, it's "rush each other and hack to bits."Best way to anti-zerg is to require siege, coordinated attacks against fortified structures. But even then, once the gate/wall goes down, it's "rush in and hack to bits." Zerg.So unless you want a civil war-esque "line up and shoot each other" MMO - the "zerg" will always be a part of large scale open world PvP. Hell even then you'd have bayonet charges (zerg).Not having a damage/target cap on AoE certainly does help, but so does removing most if not ALL AoE completely from PvP outside of dedicated siege weaponry.The real problem is magic. And AoE. And a lack of collision detection / active blocking of projectiles.
In an MMO a large number of players running together is not what defines a zerg. Its where a large number of players need no plan and can win just because they are heading in the same direction. In the case you bring up, they break down a keep door and just run in. Well if there is no plan needed to win you are right but in DAoC, you needed a part of the people that broke down the door to stay behind and defend and rebuild. A common tactic was to let a keep get taken and wipe out the force as they took out the commander (npc) of the base. So 10% needed to stay by the door. Scouts often needed to patrol as the keep was taken out. Most people in a keep raid in DAoC knew their job and would switch with players to take turns doing them. You learned them all. In the end, you felt needed. Not once in GW2 WvW have I felt needed. I follow the train and win. In my 2 years of playing I have only seen smart playing win the battle a handful of times. Numbers is all you need.
Sorry but you know nothing about WvW in Guild Wars 2. I can easily say that you're just a typical pug player with just reading your posts. In Guild Wars 2 there are 2 types of WvW players.
1. Pug players who knows nothing about WvW and just follows the blue tag on the ebg or home border.
2. Hardcore players who plays with their guilds on other enemy borders and mostly does gvg and tactical plays.
I'm in a very good and well known WvW guild like 1 year now. We have 4 commanders with 4 different teams that do different jobs on border. 1 purple tag with 15-16 players behind him for main fights, 2 yellow tags with 2 more players for each of them for scouting and 1 red tag with 3 thiefs and 1 mesmer for snipe. They all do different things in WvW. We can easily destroy huge pug raids with just 15-16 people in our raid with right commands and tactical play. All hardcore players do the same thing in Guild Wars 2. Those pug raids nothing but trash and home for casual players. If you play with a real WvW guild in Gw2 you will understand what it means to be a good player in WvW. Even if you have 15-20 people in your raid and you're facing an enemy with 40-50 people, you can beat them easily if you want. One amazing portal or veil from your mesmer or only one smart move from your commander can change everything instantly in a battle.
It's aways nice to see one DAoC player who understood how to play GW2 WvW.
The first year I tried the top 10 PvP servers in GW2 and never seen this on any of them. What server are you on now? I will come see what WvW is on your server. My guess it will be more of the same.
You didn't understand what he said, obviously.
You can either be part of the random groups, which are mostly zergs, or join a PvP guild and enjoy organized PvP with strategy and objectives. And then, you will also enjoy destroying those zerg, because despite what the people who don't even play GW2 say, strategy and organisation is superior to zerging in that game.
It's actually exactly like DAoC or any other "RvR" style PvP game.
Im saying, I have played the top 10 PvP server the first year or so and not one guild was running tactics that came close to DAoC. I saw guild try and most times the zergs would win. If they are on a server thats playing tactics that can beat zergs most times. I want to come see. As he always defends GW2 even when its clear he is wrong. I am calling him on it. I would love to jump to his server. I will do it this weekend and see how well they play. My guess its just hot air as it normally is when it comes to GW2 WvW. Dont get me wrong, when I feel like large scale RvR style combat, GW2 is the best option right now. But even the devs have said they know they are zergish and trying to fix that in the coming expansion. So yes I get what he is saying, Im asking him to put his money where his mouth is. If I am wrong, I would be very happy and find a place there.
Edit: Still waiting for a server name, guild name as well so I can watch you guys in action =-)
Originally posted by Nanfoodle Originally posted by Jean-Luc_PicardOriginally posted by NanfoodleOriginally posted by Jean-Luc_PicardOriginally posted by NephethOriginally posted by NanfoodleOriginally posted by BadSpockPeople be zerging back in UO with the Faction Wars in Felucca.People be zerging today in a bunch of MMOs with "open world" style PvP - including RvR types.Realistically, any open field conflict between two or more large factions could be called a zerg, but honestly that is the nature of melee combat.Even if it is two large armies clashing on the field, it's "rush each other and hack to bits."Best way to anti-zerg is to require siege, coordinated attacks against fortified structures. But even then, once the gate/wall goes down, it's "rush in and hack to bits." Zerg.So unless you want a civil war-esque "line up and shoot each other" MMO - the "zerg" will always be a part of large scale open world PvP. Hell even then you'd have bayonet charges (zerg).Not having a damage/target cap on AoE certainly does help, but so does removing most if not ALL AoE completely from PvP outside of dedicated siege weaponry.The real problem is magic. And AoE. And a lack of collision detection / active blocking of projectiles.
In an MMO a large number of players running together is not what defines a zerg. Its where a large number of players need no plan and can win just because they are heading in the same direction. In the case you bring up, they break down a keep door and just run in. Well if there is no plan needed to win you are right but in DAoC, you needed a part of the people that broke down the door to stay behind and defend and rebuild. A common tactic was to let a keep get taken and wipe out the force as they took out the commander (npc) of the base. So 10% needed to stay by the door. Scouts often needed to patrol as the keep was taken out. Most people in a keep raid in DAoC knew their job and would switch with players to take turns doing them. You learned them all. In the end, you felt needed. Not once in GW2 WvW have I felt needed. I follow the train and win. In my 2 years of playing I have only seen smart playing win the battle a handful of times. Numbers is all you need.Sorry but you know nothing about WvW in Guild Wars 2. I can easily say that you're just a typical pug player with just reading your posts. In Guild Wars 2 there are 2 types of WvW players.1. Pug players who knows nothing about WvW and just follows the blue tag on the ebg or home border.2. Hardcore players who plays with their guilds on other enemy borders and mostly does gvg and tactical plays.I'm in a very good and well known WvW guild like 1 year now. We have 4 commanders with 4 different teams that do different jobs on border. 1 purple tag with 15-16 players behind him for main fights, 2 yellow tags with 2 more players for each of them for scouting and 1 red tag with 3 thiefs and 1 mesmer for snipe. They all do different things in WvW. We can easily destroy huge pug raids with just 15-16 people in our raid with right commands and tactical play. All hardcore players do the same thing in Guild Wars 2. Those pug raids nothing but trash and home for casual players. If you play with a real WvW guild in Gw2 you will understand what it means to be a good player in WvW. Even if you have 15-20 people in your raid and you're facing an enemy with 40-50 people, you can beat them easily if you want. One amazing portal or veil from your mesmer or only one smart move from your commander can change everything instantly in a battle.It's aways nice to see one DAoC player who understood how to play GW2 WvW. The first year I tried the top 10 PvP servers in GW2 and never seen this on any of them. What server are you on now? I will come see what WvW is on your server. My guess it will be more of the same. You didn't understand what he said, obviously.You can either be part of the random groups, which are mostly zergs, or join a PvP guild and enjoy organized PvP with strategy and objectives. And then, you will also enjoy destroying those zerg, because despite what the people who don't even play GW2 say, strategy and organisation is superior to zerging in that game.It's actually exactly like DAoC or any other "RvR" style PvP game.Im saying, I have played the top 10 PvP server the first year or so and not one guild was running tactics that came close to DAoC. I saw guild try and most times the zergs would win. If they are on a server thats playing tactics that can beat zergs most times. I want to come see. As he always defends GW2 even when its clear he is wrong. I am calling him on it. I would love to jump to his server. I will do it this weekend and see how well they play. My guess its just hot air as it normally is when it comes to GW2 WvW. Dont get me wrong, when I feel like large scale RvR style combat, GW2 is the best option right now. But even the devs have said they know they are zergish and trying to fix that in the coming expansion. So yes I get what he is saying, Im asking him to put his money where his mouth is. If I am wrong, I would be very happy and find a place there.
Are you for real!? First year? Top 10 server? What are we even arguing for? You really think that server success is relevant to quality of guilds and their tactics? Of corse the most populated server with bigger zergs will win. They can play 7/24 and they can just farm with capturing points without real fight. We're not talking about server success here. That's why all servers decided to keep guild raids on specific borders and separate them from pug raids. Pug zergs can get as much as points they want as long as there are players and commanders willing to play. Guild raids are something else. Guild raids fight for themselves and for their reputation not for the server's sake. We changed our server 4 times in the last 5 months. Why? Because we don't care the server is successful or not. We're trying to find new rivals all the time. All big guilds do the same. Just last night on WvW we didn't capture even a camp in 3 hours on guild raid. We just fought with 2 other guilds constantly in front of out home tower. They didn't even try to capture our tower. When we wiped they just waited for us to come back for fight.
Right now we're on the Seafarer's Rest on Eu. Last month we were playing on the Desolation server. In 2 weeks we will change our server again(We'll probably go to Gunner's Hold). You're always welcome to see how WvW guilds fight. Every night from 20:00 to 01:00 UTC+2 there are guild raids everywhere on enemy borders. Just don't go to ebg or home border. They're for pugs. Our guild have WvW raids everyday except fridays(WvW reset day). And we're doing GvG battles twice a month.
When a game is designed in a way where Tactics are not a better option then Zergs, then you have a problem. Viable but not desirable.
Oh and the only difference between this and the EQ vid would be the amount of graphics on screen. BD is obviously more cluttered due to the modern graphics and effects. A bit overdone in my book but hey, that what the eastern gamers like.
This would be the words of someone who has never played EQ or Vanguard past newbe areas. These types of games had everyone working as a unit. No one was out of place and if you were, everyone knew it. EQ and Vanguard had zero zerg game play.
No I did not play EQ, I will admit that.
So you tell me that everyone back in 1999 knew exactly where to be and what to do in a battle, through what? Texting in chat?
Yeah, pretty much. But that aside...
What I am relly getting from this thread is that BD fanboys are desperately trying to deflect from the brainless clusterfuck of a charging mob shown in that video by dragging other games into the mix. I mean... We are talking about EQ in the thread FFS... A game that has next to nothing to do with BD. The thread is about an action based PvP focused game...
This is all in an effort I think to deflect from talking about BD. Mainly, I guess, because the fans of BD know just how bad the play in that vid looks.
Deflect deflect deflect.
I am not anti action gameplay, as I said earlier in this thread I play and love Mount & Blade and love the mass combat PvP in that game, but action doesn't mean mindless zerg zerg zerg and we do ourselves as gamers a disservice in accepting it as ok in terms of modern game design.
I still haven't heard what aspect of Black Desert would inherently promote zerging in PvP more so than a game like EQ1 would.
Again, it's not so much about the gameplay as it's about the people playing the game.
You can start the age-old argument of "oldschool" versus new games & communities again, but there's a million other threads on this site for that.
Using one video where people are reportedly zerging to conclude that the game is a zergfest is about as useful as putting laxative in your dad's morning coffee; and less funny.
For the record: I'm not even interested in Black Desert much.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
No, let's compare them, I don't mind. They want to prove Black Desert isn't a messy zerg.
Let's see.
EQ:
Black Desert
fail
What exactly do those screens tell us on the subject? Fail indeed.
A large organized group of players following specific rules in order to overcome an objective vs throwing as many players as you can at the enemy because numbers will win regardless of organization.
The problem with this argument is that they're nothing alike. In EQ this is a group or raid of players teaming up to take down an NPC that REQUIRES this number of people and lots of organization to overcome. In Black Desert this is a pvp .. um.. arena area where they are pitting 100 vs 100 players against each other. Neither of these are actually zergs at all. IF in Black Desert this were open world PVP and one side gathered 100 people to fight against 10 just because numbers win, then that is a zerg.
What I believe the OP is trying to convey is the utter disastrous mess that ends up happening when having an arena pvp of this magnitude. Some people might like it. I personally find it pointless and not rewarding in any way.
Raids in classic EQ were/ are highly organised. High numbers do not equal zerg.
Agreed. Raids in EQ were/are tightly organized and coordinated.
This.
Because you ran with every raid group in EQ ever put together? A Zerg is a tactic that is employed. I'm sure plenty of raids were zerged in EQ, just as it goes for any (non instanced) game.
The only thing you get from zerging raid bosses in EQ is a corpse run and experience loss.
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do. Benjamin Franklin
Comments
Very silly as are most of your posts.
Zerg is a term coined from Starcraft. A weaker enemy that uses greater numbers to balance.
A viable tactic in any battle.
Mass numbers of PvP players in an MMO = Zerg according to practically everyone here.
So what is your point?
Oh and the only difference between this and the EQ vid would be the amount of graphics on screen. BD is obviously more cluttered due to the modern graphics and effects. A bit overdone in my book but hey, that what the eastern gamers like.
Lets face it here. This game wasn't designed with western gamers in mind. In fact I don't think any game is anymore.
Because every single one of you here wants something different.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
People be zerging back in UO with the Faction Wars in Felucca.
People be zerging today in a bunch of MMOs with "open world" style PvP - including RvR types.
Realistically, any open field conflict between two or more large factions could be called a zerg, but honestly that is the nature of melee combat.
Even if it is two large armies clashing on the field, it's "rush each other and hack to bits."
Best way to anti-zerg is to require siege, coordinated attacks against fortified structures. But even then, once the gate/wall goes down, it's "rush in and hack to bits." Zerg.
So unless you want a civil war-esque "line up and shoot each other" MMO - the "zerg" will always be a part of large scale open world PvP. Hell even then you'd have bayonet charges (zerg).
Not having a damage/target cap on AoE certainly does help, but so does removing most if not ALL AoE completely from PvP outside of dedicated siege weaponry.
The real problem is magic. And AoE. And a lack of collision detection / active blocking of projectiles.
When a game is designed in a way where Tactics are not a better option then Zergs, then you have a problem. Viable but not desirable.
This would be the words of someone who has never played EQ or Vanguard past newbe areas. These types of games had everyone working as a unit. No one was out of place and if you were, everyone knew it. EQ and Vanguard had zero zerg game play.
No I did not play EQ, I will admit that.
So you tell me that everyone back in 1999 knew exactly where to be and what to do in a battle, through what? Texting in chat?
Or did they just spend weeks choreographing the whole event?
Or was it just that people and the game played a little slower than they do now, and it looked more organized?
So tell me, exactly how was it done in EQ and why can't it be done now?
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
In an MMO a large number of players running together is not what defines a zerg. Its where a large number of players need no plan and can win just because they are heading in the same direction. In the case you bring up, they break down a keep door and just run in. Well if there is no plan needed to win you are right but in DAoC, you needed a part of the people that broke down the door to stay behind and defend and rebuild. A common tactic was to let a keep get taken and wipe out the force as they took out the commander (npc) of the base. So 10% needed to stay by the door. Scouts often needed to patrol as the keep was taken out. Most people in a keep raid in DAoC knew their job and would switch with players to take turns doing them. You learned them all. In the end, you felt needed. Not once in GW2 WvW have I felt needed. I follow the train and win. In my 2 years of playing I have only seen smart playing win the battle a handful of times. Numbers is all you need.
I managed to narrow it down to 1 fact:
they dont have a clue what thyere talking about
We wiped endless number of zerglings who were standing in circle (commander down) of tower/keep/SM with way less people with exact same tactics you described.
Im sorry (not really) that you were always on receiving end of that.
Both of the above. Wiping and setting up could take an hour or more, so you had time to discuss. Gameplay is slower. It doesn't just look more organized, it was more organized.
Why can't it be done now? Probably because it would be too hard, people complain about having to group, let alone having complex raids that require organisation.
More organised MMO are possible though, but the current MMO are mostly DPS+Dodge, because people prefer the challenge of SKILL over STRATEGY. And by skill, I mean the same skill games like street fighter have.
The skill required in MMO now is more about retention of button combinations, about dodges, about action in general, before it was more about strategy, community, organisation, control.
Yes, on a new raid boss we could spend sometimes 30 min or more as the raid leader typed out instructions for each team and member. After we had done the raid a few times and got it down, they would make macros of the instructions and we would read them over depending on what we were doing because of what members and classes showed up. So 5-10 min prep time was needed once we knew it and the raid leader had his macros set up with the instructions.
Why cant it be done now? EQ1 and Vanguard were class/roll games. Each class was needed to fill a roll. Even DPS classes had jobs. As a necro a pure DPS class I had a few very important rolls to fill in many raids. Most MMOs now have made classes go generic that almost class is a hybrid class. You get 40 players together and no one knows what they are able to do. So a raid leader would need to ask each player of every class what they can do and are speced for. If BD has a real trinity game. I will play it. I love the old days where a Wizard joined the team and you knew what his job was. Could be speced different and have his onw way of doing things, but in the end. He knew his job or quickly got a bad name and didnt find teams.
Sure now you get tones of players all playing hybrid classes that can do almost anything but that lends to everyone trying to be everything. No tactics and mostly zergs.
So you support zerg tactics in MMOs as the main way a game should be designed? Because your post make no sense. I talking on one type of plans we used to deal with zergs and how they were not the I win game plan in DAoC.
Raquelis in various games
Played: Everything
Playing: Nioh 2, Civ6
Wants: The World
Anticipating: Everquest Next Crowfall, Pantheon, Elden Ring
EQ didn't change. It is still the same coordinated strategic fight with a very slow and long raid.
It is just "different" design, it's completely the opposite of zerg.
Sorry but you know nothing about WvW in Guild Wars 2. I can easily say that you're just a typical pug player with just reading your posts. In Guild Wars 2 there are 2 types of WvW players.
1. Pug players who knows nothing about WvW and just follows the blue tag on the ebg or home border.
2. Hardcore players who plays with their guilds on other enemy borders and mostly does gvg and tactical plays.
I'm in a very good and well known WvW guild like 1 year now. We have 4 commanders with 4 different teams that do different jobs on border. 1 purple tag with 15-16 players behind him for main fights, 2 yellow tags with 2 more players for each of them for scouting and 1 red tag with 3 thiefs and 1 mesmer for snipe. They all do different things in WvW. We can easily destroy huge pug raids with just 15-16 people in our raid with right commands and tactical play. All hardcore players do the same thing in Guild Wars 2. Those pug raids nothing but trash and home for casual players. If you play with a real WvW guild in Gw2 you will understand what it means to be a good player in WvW. Even if you have 15-20 people in your raid and you're facing an enemy with 40-50 people, you can beat them easily if you want. One amazing portal or veil from your mesmer or only one smart move from your commander can change everything instantly in a battle.
Its quite fun to wipe zerglings so yes, i support it. Zerg was always a part of massive MMOs and always will be. And its your choice to zerg or not zerg, and its quite obvious which way you picked so its really funny you complain about YOUR OWN choice.
here is the difference, in one game everyone is organised and they all do the same thing like an orchestra
in another game, there is full out DPS and chaos
I'll let you decide which is which
The first year I tried the top 10 PvP servers in GW2 and never seen this on any of them. What server are you on now? I will come see what WvW is on your server. My guess it will be more of the same.
Yes ...yes ..organized Zerg is much better that just plain old Zerg .. lmao aint that rich
Im saying, I have played the top 10 PvP server the first year or so and not one guild was running tactics that came close to DAoC. I saw guild try and most times the zergs would win. If they are on a server thats playing tactics that can beat zergs most times. I want to come see. As he always defends GW2 even when its clear he is wrong. I am calling him on it. I would love to jump to his server. I will do it this weekend and see how well they play. My guess its just hot air as it normally is when it comes to GW2 WvW. Dont get me wrong, when I feel like large scale RvR style combat, GW2 is the best option right now. But even the devs have said they know they are zergish and trying to fix that in the coming expansion. So yes I get what he is saying, Im asking him to put his money where his mouth is. If I am wrong, I would be very happy and find a place there.
Edit: Still waiting for a server name, guild name as well so I can watch you guys in action =-)
Sorry but you know nothing about WvW in Guild Wars 2. I can easily say that you're just a typical pug player with just reading your posts. In Guild Wars 2 there are 2 types of WvW players. 1. Pug players who knows nothing about WvW and just follows the blue tag on the ebg or home border. 2. Hardcore players who plays with their guilds on other enemy borders and mostly does gvg and tactical plays. I'm in a very good and well known WvW guild like 1 year now. We have 4 commanders with 4 different teams that do different jobs on border. 1 purple tag with 15-16 players behind him for main fights, 2 yellow tags with 2 more players for each of them for scouting and 1 red tag with 3 thiefs and 1 mesmer for snipe. They all do different things in WvW. We can easily destroy huge pug raids with just 15-16 people in our raid with right commands and tactical play. All hardcore players do the same thing in Guild Wars 2. Those pug raids nothing but trash and home for casual players. If you play with a real WvW guild in Gw2 you will understand what it means to be a good player in WvW. Even if you have 15-20 people in your raid and you're facing an enemy with 40-50 people, you can beat them easily if you want. One amazing portal or veil from your mesmer or only one smart move from your commander can change everything instantly in a battle.
It's aways nice to see one DAoC player who understood how to play GW2 WvW.
The first year I tried the top 10 PvP servers in GW2 and never seen this on any of them. What server are you on now? I will come see what WvW is on your server. My guess it will be more of the same.
You didn't understand what he said, obviously. You can either be part of the random groups, which are mostly zergs, or join a PvP guild and enjoy organized PvP with strategy and objectives. And then, you will also enjoy destroying those zerg, because despite what the people who don't even play GW2 say, strategy and organisation is superior to zerging in that game. It's actually exactly like DAoC or any other "RvR" style PvP game.
Im saying, I have played the top 10 PvP server the first year or so and not one guild was running tactics that came close to DAoC. I saw guild try and most times the zergs would win. If they are on a server thats playing tactics that can beat zergs most times. I want to come see. As he always defends GW2 even when its clear he is wrong. I am calling him on it. I would love to jump to his server. I will do it this weekend and see how well they play. My guess its just hot air as it normally is when it comes to GW2 WvW. Dont get me wrong, when I feel like large scale RvR style combat, GW2 is the best option right now. But even the devs have said they know they are zergish and trying to fix that in the coming expansion. So yes I get what he is saying, Im asking him to put his money where his mouth is. If I am wrong, I would be very happy and find a place there.
Are you for real!? First year? Top 10 server? What are we even arguing for? You really think that server success is relevant to quality of guilds and their tactics? Of corse the most populated server with bigger zergs will win. They can play 7/24 and they can just farm with capturing points without real fight. We're not talking about server success here. That's why all servers decided to keep guild raids on specific borders and separate them from pug raids. Pug zergs can get as much as points they want as long as there are players and commanders willing to play. Guild raids are something else. Guild raids fight for themselves and for their reputation not for the server's sake. We changed our server 4 times in the last 5 months. Why? Because we don't care the server is successful or not. We're trying to find new rivals all the time. All big guilds do the same. Just last night on WvW we didn't capture even a camp in 3 hours on guild raid. We just fought with 2 other guilds constantly in front of out home tower. They didn't even try to capture our tower. When we wiped they just waited for us to come back for fight.
Right now we're on the Seafarer's Rest on Eu. Last month we were playing on the Desolation server. In 2 weeks we will change our server again(We'll probably go to Gunner's Hold). You're always welcome to see how WvW guilds fight. Every night from 20:00 to 01:00 UTC+2 there are guild raids everywhere on enemy borders. Just don't go to ebg or home border. They're for pugs. Our guild have WvW raids everyday except fridays(WvW reset day). And we're doing GvG battles twice a month.
Yeah, pretty much. But that aside...
What I am relly getting from this thread is that BD fanboys are desperately trying to deflect from the brainless clusterfuck of a charging mob shown in that video by dragging other games into the mix. I mean... We are talking about EQ in the thread FFS... A game that has next to nothing to do with BD. The thread is about an action based PvP focused game...
This is all in an effort I think to deflect from talking about BD. Mainly, I guess, because the fans of BD know just how bad the play in that vid looks.
Deflect deflect deflect.
I am not anti action gameplay, as I said earlier in this thread I play and love Mount & Blade and love the mass combat PvP in that game, but action doesn't mean mindless zerg zerg zerg and we do ourselves as gamers a disservice in accepting it as ok in terms of modern game design.
I still haven't heard what aspect of Black Desert would inherently promote zerging in PvP more so than a game like EQ1 would.
Again, it's not so much about the gameplay as it's about the people playing the game.
You can start the age-old argument of "oldschool" versus new games & communities again, but there's a million other threads on this site for that.
Using one video where people are reportedly zerging to conclude that the game is a zergfest is about as useful as putting laxative in your dad's morning coffee; and less funny.
For the record: I'm not even interested in Black Desert much.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
A large organized group of players following specific rules in order to overcome an objective vs throwing as many players as you can at the enemy because numbers will win regardless of organization.
The problem with this argument is that they're nothing alike. In EQ this is a group or raid of players teaming up to take down an NPC that REQUIRES this number of people and lots of organization to overcome. In Black Desert this is a pvp .. um.. arena area where they are pitting 100 vs 100 players against each other. Neither of these are actually zergs at all. IF in Black Desert this were open world PVP and one side gathered 100 people to fight against 10 just because numbers win, then that is a zerg.
What I believe the OP is trying to convey is the utter disastrous mess that ends up happening when having an arena pvp of this magnitude. Some people might like it. I personally find it pointless and not rewarding in any way.
The only thing you get from zerging raid bosses in EQ is a corpse run and experience loss.
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do.
Benjamin Franklin
WW2 wasn't a fun game. In fact it was most commonly referred to as "hell" (the exact opposite of a fun game.)
There's nothing wrong with winning real wars with the tools at your disposal, it's just bad as the basis for a game design.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver