Best Of
Re: Feedback on Huntsman's Warmask Mythic
I think the recent power creep has just done a lot to ruin some perspectives, when basically major vuln on demand for 1 slot isn't good enough anymore.
Here's a simple way to understand how bad this mythic item is: After ZOS last rebalanced the heavy attack durations for various weapons, it now generally takes about 2.5s to complete a heavy attack. This mythic's buff lasts for 20s, meaning you'd spend approximately 12% of your time only to maintain an 8% damage increase. To put it more bluntly, its expected damage gain for you is negative (and that's not even mentioning its damage reduction against non-targets).
The only scenario I can imagine where it would actually increase damage is in PvP, using a stealth HA to start a gank and ending the fight in a very short time, allowing it to provide a positive benefit. But if I can perform a stealth HA, why would I use this mythic item, which offers a low bonus and occupies my head slot? Not to mention Monomyth, even Maarselok would perform better than this.
So the mythic ends up being probably most potent in PvP, with possibly dangerous scaling potential in groups - what is the issue then? Do you not have enough PvE mythics? I don't think an item needs to be buffed to satisfy all possible clienteles if that comes at the cost of overbuffing a use case. And as I said above, comparing it to the most busted items that have been released is really nothing but an exercise in futility. Everytime they release >profanity placeholder< like Saints & Seducers or Monomyth I just cringe, because I know this stuff isn't going away anymore and it just gets worse from there.
Most aren't especially good, and those that are outclass this set so heavily. The Velothi Ur amulet gives 15% damage to monsters 100% of the time, minor force, and penetration, at the cost of a small source of single target damage. It would be nice to have a mythic that allows players to play into being single target, focusing things down rather than just aoe nuking with beam and velothi, but beam alternatives are already weak, and this mythic is very weak in pve situations, especially with how heavily ZOS has been encouraging cleave in their fights in dungeons.
CP5
1
Re: Feedback on Huntsman's Warmask Mythic
I think the recent power creep has just done a lot to ruin some perspectives, when basically major vuln on demand for 1 slot isn't good enough anymore.
Here's a simple way to understand how bad this mythic item is: After ZOS last rebalanced the heavy attack durations for various weapons, it now generally takes about 2.5s to complete a heavy attack. This mythic's buff lasts for 20s, meaning you'd spend approximately 12% of your time only to maintain an 8% damage increase. To put it more bluntly, its expected damage gain for you is negative (and that's not even mentioning its damage reduction against non-targets).
The only scenario I can imagine where it would actually increase damage is in PvP, using a stealth HA to start a gank and ending the fight in a very short time, allowing it to provide a positive benefit. But if I can perform a stealth HA, why would I use this mythic item, which offers a low bonus and occupies my head slot? Not to mention Monomyth, even Maarselok would perform better than this.
Lykeion
1
add a surrender button in bg 4 v 4 lil bro
yep , just add em , given how horrible the drafting system design is , wasting people's time in an awfully design mode is just wow rage baiting , SICK AND TIRED OF BEING IN A 3 v 4 MATCH, and whats funny is that you added a player AFTER we lost a round , still no HEALER on our team 99% of the time , I dont mind losing, but losing because of this ???? that 5% boost if one player is missing is NOT ENOUGH, if you cant design a fun pvp mode just add a surrender button
Dock01
6
Re: This is how ESO recovers: a tale of two MMOs
moderatelyfatman wrote: »They also introduce new class specialisations that changed the way you could play your class.
ESO already did that, and apparently people hate it.
I have no clue what players are looking for anymore. But a consistent top complaint for 10 years that drove players away from ESO has been that "the combat sucks". Anything that aims to substantially turn things around would probably have to address that, but I just can't imagine them making fundamental changes to the game on this scale.
Faulgor
1
Re: This is how ESO recovers: a tale of two MMOs
ESO is more FOMO focused. Rather than leaning into giving the player characters depth, they've opted to destabilize the combat system while still neglecting the things players have asked for. RPs wanted thematic and combat based ice builds, fire mages etc.
ZOS heard this: problem with NB...ZOS - here's every NB ability. Warden AOE outrageous, Sorc heals and shields? Now you can have it too.
Revert Jabs? Suffer and like it.
Wanna win - BeeeEAM
Fix Necro? What's Necro?
ZOS heard this: problem with NB...ZOS - here's every NB ability. Warden AOE outrageous, Sorc heals and shields? Now you can have it too.
Revert Jabs? Suffer and like it.
Wanna win - BeeeEAM
Fix Necro? What's Necro?
Re: This is how ESO recovers: a tale of two MMOs
colossalvoids wrote: »moderatelyfatman wrote: »They also introduce new class specialisations that changed the way you could play your class.
ESO already did that, and apparently people hate it.
I have no clue what players are looking for anymore. But a consistent top complaint for 10 years that drove players away from ESO has been that "the combat sucks". Anything that aims to substantially turn things around would probably have to address that, but I just can't imagine them making fundamental changes to the game on this scale.
This consistent complaint is the same thing that is most consistent praise out there also, just another polarising thing that is "making or breaking" the game.
But talking about "specialisation" that's pretty much the opposite to what was done for many of us. We're not further specialised in anything, not deepening our class fantasy or connection with a character but making all the characters the same character at best, or alienating completely at worst. Surely some might see it as opening the system a bit, even read that people comparing it to something closer to main line TES spell system but personally I see it the exact opposite way. It might not be as bad in a long run and becoming just another polarising feature in the future is balanced properly, but currently it's not the case as far as I see feedback going.
I can't comprehend how we could live in such different universes. I have 20 max level characters, and they each have 2 completely different builds, according to their power fantasy and gameplay niche. Not only have there never been as many options, there have never been as many viable options.
I wish I could make even more, but they refuse to add more character slots.
I can see that, have full max slots myself but for me it made all of them the same character with same access to every kit. Can go get a cloak on my warden and incapacitate my target before using the executioner's blade on them. Can do the same on a sorc, plar etc. but those are highly thematically specific abilities that are tied to classes in player minds.
My idea of specialisation would be more in line with having, as an example, 3 new sub lines for a nightblade, such as: spectral assassin (rogue), spellblade (arcane warrior) and a shadow mage. More deeply exploring the archetype and adding new, thematically driven abilities or exploring new or different morphs for ones already existing in their kit. Going back to having unique abilities without adding virtually the same ones to other classes, having specific sets that work best with specific classes and situations (like War Machine/Master Architect were) without making them severely underpowered or made for situations that almost non existent in actual content.
Or just go full sandbox and introduce traditional lines of illusion, destruction, etc. and neutralise current flavours of abilities and their dependency on existing classes all together. Both extremes honestly sound better and more fun than what we have currently with Mora's Nightblades of Meridia everywhere, though the current one was an extremely easy feature to implement on a go comparatively, I'd assume, as it adds nothing new but using everything already existing without any variation or consideration for the "base class" you're slapping it to.
Re: PTS Update 48 – Feedback Thread for Combat Animation Memory Reduction
Just a simple question: Why do we have animations at all, in combat? When one of the main "skills" is to cancel it?
