Bolt escape vs Teleport Strike

Masty_Spy

Hi. There is "4 meters" on bolt icon and "22 meters" on TP icon. Can someone tell me real Bolt`s lenght? Cuz i think its not 4 meters. And how to survive Ambush spam as Magicka Sorc.

DannyLV702

Bolt escape takes you 15 meters ahead. The 4 meters is the radius of the damage/stun

DannyLV702

Also, use defensive rune on your backup bar to protect yourself against those annoying NBs lol stops them in their tracks

Desommettor

xmasterrreb17_ESO wrote: »

Hi. There is "4 meters" on bolt icon and "22 meters" on TP icon. Can someone tell me real Bolt`s lenght? Cuz i think its not 4 meters. And how to survive Ambush spam as Magicka Sorc.

You cant get away from it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhcRXs6kmms

Cathexis

Desommettor wrote: »

xmasterrreb17_ESO wrote: »

Hi. There is "4 meters" on bolt icon and "22 meters" on TP icon. Can someone tell me real Bolt`s lenght? Cuz i think its not 4 meters. And how to survive Ambush spam as Magicka Sorc.

You cant get away from it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhcRXs6kmms

See for me in that situation weapon flip block weaponflip defensive rune rally into werewolf and then it's murder time.

Minno

Cathexis wrote: »

Desommettor wrote: »

xmasterrreb17_ESO wrote: »

Hi. There is "4 meters" on bolt icon and "22 meters" on TP icon. Can someone tell me real Bolt`s lenght? Cuz i think its not 4 meters. And how to survive Ambush spam as Magicka Sorc.

You cant get away from it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhcRXs6kmms

See for me in that situation weapon flip block weaponflip defensive rune rally into werewolf and then it's murder time.

As a Templar its not so fun

Strider_Roshin

Question? Can you use bolt escape while immobilized?

Ashamray

Strider_Roshin wrote: »

Question? Can you use bolt escape while immobilized?

U can. U can also telepot strike while immobilized. It's the greatest gap closer in the game in my opinion.

Kutsuu

I know sypher was annoyed in that video, and anyone probably would be, but if 4 players who have gap closers want you dead 4v1... should you really be able to escape that so easily? Would have been the same deal with other gap closers.

That's not to say that I don't think Ambush needs a minimum range like the other gap closers. It could create issues with it since it has a pretty long cast time (other gap closers begin their animation instantly, while Ambush has a ~.5s windup before moving that has a range check at the *end* of that cast time), but I think they just need to move the "range check" to the beginning of the cast when they add a minimum range.

And for sure all gap closers need to lose that hidden silence/stun component.

Kutsuu

Ashamray wrote: »

Strider_Roshin wrote: »

Question? Can you use bolt escape while immobilized?

U can. U can also telepot strike while immobilized. It's the greatest gap closer in the game in my opinion.

IMO by far the most amazing thing about it is that you don't have to be facing your target when you cast it. If someone immobilizes you and moves behind you, you can still cast it and be back on top of them. It does cost a fair amount more than other gap closers though. If we take away the benefits of it, I'd like to see a stam cost reduction to go with it.

Cathexis

Kutsuu wrote: »

I know sypher was annoyed in that video, and anyone probably would be, but if 4 players who have gap closers want you dead 4v1... should you really be able to escape that? Would have been the same deal with other gap closers.

That's not to say that I don't think Ambush needs a minimum range like the other gap closers. It could create issues with it since it has a pretty long cast time (other gap closers begin their animation instantly, while Ambush has a ~.5s windup before moving that has a range check at the *end* of that cast time), but I think they just need to move the "range check" to the beginning of the cast when they add a minimum range.

And for sure all gap closers need to lose that hidden silence/stun component.

Yes you should be able to escape it.

Stacking more players shouldn't automatically mean you lose.

Kutsuu

If you can consistently escape a 4v1, what does that mean for 1v1 and smaller scale fights? I've played some other games where players can disengage and escape 100% of the time if they wish... not so fun.

Of course you can still escape 4v1 if you manage to LOS and get 2 streaks before they get in range/sight again, using rocks and what not. I just don't like the idea of being able to consistently escape in the open field against 4 opponents because of what that means for smaller scale fights.

Cathexis

Kutsuu wrote: »

If you can consistently escape a 4v1, what does that mean for 1v1 and smaller scale fights? I've played some other games where players can disengage and escape 100% of the time if they wish... not so fun.

Of course you can still escape 4v1 if you manage to LOS and get 2 streaks before they get in range/sight again, using rocks and what not. I just don't like the idea of being able to consistently escape in the open field against 4 opponents because of what that means for smaller scale fights.

This mentality I don't understand. That's like saying you don't want your opponent to win or lose as a margin of skill/error, because they should always just automatically die when you attack them. This attitude is what seriously undermines the quality of combat in this game. I'm really getting sick of this hard dps instant kill mentality people want so badly. Not only is it lazy, but it brings down the quality of combat by turning the game into who can hit first. Why have different classes at all if players just want to have instant kills, there is no point in being a healer or a tank or mobile if ultimately the first person to hit wins.

I want my opponent to fight back. I want them to resist so when I do beat them, my skill is exercised and improved.

kendellking_chaosb14_ESO

Kutsuu wrote: »

If you can consistently escape a 4v1, what does that mean for 1v1 and smaller scale fights? I've played some other games where players can disengage and escape 100% of the time if they wish... not so fun.

Of course you can still escape 4v1 if you manage to LOS and get 2 streaks before they get in range/sight again, using rocks and what not. I just don't like the idea of being able to consistently escape in the open field against 4 opponents because of what that means for smaller scale fights.

Not vs Nightblades I have seen Sorcerers jump on Rock and stop Gap closers and I just switch bars and Gap Close with Ambush.

Kutsuu

Cathexis wrote: »

Kutsuu wrote: »

If you can consistently escape a 4v1, what does that mean for 1v1 and smaller scale fights? I've played some other games where players can disengage and escape 100% of the time if they wish... not so fun.

Of course you can still escape 4v1 if you manage to LOS and get 2 streaks before they get in range/sight again, using rocks and what not. I just don't like the idea of being able to consistently escape in the open field against 4 opponents because of what that means for smaller scale fights.

This mentality I don't understand. That's like saying you don't want your opponent to win or lose as a margin of skill/error, because they should always just automatically die when you attack them. This attitude is what seriously undermines the quality of combat in this game. I'm really getting sick of this hard dps instant kill mentality people want so badly. Not only is it lazy, but it brings down the quality of combat by turning the game into who can hit first. Why have different classes at all if players just want to have instant kills, there is no point in being a healer or a tank or mobile if ultimately the first person to hit wins.

Please, feel free to highlight anywhere in my post that I said I want to instantly kill everyone, or I want them to automatically die if I attack them. I was very clear in saying that escape mechanics should not be a consistent 100% chance of disengaging from a fight. Instead of attacking a straw man, you should consider actually engaging my point.

Again, my point is that being able to consistently escape from any fight in open field, even 4 to 1 odds, means that you'll rarely be able to finish a fight without whoever is losing just walking away from it. I'd rather escapes be generally slightly less powerful than "chase", such is the case with bolt escape moving you 15m while gap closers can bridge 22m, because that means you have to use strategy to make the escape viable (LOS or CC so that you can get 2 bolt escapes in a row), and you can prevent people from escaping from you if you counter their strategy. This exemplifies requiring skill in gameplay, no?

I'm sure Sypher has escaped from more players than that on plenty of occasions, when he successfully split them up and reduce their numbers using his rock climbing tricks, ultimately resulting in him getting away. The main problem I see in the video, that happens with all gap closers, is the stupid silence that happens when someone hits a gap closers. That crap needs to go.

Cathexis

Kutsuu wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

Kutsuu wrote: »

If you can consistently escape a 4v1, what does that mean for 1v1 and smaller scale fights? I've played some other games where players can disengage and escape 100% of the time if they wish... not so fun.

Of course you can still escape 4v1 if you manage to LOS and get 2 streaks before they get in range/sight again, using rocks and what not. I just don't like the idea of being able to consistently escape in the open field against 4 opponents because of what that means for smaller scale fights.

This mentality I don't understand. That's like saying you don't want your opponent to win or lose as a margin of skill/error, because they should always just automatically die when you attack them. This attitude is what seriously undermines the quality of combat in this game. I'm really getting sick of this hard dps instant kill mentality people want so badly. Not only is it lazy, but it brings down the quality of combat by turning the game into who can hit first. Why have different classes at all if players just want to have instant kills, there is no point in being a healer or a tank or mobile if ultimately the first person to hit wins.

Please, feel free to highlight anywhere in my post that I said I want to instantly kill everyone, or I want them to automatically die if I attack them. I was very clear in saying that escape mechanics should not be a consistent 100% chance of disengaging from a fight. Instead of attacking a straw man, you should consider actually engaging my point.

Again, my point is that being able to consistently escape from any fight in open field, even 4 to 1 odds, means that you'll rarely be able to finish a fight without whoever is losing just walking away from it. I'd rather escapes be generally slightly less powerful than "chase", such is the case with bolt escape moving you 15m while gap closers can bridge 22m, because that means you have to use strategy to make the escape viable (LOS or CC so that you can get 2 bolt escapes in a row), and you can prevent people from escaping from you if you counter their strategy. This exemplifies requiring skill in gameplay, no?

I'm sure Sypher has escaped from more players than that on plenty of occasions, when he successfully split them up and reduce their numbers using his rock climbing tricks, ultimately resulting in him getting away. The main problem I see in the video, that happens with all gap closers, is the stupid silence that happens when someone hits a gap closers. That crap needs to go.

You are correct with that first part, you did not explicitly say that and I'm sorry if I painted you that way. The argument however was not a straw man. The implication of players not being able to escape is that they are forced to fight. In 4v1 where 4 nightblades just spamming teleport strike is obviously that you are going to die. The DPS ratio is too high. The implication then is that you are suggesting that players should only have a partial chance of escape in that scenario. But the reality is they have zero chance of escape in that scenario.

So the argument you are making is substantiated on a theoretical "anything is possible" kind of scenario instead of on the actually occurring scenario.

Reliably being able to walk away from any fight is fundamentally not a bad thing because it enables players who are in outnumbered situations to even the battlefield, or disengage from what is obviously a total farce as a fight. That doesn't mean they can't fight - the choice to remain and play it out still exists.