Best way to organize squad and subgroups

steki.1478 · July 27, 2019

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:
@"steki.1478" said:The larger the subgroup, the less likely you are to receive 5 man buffs. If you had 6/7 supports in a 15 man party you'd receive random overflow buffs instead of having those 6/7 supports spread around 3x5 man parties. Missing a single stability stack because you werent close enough to guardian (because 4 other players of 15 man party were closer to it than you) can essentially kill you if you got pulled by mesmer for example.

Right, but in such a situation, you are compromising one party member over an entire subgroup.

I'm gonna put this out there that zergs, and WvW are chaotic in nature...and we are dealing with loads of hidden variables. We want to find the most realistic scenario to occur in a given situation with a fundamental understanding of what the variables are.

In the case of a player, which happens to be out of range of a Firebrand due to the inclusion of 4 other players in closer proximity to a firebrand (Said player can actually be within the 360 range) We can actually have such an example be shown in the picture in the post made above.

At that particular instance in time, that player pointed at by the black arrow will not be healed or buffed by anyone. So he can become compromised. But like i said before, i think it's actually better to compromise a single, non healing player than an entire subgroup. Keep in mind that the same scenario can play out under the 5 man subgroup setup, but in a different manner, in which a player is simply out of range of their own subgroup. There are MORE possibilities for this player to not receive heals in said situation than he would if there was a larger subgroup, because there are more opportunities to receive proximity heals the more open the subgroup is, and less opportunities the more closed the subgroup is. Here is an image that shows such a scenario

You may also want to note that the two healers toward the bottom of this squad will ALWAYS heal those in closest proximity to them, regardless of color change or not. Changing the colors (or rather the team in which the healer belongs) will drastically change the number of people who are healed in this particular instance. For example, exchange the Green healer and Pink Healer and swap their colors (which essentially swap their positions) And you'll notice that the pink player next to our orange player (the one with the arrow pointed) will now also not receive any heals/buffs. Note that these players are also very close to the tag, just not close to their respective subgroups.

You're forgetting that heals are spammed constantly and that boons have limited duration.

Your pic shows what's happening within half second, at any random point which generally doesn't mean anything for supports - they just spam random low cooldown and low impact skills. Person who's in the middle of the zerg wont die immediately if he doesn't receive heals in that one second.

The main problem of your idea and also the most important part of organising parties is the moment you group up on commander tag. That's when you use your most important skills and that's when you want every single person on tag to have same amount of same buffs. With bigger parties those buffs would be shared randomly and you can end up with half squad having 10 stacks of stability and other half having none.

JusticeRetroHunter.7684 · July 27, 2019

@"steki.1478" said:

I ended up finding the real reason as to why a 5 man subgrouping is better than a 15 man subgrouping (In some cases) which your responses helped me figure out. It has to do with the nature of Radius upon converging to a singular point;

As the players, and the healers converge to a single point (onto tag), in both 5 man and 15 man configurations, everyone will receive healing...this is true. However, in "more than 5 man" configurations, the radius of healing circles continue to converge as more and more people collapse onto the tag, until the radius of all healer's and their skills drops to that singular point, while in 5 man configurations, the radius remains the same, at the regular radius of the skills being used. This is actually an objective reason as to why a 5 man configuration is BETTER than a 15 man configuration, because of this drop off in radius that occurs. This is essentially what happens when you explain that half the squad get's buffed while the other does not. It's because any SLIGHT differentiation from the tags position can result in leaving the radi of the healing/buff circles.

Now, this is actually a good reason to run 5 man subgroups. I'm convinced...

However...This still doesn't discount 15 man configurations and i'll explain why. This goes back to the effects of Healing other Healers and how this provides better sustain overall to the entire squad. The truth is that healing other healers just never happens in 5 man subgrouping WITHOUT Proximity Priority healing. The only time you will receive healing from other healers in 5 man subgrouping is from OVERFLOW. And cycling back to the earlier argument, is that overflow doesn't occur when your group is constantly pressured and all your healing is diverted to healing your own subgrouping.

This doesn't happen in a 15 man group, in which the healing actually has the possibility of being shared to other healers due to proximity priority. Like the images above, there are millions of other configurations, in which some players receive healing, and some players don't, simply because of their location in proximity to their healers or subgroups. The main point that was being illustrated was that there are more configurations in which healers and players receive more healing in "more than 5 man setups" than healers and players receive in 5 man setups. This is also an objective truth which favors 15 man setups.

So my conclusions...There are pros and cons to both...and both mechanics co-exist with one another, and they both seems to have strengths and weaknesses. The Majority of people stick to the traditional 5 man setup, which favors converging onto tag, while 5manplus setups favor more oppertunity for survivability.

JusticeRetroHunter.7684 · July 27, 2019

@"Cyninja.2954" said:It's not rocket science...

I don't think you give WvW mechanics enough credit. There's a lot of nuance, especially in super high tier gvg/raidvraid scenario's where one pushes are decided by the small details.

You create groups with 2 supports and 3 dps.Why? Because that's how many it currently takes to somehow keep people alive against a similar built group. Less healer means a more defensive setup will kill you, more healers means you lose to much pressure.

I'm gonna challenge your position on this. Let's say we have two raid groups. a 25 man zerg with 5 healers and 20 dps, and an opposing 25 man zerg with 15 healers and 10 dps. Who is more likely to win? and why? Do you have a definitive reason or is it just a hunch or a guess?

Groups are built ideally with 5 people per group.Why? Because of boon limitations (and blasting limitations), especially stability or to be more exact: primarily for stability and as much as you can get your hands on of it.Firebrand is the backbone of every support strucutre.Why? Stability.

Right, this was the discussion of the topic for the most part. But this kinda just tells us why we take firebrands, not why we order them in the subgroups the way we currently do so.

You seperate close, medium and ranged groups.Why? So guards and other support have an easier time standing at the appropraite range if need be.If not enough Firebrands are available you start making ranged groups and seperate warriors/spellbreakers into stand alone groups until guards are found.Why? Because this way ranged dps can tag behind or at least try to not be part of the melee ball. Warriors can operate independently and without sustain longer than most other classes.

Okay hold on a sec. I don't think this is ever a thing unless we are talking pug zergs. The ball configuration in every scenario is the most optimal formation for any zerg...regardless of what classes they are made of. There are so many reasons why ball configuration is the best (so much so they are referred to as the ("murder ball") but splitting up a group based on range just doesn't work. I can understand taking rangers, spellbreakers and thieves and placing them in their own subgroups because of their more unique off tag playstyles, but to divert healer positions away from the tag only makes the zerg as a whole less effective and more susceptible to being one pushed.

steki.1478 · July 28, 2019

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:
@"steki.1478" said:

I ended up finding the real reason as to why a 5 man subgrouping is better than a 15 man subgrouping (In some cases) which your responses helped me figure out. It has to do with the nature of Radius upon converging to a singular point;

As the players, and the healers converge to a single point (onto tag), in both 5 man and 15 man configurations, everyone will receive healing...this is true. However, in "more than 5 man" configurations, the radius of healing circles continue to converge as more and more people collapse onto the tag, until the radius of all healer's and their skills drops to that singular point, while in 5 man configurations, the radius remains the same, at the regular radius of the skills being used. This is actually an objective reason as to why a 5 man configuration is BETTER than a 15 man configuration, because of this drop off in radius that occurs. This is essentially what happens when you explain that half the squad get's buffed while the other does not. It's because any SLIGHT differentiation from the tags position can result in leaving the radi of the healing/buff circles.

Now, this is actually a good reason to run 5 man subgroups. I'm convinced...

However...This still doesn't discount 15 man configurations and i'll explain why. This goes back to the effects of Healing other Healers and how this provides better sustain overall to the entire squad. The truth is that healing other healers just never happens in 5 man subgrouping WITHOUT Proximity Priority healing. The only time you will receive healing from other healers in 5 man subgrouping is from OVERFLOW. And cycling back to the earlier argument, is that overflow doesn't occur when your group is constantly pressured and all your healing is diverted to healing your own subgrouping.

This doesn't happen in a 15 man group, in which the healing actually has the possibility of being shared to other healers due to proximity priority. Like the images above, there are millions of other configurations, in which some players receive healing, and some players don't, simply because of their location in proximity to their healers or subgroups. The main point that was being illustrated was that there are more configurations in which healers and players receive more healing in "more than 5 man setups" than healers and players receive in 5 man setups. This is also an objective truth which favors 15 man setups.

So my conclusions...There are pros and cons to both...and both mechanics co-exist with one another, and they both seems to have strengths and weaknesses. The Majority of people stick to the traditional 5 man setup, which favors converging onto tag, while 5manplus setups favor more oppertunity for survivability.

Fights don't last very long to optimize overflow heals. Most of the impact happens within 10-20 seconds and if you're far away from healer you're dead regardless of squad composition. Receiving important boons can be one of the main factors why you're not near your healer and the only way to provide those boons reliably to everyone is by spliting into 5 man parties.

If fights were chaotic constantly (which happens a lot in unorganized single-party-30-man-clouds) that means that

1) the squad consists of random builds;

2) there's no grouping up for stacking important boons;

2') there's not enough supports that can grant those boons and heals;

and mainly

3) there's no pressure coming from enemies (if there was, fights would last very long and every bad movement would be punished like I mentioned above) and when there's no pressure, there's no need to stay constantly around healers.

Boons and buffs have much higher priority than heals when it comes to forming parties. That's why you had 1 healer per 10-20 people (if any) before fb heals got gutted and before scrapper/tempest became overheal factories, but you absolutely needed (and you still do) 1 fb per 5 people. Passive healing that stays even after you leave radius of healer can still keep you alive for some time (of enemy pressure isn't very high), but not having access to certain buffs can heavily limit your capabilities, and most of those are still only 5-man.

JusticeRetroHunter.7684 · July 28, 2019

@"steki.1478" said:
If fights were chaotic constantly (which happens a lot in unorganized single-party-30-man-clouds) that means that

Ah, when i was talking about how zergs are chaotic in nature i was referring to Chaos Theory i didn't mean chaotic as in unorganized.

Fights don't last very long to optimize overflow heals. Most of the impact happens within 10-20 seconds and if you're far away from healer you're dead regardless of squad composition. Receiving important boons can be one of the main factors why you're not near your healer and the only way to provide those boons reliably to everyone is by spliting into 5 man parties.
I agree with that ya. If you don't have stability, you get CC'd, you fall behind and then you die. I think that's a pretty common occurrence. Thing is that in my own personal experience, running with the meta standard 5 man subgroup with FB scrapper, but i find myself starved for stability a lot of the time...and other times i find i have stability just fine. It's hard to say whether its from being stripped or lack of application of it. But all i can give on this is my personal experience. So i agree with what your saying here...but i feel that it's just too much of a grey area for me to speak on.

Fights last as long as they do, sometimes for 1 minute sometimes for 3 hours (Yes I've had a fight that lasted for 3 hours.) And not just any rando fights....these are guild vs guild 80v80v80 blob fights with top guilds. It's really hard to say that "fights don't last very long" or that it "only matters for 10-20 seconds" because i just don't think its a valid way of thinking about any situation.

Anyway i think it's worth talking about and understanding why groups are setup like this.

Dawdler.8521 · July 28, 2019

@"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said:I'm gonna challenge your position on this. Let's say we have two raid groups. a 25 man zerg with 5 healers and 20 dps, and an opposing 25 man zerg with 15 healers and 10 dps. Who is more likely to win? and why? Do you have a definitive reason or is it just a hunch or a guess?Why is that even a "challenge" lol. There is a reason why literally every commander will say there isnt enough dps. Because most fights are won in the first push by overwhelming and consistent force. Dps will usually die first and if say 5 of those 10 dps are dead in the first push as opposed to 5 of the 20 dps... you have an utterly crippled force that wont do any damage vs a mostly intact force.

Of course it matters on skill, awareness and the leadership of both groups - the dps of 10 people can easily exceed 20 - but lets assume that they're not idiots.

The only advantage the healer heavy group will have is vs pug clouds that cant focus hard enough to break through them while they will resbot anyone down with more ease.

Cyninja.2954 · July 28, 2019

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:
@Cyninja.2954 said:It's not rocket science...

I don't think you give WvW mechanics enough credit. There's a lot of nuance, especially in super high tier gvg/raidvraid scenario's where one pushes are decided by the small details.

The nuance comes in when guilds run special off tactics or off meta things (which if successful might become meta). You were asking what is the "most efficient and optimal" way right now. Boons and healing priorities are very clear. Necessity for boons and support are very clear. Again, it's not rocket science.

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:
@Cyninja.2954 said:
You create groups with 2 supports and 3 dps.
Why? Because that's how many it currently takes to somehow keep people alive against a similar built group. Less healer means a more defensive setup will kill you, more healers means you lose to much pressure.

I'm gonna challenge your position on this. Let's say we have two raid groups. a 25 man zerg with 5 healers and 20 dps, and an opposing 25 man zerg with 15 healers and 10 dps. Who is more likely to win? and why? Do you have a definitive reason or is it just a hunch or a guess?

15 Healers and 10 dps win against 5 healers and 20 dps for players of equal skill (if the makeup if similar between damage classes and healers) and if no advantage is given to either side like first strike from stealth.

The advantage of having more dps is directly negated by not being able to use skills due to lack of stability. Pressure from 20 dps is negated by more reflect bubbles, condition cleanse, aegis, etc. for the group with more support. Worst case, the side with more support just pirate ships the opposition in a war of attrition.

Overall reason: it doesn't take that much damage to kill a player. As such it makes no difference if you have 10 or 50 people kill you. Support classes increase the amount of players needed but past a certain point you have enough damage. 10 players are more than enough to decimate a group without sufficient support.

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:
@Cyninja.2954 said:
Groups are built ideally with 5 people per group.
Why? Because of boon limitations (and blasting limitations), especially stability or to be more exact: primarily for stability and as much as you can get your hands on of it.
Firebrand is the backbone of every support strucutre.
Why? Stability.

Right, this was the discussion of the topic for the most part. But this kinda just tells us why we take firebrands, not why we order them in the subgroups the way we currently do so.

I literally told you: it's to ensure that stability goes to every member in the squad. Stability is a boon that stacks. If more than 5 people are in the Firebrands subgroup it is very well possible that the same person gets multiple stacks and someone goes empty.

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:
@Cyninja.2954 said:
You seperate close, medium and ranged groups.
Why? So guards and other support have an easier time standing at the appropraite range if need be.
If not enough Firebrands are available you start making ranged groups and seperate warriors/spellbreakers into stand alone groups until guards are found.
Why? Because this way ranged dps can tag behind or at least try to not be part of the melee ball. Warriors can operate independently and without sustain longer than most other classes.

Okay hold on a sec. I don't think this is ever a thing unless we are talking pug zergs. The ball configuration in every scenario is the most optimal formation for any zerg...regardless of what classes they are made of. There are so many reasons why ball configuration is the best (so much so they are referred to as the ("murder ball") but splitting up a group based on range just doesn't work.

Incorrect. If damage classes are present wihtout support at the very front, they provide rallies to the enemy team because they WILL go down. That is the situation given. Without an ideal setup, ranged dps can not engage as freely. Also yes, this is for PUG fights since no GvG guild would ever understack on supports.

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:I can understand taking rangers, spellbreakers and thieves and placing them in their own subgroups because of their more unique off tag playstyles, but to divert healer positions away from the tag only makes the zerg as a whole less effective and more susceptible to being one pushed.

I wouldn't take rangers for anything blob related. You are not diverting healers away from tag, not sure where you read that. If you lack healers you divert classes who lack support in squad away from the danger zone as best as possible by factors of range and selfsustain.

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:If you don't have stability, you get CC'd, you fall behind and then you die.

That is one of its uses. The way bigger one is: stability prevents loss of character control. It's not only movement and positioning.

JusticeRetroHunter.7684 · July 28, 2019

@Cyninja.2954 said:The advantage of having more dps is directly negated by not being able to use skills due to lack of stability. Pressure from 20 dps is negated by more reflect bubbles, condition cleanse, aegis, etc. for the group with more support. Worst case, the side with more support just pirate ships the opposition in a war of attrition.
Overall reason: it doesn't take that much damage to kill a player. As such it makes no difference if you have 10 or 50 people kill you. Support classes increase the amount of players needed but past a certain point you have enough damage. 10 players are more than enough to decimate a group without sufficient support.
@"Dawdler.8521" said:Why is that even a "challenge" lol. There is a reason why literally every commander will say there isnt enough dps. Because most fights are won in the first push by overwhelming and consistent force. Dps will usually die first and if say 5 of those 10 dps are dead in the first push as opposed to 5 of the 20 dps... you have an utterly crippled force that wont do any damage vs a mostly intact force.
Of course it matters on skill, awareness and the leadership of both groups - the dps of 10 people can easily exceed 20 - but lets assume that they're not idiots.
The only advantage the healer heavy group will have is vs pug clouds that cant focus hard enough to break through them while they will resbot anyone down with more ease.

So already off the bat we have two conflicting opinions on this question. This is why I chose to challenge your stance on your opinion

Now I actually agree with you cyninja. The answer you gave makes the most sense objectively. But you can understand why Dawdler said what he said.

I’ve been in both situations...running 5 healers in 25 man groups with 20 DPS and 25 man groups with nearly 3 healers for every 2 dps. In both situations we’ve rolled over many zergs both organized and unorganized. The truth is that the answer isn’t always very clear as to which composition is actually better.

We can analyze such compositions from an objective standpoint which is what I’m really getting at. It’s not rocket science...but at least everyone can agree that a rockets obey Newton’s laws of motion. Meanwhile everyone has different answers for the compositions of WVW, because most of the meta is just derived from opinions and subjective view points. I’m here attempting to challenge the status quo in order to extrapolate objective truths about the game mode which ultimately helps not just myself but others to make better decisions to gain more kills, win more games and avoid deaths.

Anyway, my stance on the question is that it comes down to what you said about killing players. One way of thinking about is that the damage and healing of both zergs have an equilibrium point. If 20 dPS are doing 2kdps, that’s a total of 40kdps inflicted to the enemy Zerg. If the opposing Zerg with 15 healers are healing for 5khps than they out heal the enemy zergs damage by 25kHPs (total 75khps) Due to the nature of healing he maximum amount of heal before it becomes overheal is also 40Khps.

Once the healing amount drops below the DPS amount your Zerg ends up losing the fight.

DPS can also be concentrated on less players. So if you have 10 dPS focusing a single person with 2kdps each, that single player will take 20kdps. In 5 man compositions, you would add the 5khps + a maximum potential over healing, which has a maximum of 25khps. That means that in order to kill a single person, you would need an additional 10k dPS to be concentrated on that player before they become comparable to damage.

Aeolus.3615 · July 28, 2019

@steki.1478 said:
@Aeolus.3615 said:
@steki.1478 said:1 FB per 5 people
1-2 heralds per 5 people1-2 scourges per 5 people
1-2 scrappers per 10 people1 spellbreaker per 10 people1 weaver per 10 people
1 tempest per 15 people
1-2 chrono per any sized squad (?)
First 3 are mandatory in each party. Each party also needs 1 scrapper or 1 tempest, preferably not both and preferably scrapper over tempest until you have more than enough scrappers (ratio of scrapper:tempest should be around 3:1 for example). Chrono is used for utility, but it's a bit questionable after last patch.
Spellbreaker favors small scale and in case of 15 man squads it should always be in the squad, 2-3 at least. Even berserkers and daredevils can be good in those. Weaver is usually a waste because its damage is too slow and unreliable compared to warr and daredevil.
Weaver favors large scale fights because they usually revolve around pirateship and weaver loves that. In case of 15 man squads I wouldnt use more than 2 weavers if any (unless very experienced), another class is usually more useful. If you have more than 30 people in the squad then you'd definitely like weavers instead of melee dps.
party example:
FB, HER, SCG, healer, damage/utility
healer = tempest, scrapper
damage = weaver, daredevil, spellbreaker, berserker, scourge, herald
utility = chrono (heal herald/renegade can also fit here, but it's not really meta)
Weaver is also very flexible because it doesnt really need a healer in the party (overflow heals and random regen is enough) so it's quite good to stack weavers and a few heralds in the same party. I usually like to put 3 weavers per herald (so everyone has perma 20+ might) in one party, no matter how big it is.

Why 1-2 herald for 5 players if Hereald can affect 10 players???If ur talking abour Jalis rev or renegades i would agree, but even so the jalis F2 passive with the damage reducing takes affect of 10 players if elite spec is Herald.

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 (just some informative note to that post): That's why i have bigger health bars for the players on my squad and use the smaller/normal one to the rest, i can scream to overextended players outside my heal areas or know if i need to hrow ventari tablet to heal while ill use staf and shield heals (5k each) on the close allies, while it can remove as well the condies, people are rellying wayyy to much in scourge and FB's...wich leads to those cant reach situations.

Because rev is your main dps, your main spike and because boons from facets stack. You don't lose anything by having more heralds as long as fb/scg/healer are covered. Every other class other than those 4/5 are optional.

Not sure if facets are intended to stack(i always tough facets existe to avoid stacking from similiar or equal sources...), passive healing from one herald can reach 1k for each player and per second, F2 herald/ventari heals arround 2.5-3.5k every 3 sec, if u telling me its stackable..... and can also affect 10 allies.

if that's stackable.. oh boy..

I guess ill ask my guild to try this out ._. since we are short in FB's.

Dawdler.8521 · July 28, 2019

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:
@Cyninja.2954 said:The advantage of having more dps is directly negated by not being able to use skills due to lack of stability. Pressure from 20 dps is negated by more reflect bubbles, condition cleanse, aegis, etc. for the group with more support. Worst case, the side with more support just pirate ships the opposition in a war of attrition.
Overall reason: it doesn't take that much damage to kill a player. As such it makes no difference if you have 10 or 50 people kill you. Support classes increase the amount of players needed but past a certain point you have enough damage. 10 players are more than enough to decimate a group without sufficient support.
@"Dawdler.8521" said:Why is that even a "challenge" lol. There is a reason why literally every commander will say there isnt enough dps. Because most fights are won in the first push by overwhelming and consistent force. Dps will usually die first and if say 5 of those 10 dps are dead in the first push as opposed to 5 of the 20 dps... you have an utterly crippled force that wont do any damage vs a mostly intact force.
Of course it matters on skill, awareness and the leadership of both groups - the dps of 10 people can easily exceed 20 - but lets assume that they're not idiots.
The only advantage the healer heavy group will have is vs pug clouds that cant focus hard enough to break through them while they will resbot anyone down with more ease.

So already off the bat we have two conflicting opinions on this question. This is why I chose to challenge your stance on your opinion

Now I actually agree with you cyninja. The answer you gave makes the most sense objectively. But you can understand why Dawdler said what he said.

I’ve been in both situations...running 5 healers in 25 man groups with 20 DPS and 25 man groups with nearly 3 healers for every 2 dps. In both situations we’ve rolled over many zergs both organized and unorganized. The truth is that the answer isn’t always very clear as to which composition is actually better.

We can analyze such compositions from an objective standpoint which is what I’m really getting at. It’s not rocket science...but at least everyone can agree that a rockets obey Newton’s laws of motion. Meanwhile everyone has different answers for the compositions of WVW, because most of the meta is just derived from opinions and subjective view points. I’m here attempting to challenge the status quo in order to extrapolate objective truths about the game mode which ultimately helps not just myself but others to make better decisions to gain more kills, win more games and avoid deaths.

Anyway, my stance on the question is that it comes down to what you said about killing players. One way of thinking about is that the damage and healing of both zergs have an equilibrium point. If 20 dPS are doing 2kdps, that’s a total of 40kdps inflicted to the enemy Zerg. If the opposing Zerg with 15 healers are healing for 5khps than they out heal the enemy zergs damage by 25kHPs (total 75khps) Due to the nature of healing he maximum amount of heal before it becomes overheal is also 40Khps.

Once the healing amount drops below the DPS amount your Zerg ends up losing the fight.

DPS can also be concentrated on less players. So if you have 10 dPS focusing a single person with 2kdps each, that single player will take 20kdps. In 5 man compositions, you would add the 5khps + a maximum potential over healing, which has a maximum of 25khps. That means that in order to kill a single person, you would need an additional 10k dPS to be concentrated on that player before they become comparable to damage.

That seems like a rather arbitrary conclusion thats only backed up by healers healing for 5khps and damage dealers doing damage for 2kdps.

JusticeRetroHunter.7684 · July 28, 2019

@Dawdler.8521 said:
@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:
@Cyninja.2954 said:The advantage of having more dps is directly negated by not being able to use skills due to lack of stability. Pressure from 20 dps is negated by more reflect bubbles, condition cleanse, aegis, etc. for the group with more support. Worst case, the side with more support just pirate ships the opposition in a war of attrition.
Overall reason: it doesn't take that much damage to kill a player. As such it makes no difference if you have 10 or 50 people kill you. Support classes increase the amount of players needed but past a certain point you have enough damage. 10 players are more than enough to decimate a group without sufficient support.
@Dawdler.8521 said:Why is that even a "challenge" lol. There is a reason why literally every commander will say there isnt enough dps. Because most fights are won in the first push by overwhelming and consistent force. Dps will usually die first and if say 5 of those 10 dps are dead in the first push as opposed to 5 of the 20 dps... you have an utterly crippled force that wont do any damage vs a mostly intact force.
Of course it matters on skill, awareness and the leadership of both groups - the dps of 10 people can easily exceed 20 - but lets assume that they're not idiots.
The only advantage the healer heavy group will have is vs pug clouds that cant focus hard enough to break through them while they will resbot anyone down with more ease.