Procless Cyrodiil, are you in favor or against? -

orion_1981usub17_ESO

Make no-proc Cyrodiil permanent

Opalblade wrote: »

Bring them back and nerf the OP sets, or at least remove things like "increases blah stat by blah%" from the list of banned sets. Real proc sets are a problem, but you don't set 90% of your lawn on fire just to kill a few weeds.

You know it's funny cause I've heard of some funny places that burn their grass every year...

Thraben

Change 1 campaign be no-proc

WolfyRaps wrote: »

I dont want to play a Magsorc only Cyrodiil !

It is actually quite good that people learn to use their skills again. So much knowledge about correct counterplay has been lost, apparently.

The myriad NerfSorc- threads are just sad, when we veterans would consider StamWardens, Stamcroes, StamSorcs and even some MagDKs and MagPlars to be more dangerous than a noob farming PortSorc.

Sandman929

Needs a "Revamp several existing proc sets and stop introducing new ridiculous free healing/damage sets" option.

VaranisArano

orion_1981usub17_ESO wrote: »

People were having fun... sorry it bursts your bubble of how you believe you should be able to create their deadlines. It's the best time to move in a new direction when you just made a lot of other changes, I can't think of a better time to say "hey, they like this, let's let them run with it for awhile"

Some people were having fun, yes.

Part of my issue is simply that while ZOS' deadlines make sense, the choice to listen to only the certain segment of the playerbase who was having fun with no-proc gameplay as opposed to the segment of the playerbase who doesn't want no-proc gameplay seems arbitrary.

Your reasoning seems to be that ZOS should try something new simply for the sake of it being new. Do I have that right?

ZOS_ConnorG

Greetings all,

After review we have had to edit or remove several posts for a variety of rule violations, mostly Baiting and Bashing. Ensure when engaging in a discussion that you keep said discussion civil, constructive, and within the rules. If you see a post that is baiting in nature do not engage it with further hostility and instead report it for the moderators to review.

You are welcome to review the Community Rules here.

Soul_Demon

Revert to proc Cyrodiil

VaranisArano wrote: »

orion_1981usub17_ESO wrote: »

People were having fun... sorry it bursts your bubble of how you believe you should be able to create their deadlines. It's the best time to move in a new direction when you just made a lot of other changes, I can't think of a better time to say "hey, they like this, let's let them run with it for awhile"

Some people were having fun, yes.

Part of my issue is simply that while ZOS' deadlines make sense, the choice to listen to only the certain segment of the playerbase who was having fun with no-proc gameplay as opposed to the segment of the playerbase who doesn't want no-proc gameplay seems arbitrary.

Your reasoning seems to be that ZOS should try something new simply for the sake of it being new. Do I have that right?

Indeed it is interesting. If you scan the threads on this subject it seems there are vocal few who post incessantly giving guidance and instruction on what players 'should' want repeatedly in those threads. Odd part is, after all these years of playing I am beginning to think they have convinced themselves 5 posts from one guy + 3 posts from another = 'speaking for the majority of players' ......or worse they may think that no one notices its the same people posting.

orion_1981usub17_ESO

Make no-proc Cyrodiil permanent

VaranisArano wrote: »

orion_1981usub17_ESO wrote: »

People were having fun... sorry it bursts your bubble of how you believe you should be able to create their deadlines. It's the best time to move in a new direction when you just made a lot of other changes, I can't think of a better time to say "hey, they like this, let's let them run with it for awhile"

Some people were having fun, yes.

Part of my issue is simply that while ZOS' deadlines make sense, the choice to listen to only the certain segment of the playerbase who was having fun with no-proc gameplay as opposed to the segment of the playerbase who doesn't want no-proc gameplay seems arbitrary.

Your reasoning seems to be that ZOS should try something new simply for the sake of it being new. Do I have that right?

And You don't see any irony or hypocrisy in your words regarding to whom zos "should listen" to? That is what confounds me that many folks make the exact spirit of your statement and have absolutely no problem completely disregarding they literally saying that zos must listen to them and let them have their fun.

No, I'm saying that zos is doing something new because I believe they saw a change in player behavior that **they liked** during the three week test. And therefore have decided to not revert mass pvp back to the proc fest that you like.

Urzigurumash

Frankly all this math and optimization broke the fourth wall, we should've been entirely blind to all the numbers all along, just like we should be prohibited from exiting first person

Goregrinder

Make no-proc Cyrodiil permanent

Until ZOS gives players a hard counter in the form of a poison or skill or gear set or something that we can slot in our builds, then I'm ok with never seeing free ZOS damage in Cyrodiil ever again.

Dr_Ganknstein

Change 1 campaign be no-proc

Goregrinder wrote: »

Until ZOS gives players a hard counter in the form of a poison or skill or gear set or something that we can slot in our builds, then I'm ok with never seeing free ZOS damage in Cyrodiil ever again.

Or just adjust the main culprits. Malacath, venomous smite, caluurions, vateshran staff, zaans. I think if they made it so malacath didn't buff proc damage that a lot of these proc sets wouldn't be that much of an issue. Give us more options to use stuff in cyrodiil, it makes it more interesting. I think they want to see how things are with the new cp system which I tend to forget about since I'm always playing in no-cp.

VaranisArano

orion_1981usub17_ESO wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

orion_1981usub17_ESO wrote: »

People were having fun... sorry it bursts your bubble of how you believe you should be able to create their deadlines. It's the best time to move in a new direction when you just made a lot of other changes, I can't think of a better time to say "hey, they like this, let's let them run with it for awhile"

Some people were having fun, yes.

Part of my issue is simply that while ZOS' deadlines make sense, the choice to listen to only the certain segment of the playerbase who was having fun with no-proc gameplay as opposed to the segment of the playerbase who doesn't want no-proc gameplay seems arbitrary.

Your reasoning seems to be that ZOS should try something new simply for the sake of it being new. Do I have that right?

And You don't see any irony or hypocrisy in your words regarding to whom zos "should listen" to? That is what confounds me that many folks make the exact spirit of your statement and have absolutely no problem completely disregarding they literally saying that zos must listen to them and let them have their fun.

No, I'm saying that zos is doing something new because I believe they saw a change in player behavior that **they liked** during the three week test. And therefore have decided to not revert mass pvp back to the proc fest that you like.

Well, as I said, their choice of who to listen to seems arbitrary. They say the options for proc sets are "all or nothing" and they chose "nothing", apparently based on the feedback from players who liked it. And yeah, there was lots of positive feedback...with the important caveat that a lot of people who didn't like the gameplay didn't speak up because this was stated to only be a performance test and performance was obviously worse. A segment of the player base really likes it. Another segment really doesn't. Who to listen to? An apparently arbitrary decision.

I don't entirely agree that ZOS saw a change in player behavior they liked because if they did, why are they bringing back the proc-enabled campaigns later? When they saw behavioral changes they liked from group size reductions and group-only heals, they rolled that out to all the campaigns.

I guess where I'm at is that since ZOS intends to bring back proc-enabled campaigns as an option, I'm not sure why they decided to force everyone into no-proc campaigns for six months. Clearly, ZOS doesn't actually mind proc-enabled PVP.

Maybe it's simply that they realize that no-proc PVP needs more adjustment to the classes before everything can actually be balanced, and so they need more data for their future adjustments, if no-proc PVP is going to be a serious option rather than a 3 week test?

Or perhaps they wanted to wean PVPers off of their stat-based sets before they go through and rebalance them to be less "proccy"?

I dunno why everyone got forced into no-proc PVP, but it's not because ZOS doesn't like what they see in proc-enabled PVP. If that were the case, they wouldn't be already planning how to add a proc-enabled option.

AuraNebula

Change 1 campaign be no-proc

Giving people the option to play with procs or without is the only way to satisfy everyone.

kingsirdrmr

Change 1 campaign be no-proc

orion_1981usub17_ESO wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

orion_1981usub17_ESO wrote: »

People were having fun... sorry it bursts your bubble of how you believe you should be able to create their deadlines. It's the best time to move in a new direction when you just made a lot of other changes, I can't think of a better time to say "hey, they like this, let's let them run with it for awhile"

Some people were having fun, yes.

Part of my issue is simply that while ZOS' deadlines make sense, the choice to listen to only the certain segment of the playerbase who was having fun with no-proc gameplay as opposed to the segment of the playerbase who doesn't want no-proc gameplay seems arbitrary.

Your reasoning seems to be that ZOS should try something new simply for the sake of it being new. Do I have that right?

And You don't see any irony or hypocrisy in your words regarding to whom zos "should listen" to? That is what confounds me that many folks make the exact spirit of your statement and have absolutely no problem completely disregarding they literally saying that zos must listen to them and let them have their fun.

No, I'm saying that zos is doing something new because I believe they saw a change in player behavior that **they liked** during the three week test. And therefore have decided to not revert mass pvp back to the proc fest that you like.

And that's a problem, too. It's a change they like, community outrage be damned. They shouldn't show preference to the side of the community they like (a small but vocal crowd) against the side they seem to disagree with (a slightly larger but vocal crowd) while completely ignoring the players (whether they agree or not) inbetween who play for other reasons than to cry about sets they hate or being a zealous meta sheep who hates change. They've still ignored the majority of players. The no-procs are just happy the devs so happen to agree with them at the expense of the group they hate and the rest of the Cyrodiil playerbase.

Lord_Bashu

Honestly I think you poll is slanted, and should be either or.. the third choice takes away.

amir412

Change 1 campaign be no-proc

Lord_Bashu wrote: »

Honestly I think you poll is slanted, and should be either or.. the third choice takes away.

I want to believe that people who chosed the 3rd option, prefer Cyro to be reverted. That's why i voted 3.

UntouchableHunter

Change 1 campaign be no-proc

Lord_Bashu wrote: »

Honestly I think you poll is slanted, and should be either or.. the third choice takes away.

This only shows that the majority wana the procs back. But instead the minority we don't wana force them to play with procs.

We prefer everybody having a option to play pros or not. And the minority just wana force everybody play without procs.

I really don't understand why people are against the idea to have two different campaigns. We ever had procs in this and now ZOS came with this radical decision changing everythink. We could move in this direction, maybe, but move slowly and not jumping to the abyss like that.

JayKwellen

Make no-proc Cyrodiil permanent

I strongly dislike procs and am very happy they're gone. I'm okay with them being gone forever.

However, in the interest of giving everyone a bit of what they want, I'd be okay with procs coming back in PvP so long as they were re-balanced around PvP, as it's obvious they were all "spreadsheet balanced" to provide a certain amount of DPS without any consideration of how they would work in PvP. Procs in PvP should provide equal damage output to skills and no more. This would of course require them to work differently in Cyrodiil vs. PvE.

There are multiple ways to achieve this -- their either should be barriers to how many you can wear at once, or they should scale off character stats, or they should be either rebalanced to crit (so no malacath) or simply excluded from working with malacath at all. Procs on their own are irritating, but it's often the entire combination of malacath + heavy armor + procs that leads to so many of the toxic builds we see. If instead your proc damage was based on your characters overall build (you know, kind of like how your actual abilities rely on the same thing) it would eliminate the stacking of 3 or 4 proc sets to do all of your damage for you, including the "40k health tank that can still kill you with procs" builds. It would require a little more thought to actually go into building, and require people to decide which trade-offs they want to make and where. "I want it all" should not be a valid option.

A little actual theorycrafting would be required beyond "how can I squeeze in as many procs as possible while making myself as tanky as possible" which, for all the lamentations about the death of theorycrafting with the no-proc change, is all the current meta is.

Dr_Ganknstein

Change 1 campaign be no-proc

JayKwellen wrote: »

I strongly dislike procs and am very happy they're gone. I'm okay with them being gone forever.

However, in the interest of giving everyone a bit of what they want, I'd be okay with procs coming back in PvP so long as they were re-balanced around PvP, as it's obvious they were all "spreadsheet balanced" to provide a certain amount of DPS without any consideration of how they would work in PvP. Procs in PvP should provide equal damage output to skills and no more. This would of course require them to work differently in Cyrodiil vs. PvE.

There are multiple ways to achieve this -- their either should be barriers to how many you can wear at once, or they should scale off character stats, or they should be either rebalanced to crit (so no malacath) or simply excluded from working with malacath at all. Procs on their own are irritating, but it's often the entire combination of malacath + heavy armor + procs that leads to so many of the toxic builds we see. If instead your proc damage was based on your characters overall build (you know, kind of like how your actual abilities rely on the same thing) it would eliminate the stacking of 3 or 4 proc sets to do all of your damage for you, including the "40k health tank that can still kill you with procs" builds. It would require a little more thought to actually go into building, and require people to decide which trade-offs they want to make and where. "I want it all" should not be a valid option.

A little actual theorycrafting would be required beyond "how can I squeeze in as many procs as possible while making myself as tanky as possible" which, for all the lamentations about the death of theorycrafting with the no-proc change, is all the current meta is.

Vicecanon is a damage proc set, how often have you seen that on your death recaps? Imo that's how a proc set should be. Two conditions in order for it to proc and it does damage and heals although for a low amount. If a proc set is easy to actually proc, it should do low damage. Malacath shouldn't effect sets and should act like the major brutality buff instead.

spacefracking

Change 1 campaign be no-proc

I like no-proc better, but I'd agree two campaigns would be better.

DoccEff

Change 1 campaign be no-proc

The best compromise. I can‘t see why people are against this.
We already got no-CP and CP, faction-lock and no lock. Why not make at least one campaign with all sets enabled.

UntouchableHunter

Change 1 campaign be no-proc

DoccEff wrote: »

The best compromise. I can‘t see why people are against this.
We already got no-CP and CP, faction-lock and no lock. Why not make at least one campaign with all sets enabled.

And I don't understand why ZOS don't don't do this.
If wje have a pro and a non proc campaign nobody in the forum was complaining.

techyeshic

DoccEff wrote: »

The best compromise. I can‘t see why people are against this.
We already got no-CP and CP, faction-lock and no lock. Why not make at least one campaign with all sets enabled.

That seems to be their plan. The problem with it IMO; is they are not addressing any issues in why people felt refreshed to not deal with procs for 3 weeks, and this just fragments the community yet again and just let's ZOS keep going ignoring what got done s there.

Dr_Ganknstein

Change 1 campaign be no-proc

I dont know, this seems to be growing on me. Performance was outstanding last night even during zerg vs zerg action. There are a ton more sorcs though. This was in Ravenwatch, not sure how the CP camps are doing. The lack of sets isn't great but when the performance is good and you get to actually use your abilities its a lot of fun.

Minalan

Make no-proc Cyrodiil permanent

Keep a full CP and NO PROC campaign. Whatever horrible future sets the ZOS itemization team has in mind to hype a patch, we have a safe place where we can escape from it.

CSose

I just want performance to be as it was 3 years ago. As the set restrictions DO NOT improve performance, there must be another reason for keeping the set restrictions. (that reason IS NOT that most people are happy with the restrictions)