Jump to content

Server time (UTC): 2021-08-01 03:17

PLIKT -- O-Squad Patrol -
TODAY | 2021-08-01 19:00:00 (server time) | Starts in 15 hours, 42 minutes | Nyheim City

Let's Talk About Zergs


Do you think Zergs are healthy for the server?  

107 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

  • Diamond

I am a part of DeadHorse the roster is huge and only got that big due to the fact that enough big groups show up and roll your shit so many times before you result to the same tactics to survive. I would love to see a group roster Cap but I know thats very unpopular.  I think that smaller groups would result in roleplay beign spread more widely through out the map and more storylines could be developed as more groups and leaders fight for control of their towns, regions and resources. This was a great topic and I am interested to see everyones opinion on things from smaller dynamic groups to the larger Zerg type groups that many of us find ourselves part of.

Link to post
  • MVP

Unfortunately I don't think there is a solution to this.

Putting a restriction on how many players can be in a group just results in 2 groups being created that then run together anyway, you can't really prevent people from working together if they want to, and putting restrictions on teaming is also a bad move.

 

Do I think Zergs are a problem? Not really, I find them annoying at times but it's not really problematic, we've found ways around dealing with Zergs and continue to find ways to tackle them.

Link to post
  • Diamond

Agreed. Roleplay is definitely limited when increasing the number of members whether it be peace time or active hostilities. Although I'm a member of one of these zergs. I would still love to see Larger amounts of small groups Scattered throughout the country. However it is players choice at the end of the day to fly the same flag. 

I also agree with NOT having group limits. if you can successfully recruit and maintain that level of members then absolutely understandable. We just have to do better at active WAR roleplay. which is definitely there we just have to get to it before the bullets start flying around.

Link to post
  • Sapphire

wtf is this rust? its not like you can fucking bag in for a raid and zerg lmao. Limiting group size = limiting roleplay.

Edited by JorrdanVC
Link to post
Just now, JorrdanVC said:

wtf is this rust? its not like you can fucking bag in for a raid lmao. Limiting group size = limiting roleplay.

Perhaps read the thread I specifically said I am not proposing to limit group size.

Link to post

I think that the server goes through stages, sometimes there are a few big groups and sometimes there are many smaller groups, so it will eventually change, it's just a question of how long it will take for this change to happen.

Link to post
  • Sapphire
3 minutes ago, Mike said:

Perhaps read the thread I specifically said I am not proposing to limit group size.

I skimmed it not gon cap but there is literally no other solution to "zergs" then limiting group size/numbers.

Edited by JorrdanVC
Link to post

I don't think limiting group size should be a thing, nor i think it ever will be a thing because it can be easily bypassed, but i do agree these super large 20+ man groups with most of them if not all active, is not good for the server. The only way to survive these big ass zerg groups are being in one, if you're a small group trying to start, or solo to rolepaly, you're going to get absolutely fucked if the big groups decided to not like you. I don't think they add anything to the server other than just donimating the PvP scene, me even being in one i can see that. when we have everyone on, not that much roleplay going on, usually just PvP with the other zerg, only roleplay is when its just a couple of people on. I don't think that these 25+ man groups add any good roleplay.

Link to post

Speaking as a member of Dead Horse:

While some of these groups do have pretty large rosters, not all of those people are interested in PvP warfare. And you rarely find the entire roster online at the same time (but you might see a majority, I guess.)

I would argue that seeing a few larger groups would be realistic for this setting. People will naturally gravitate towards where they feel safest. There is power and safety in numbers.

You also have to consider character motivation. Some characters may simply align better with one of these groups, and if they are forced to create their own using the same ideals then they already have an automatic ally and add to their numbers in that way.

While large groups may make roleplay seem limited at first, consider the following:

-The more people you have in a group the larger chance you have for internal conflicts.

-Massive groups will inevitably experience growing pains and have characters splinter off to join other groups or start their own.

From my experience so far on the server, numbers seem very fluid. People are always arriving, leaving, creating, and changing. I don't think it's anything to worry about.

 

Link to post
  • Lore Master

No matter what restriction you put in, it'll simply be divided into several different groups / dynamic groups that'll ultimately end up allying eachother, leaving us in the same situation we started in.

So yeah, I don't know what you want to be done.

Link to post
21 minutes ago, DukeLR said:

So yeah, I don't know what you want to be done.

I'm not sure what to do about the problem I was just bringing it forward to see if others had an idea. The only way I can see the dynamic being fixed is if people just realize that multiple zurgs are not good for server and break off to make more groups.

Link to post
  • Sapphire

Honestly I see no problem with Zerg Groups. I don't quite understand "Small Group=More RP", wouldn't you have less RP? If you had more people in a group you could easily have atleast 4-6 in each RP Hot Spot (RP Hubs) or even branch out and create checkpoints. Like @GhostyBae stated, not every group with 20+ people will be interested in Warfare. 

One thing to consider aswell, not everyone in those zerg groups will participate in a firefight. I highly doubt you'd see a 27v32 in the middle of a field, If that were to happen it would probably be in a raid against an opposing faction. But another reason why I support Zerg Group's is that they are able to establish a presence ICly and help build connections because of their size. I could go on about this, but I feel like I confused some people (by accident of course lol) and If I did it would quickly turn into a rant. 

Link to post
3 minutes ago, Trijim said:

Honestly I see no problem with Zerg Groups. I don't quite understand "Small Group=More RP", wouldn't you have less RP? If you had more people in a group you could easily have atleast 4-6 in each RP Hot Spot (RP Hubs) or even branch out and create checkpoints. Like @GhostyBae stated, not every group with 20+ people will be interested in Warfare. 

The reason why I believe more groups with less people will give you more RP is because if there are more groups on the server then there are more avenues of RP to explore just given that there are more groups with differing goals/ideas as opposed to a few groups with a lot of people in them. Six possible storylines is more than only four storylines and the best way to achieve this to have more groups with less people.

6 minutes ago, Trijim said:

One thing to consider aswell, not everyone in those zerg groups will participate in a firefight. I highly doubt you'd see a 27v32 in the middle of a field, If that were to happen it would probably be in a raid against an opposing faction. But another reason why I support Zerg Group's is that they are able to establish a presence ICly and help build connections because of their size. I could go on about this, but I feel like I confused some people (by accident of course lol) and If I did it would quickly turn into a rant. 

I'm not sure if you've been in touch with what all has been going on in game in the last two weeks (at least) it has just been constant zerg PVP. Now I'll be honest war RP is fun but the only problem is that I think it is less likely to resolve a war when you have zerg groups (just because there are so many different opinions due there being more people) as opposed to solving a war with smaller groups.

Link to post
  • Sapphire

You may think Spero is a zerg group, but at most we have 12 people online.  Hell, last night we had 10.  Groups that are allied together go into combat together.  Its all RP.  If you don't like getting rolled as a smaller group, make good relations with the bigger groups.  There shouldn't be a rule to help out smaller groups IC.  Would like to add that Spero has not recruited a single person in months.

Edited by GhostyAlt
Me dum
Link to post

Thank you for bringing attention to this, as I find the whole conundrum to be a though nut to crack. I think that in a game like dayz, where you can be attacked at any given moment, there is an incentive apropos of having a larger group size. When I joined The Lost Highway, we had a small group size, and among us over half were non-combatants. This reality led to us getting "clapped" frequently, and has caused a few members to leave. I have noticed that as we have begun to position ourselves favorably with the "Zerg" groups, and as we started recruiting more, shall we say, "militia positive" members, this has stopped. We now have enough people so that there is usually someone who can be online no matter the time, which is clearly advantageous. I know that "small" groups were considered to be roughly 15 or so people, but even then it might feel necessary to continue growing your ranks. Basically, I think it is hard for a group not to aspire, consciously or not, to become a "Zerg" group. I mean, if I met over 15 people who I wanted to rp and grow with, I wouldn't want to feel like I couldn't say "yes" to them joining. I get the appeal of having small "secret club" like groups, it is just in Dayz, your group may be forever disadvantaged. To explain: for example, you must have 10 active mebers to have a settlement. While this is not the "be-all, end-all" of a group, I feel it would be a lie to say that it isn't certainly appealing.

Link to post
  • MVP

Indeed thank you for bringing the issue of super groups up as it is a topic that has never been explored in this community before.  Also these polls that keeping popping up with one answer calling for an explanation for your reasoning and no call for an explanation of the other. 

 

Anyway, people want to play with their friends and there's nothing wrong with that. Group size just results in the same thing as normal large groups. Friends won't rob friends, they will hang out with and roleplay with whom they want.  There's a lotta holes in your points but I am sure plenty of other people will hop on the opportunity to argue. 

Link to post
  • Sapphire

People were just complaining that there weren’t enough players/groups. Now there are as you said 9 groups, 4/9 having over 20+ members. I really don’t see how this is much of a problem, if even, a problem at all. You want to do something about “zergs” do it IC. If I have made 20+ friends that makes sense for us to roll as a group then so be it. I don’t really think it hinders anything as long as groups don’t have a “group mentality” and everyone RP’s to their own characters play style.

The last group you personally ran, the Chechenskiy Battalion, had more than 20+ people in it and it didn’t seem to be a problem back then, as it was what it is now.. Just a bunch of friends all playing together, the way THEY want to play on the server.

Link to post
  • Legend

When you end up fighting double your numbers every single firefight you're in, you realise just how cringe it is to see 2 groups merging together despite absolutely baffling reasons to do so:

E.g. @Chechnyans & @Fishermen

Regardless, if they're official groups and aren't forming megasquad alliances i don't really care. Know the size of the group you're dealing with and most of those groups have similar numbers on their rosters.

Edited by Para
Link to post
  • Emerald

Zergs can become a problem when it’s a group or a alliance of groups of like 60 people actively running around the server with no real competition’s. In that respect, yes I would agree with you that it is unhealthy.

 

But what you seem to be pointing out is merely group size. Which I personally don’t think is a problem. There’s no concrete way to limit group size without just splitting up the players into several groups which will just result in those same players allying with each other. 
 

would also just like to point out, just because a roster is big doesn’t mean all of them are on at once. People live in different time zones and have different schedules. I’ve ran with 3 relatively large groups since this lore. New Divide, Belic Bar, and Spero. All of whom have/had quite a large roster but that doesn’t mean all of them are on at once. Sometimes you may have 7/30 people online, sometimes you have 24/30. 

Link to post
  • Diamond

I say fuck the establishment no more groups just everyone against everyone 

in all seriousness though thicc groups, are they annoying to fight? Perhaps

but at the end of the day there’s nothin you can do about it without slapping a player cap on it 

Link to post
  • Emerald

Large groups form, large groups break apart into smaller groups, then large groups form again. It's the ebb and flow of the server. People flock together, it's in our nature. If you want to be a lone wolf or a small group you can, but recognize the disadvantages that comes with the territory.

 

I don't see any problem with the "zergs" on the server. I call it RP.

Link to post
  • Head Admin
1 hour ago, Mike said:

I'm not sure if you've been in touch with what all has been going on in game in the last two weeks (at least) it has just been constant zerg PVP. Now I'll be honest war RP is fun but the only problem is that I think it is less likely to resolve a war when you have zerg groups (just because there are so many different opinions due there being more people) as opposed to solving a war with smaller groups.

As the leader of one of the so-called "Zergs" I disagree with this statement. I have seen plenty of peaceful roleplay outside two massive fights.

It's all a matter of perspective. You get the roleplay you seek for the most part.

Link to post
  • Diamond

I don't see it as an issue but I can understand how it can be an issue. It has to do with intent. If there is a 40+ group of pacifists vs a 40+ of PvP focused players, then one can be seen as a problem as the other can be seen as not a problem. It's about intent of the Zerg army. I personally like seeing large groups. It creates a community which is what we would see in a realistic scenario. Also, as a sort of side note, I would like to see these groups that have such influence, communicate politely with each other OOC so if they steer the RP in a direction, they can assure it goes well for all parties and there is no OOC anger. That's just my opinion though. Zerg have a heavier burden to assure the RP is going well on the server since they make such an influential majority. So they should communicate more. 

Link to post
  • Game Master

Group size isn't a problem, group zerging and alliances are. I hate zergs, group alliances etc and I see some good fraggers taking part in them, come on guys, what happened to the 10v10s in Kab and shit talking on the forums afterwards 😠

Link to post
  • Roland locked this topic
  • Roland unlocked this topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...