New Dark Cloak: calculations and thoughts?

Billium813

ccfeeling wrote: »

PVE perspective

Tank moves a lot , we still have a not really bad HOT during moving and excellent healing while not moving . Most of the cases controlled by the tank unless some environment mechanics happen .

Tank moves but not frequently , most efficiency clear , tank pulls and taunts all mobs , stay at same spot and let DPS burn them down .

code65536 wrote: »

I think the changes are fine for PvE tanks.

Yes, PvE tanks do have to move, but you're usually not constantly moving. You're usually moving in bursts and then standing still, and the movement check here is sufficiently granular.

I think these are good points. I think a weak heal if you don't know how to use it, but an exceptional heal if you do offers a learning curve that I WANT to see more in the game. People being upset because they want a heal that works 100% of the time and think having to stay still is "playing dumb" don't understand the mechanics of tanking or don't like that a game could have a learning curve to it.

I'd rather see changes like this than nebulous changes targeted at fictional new players to make the game more accessible.

edward_frigidhands

Billium813 wrote: »

ccfeeling wrote: »

PVE perspective

Tank moves a lot , we still have a not really bad HOT during moving and excellent healing while not moving . Most of the cases controlled by the tank unless some environment mechanics happen .

Tank moves but not frequently , most efficiency clear , tank pulls and taunts all mobs , stay at same spot and let DPS burn them down .

code65536 wrote: »

I think the changes are fine for PvE tanks.

Yes, PvE tanks do have to move, but you're usually not constantly moving. You're usually moving in bursts and then standing still, and the movement check here is sufficiently granular.

I think these are good points. I think a weak heal if you don't know how to use it, but an exceptional heal if you do offers a learning curve that I WANT to see more in the game. People being upset because they want a heal that works 100% of the time and think having to stay still is "playing dumb" don't understand the mechanics of tanking or don't like that a game could have a learning curve to it.

I'd rather see changes like this than nebulous changes targeted at fictional new players to make the game more accessible.

I think people are likely taking issue with the fact that only Night Blade Tanks are being subject to this because the class is heavily favored by gank builds and they are trying to separate balancing of those from people who play other builds/playstyles in PVE and PVP.

I am personally fine with the change but I feel like this is not where it would end and it will likely be further adjusted once the outrage machine has died down. Adjustments would be fine except in this case it does seem like the developers have shown an excess bit of shortcomings when it comes to communication, competence and direction.

code65536

Jazraena wrote: »

code65536 wrote: »

I think the changes are fine for PvE tanks.

1. The movement check appears to be very responsive. For example, if I roll dodge, I get a weak heal tick during the dodge, but the next heal tick immediately after completing the roll is full strength. So the penalty for movement doesn't "persist" and goes away as soon as the movement ends.
2. Movement ticks are 58% of what they are on live. Static ticks are 145% of what they are on Live. So if you move, stop, move, stop and every other tick is a weak tick, you'll be getting the same amount of healing as you are right now on Live.
3. Movement caused by an enemy (e.g., not blocking an attack with a knockback ability) does not penalize your healing.

Yes, PvE tanks do have to move, but you're usually not constantly moving. You're usually moving in bursts and then standing still, and the movement check here is sufficiently granular.

I can't find myself fully agreeing with this, but there is a more important question here IMHO: Under the umbrella of Accessibility, how is this a good thing?

Personally, I don't like how ZOS tries to balance PvE and PvP together. PvE is very different from PvP; in the latter, your enemies react and adapt, while in the former, your enemies rely on massive stats (millions of health) and special mechanics. They're very different, and I believe that trying to balance the two together results in messy compromises.

This is one of those messy compromises.

But this policy of balancing the two together is something that has been around since the beginning and is something that the studio head has stated in past interviews as being important to the design of the game. That is to say, I imagine that any changes to this policy is going to have to come from the top and is not the kind of call that the combat team can make.

For PvE tanks, Dark Cloak in PTS 5 is in a much better place than it was in PTS 1 and PTS 3. And I'm speaking as someone who mains a NB tank and who has tested Dark Cloak in the new dungeon HMs in PTS 1, PTS 3, and PTS 5.

Now, how it compares to Live is a bit harder to say--in some situations, this is a buff compared to Live, and in some situations, it's a nerf compared to Live. But if one of those aforementioned "messy compromises" is needed, and there needed to be some way to make Dark Cloak weaker in PvP while not screwing over PvE too much, then what we have here in PTS 5 is a substantial improvement over what we had in PTS 1 or PTS 3.

In short, as far as "messy compromises" go, this is a better one than what we had.

edward_frigidhands

code65536 wrote: »

Jazraena wrote: »

code65536 wrote: »

I think the changes are fine for PvE tanks.

1. The movement check appears to be very responsive. For example, if I roll dodge, I get a weak heal tick during the dodge, but the next heal tick immediately after completing the roll is full strength. So the penalty for movement doesn't "persist" and goes away as soon as the movement ends.
2. Movement ticks are 58% of what they are on live. Static ticks are 145% of what they are on Live. So if you move, stop, move, stop and every other tick is a weak tick, you'll be getting the same amount of healing as you are right now on Live.
3. Movement caused by an enemy (e.g., not blocking an attack with a knockback ability) does not penalize your healing.

Yes, PvE tanks do have to move, but you're usually not constantly moving. You're usually moving in bursts and then standing still, and the movement check here is sufficiently granular.

I can't find myself fully agreeing with this, but there is a more important question here IMHO: Under the umbrella of Accessibility, how is this a good thing?

Personally, I don't like how ZOS tries to balance PvE and PvP together. PvE is very different from PvP; in the latter, your enemies react and adapt, while in the former, your enemies rely on massive stats (millions of health) and special mechanics. They're very different, and I believe that trying to balance the two together results in messy compromises.

This is one of those messy compromises.

But this policy of balancing the two together is something that has been around since the beginning and is something that the studio head has stated in past interviews as being important to the design of the game. That is to say, I imagine that any changes to this policy is going to have to come from the top and is not the kind of call that the combat team can make.

For PvE tanks, Dark Cloak in PTS 5 is in a much better place than it was in PTS 1 and PTS 3. And I'm speaking as someone who mains a NB tank and who has tested Dark Cloak in the new dungeon HMs in PTS 1, PTS 3, and PTS 5.

Now, how it compares to Live is a bit harder to say--in some situations, this is a buff compared to Live, and in some situations, it's a nerf compared to Live. But if one of those aforementioned "messy compromises" is needed, and there needed to be some way to make Dark Cloak weaker in PvP while not screwing over PvE too much, then what we have here in PTS 5 is a substantial improvement over what we had in PTS 1 or PTS 3.

In short, as far as "messy compromises" go, this is a better one than what we had.

I understand that you care only about how the ability functions for a singular playstyle but there are a lot of builds that aren't NB gank builds that also rely on it. A blanket pvp nerf would ruin the ability for a lot of playstyles and builds.

Also pvp/pve balancing is bad bandage game design since it makes things more complicated and confusing for both players and developers as two large disconnected games are formed with their own issues.

It would make far more sense to just tie the defensive power of the ability to defensive stats like both max health and resistances.

code65536

edward_frigidhands wrote: »

code65536 wrote: »

Jazraena wrote: »

code65536 wrote: »

I think the changes are fine for PvE tanks.

1. The movement check appears to be very responsive. For example, if I roll dodge, I get a weak heal tick during the dodge, but the next heal tick immediately after completing the roll is full strength. So the penalty for movement doesn't "persist" and goes away as soon as the movement ends.
2. Movement ticks are 58% of what they are on live. Static ticks are 145% of what they are on Live. So if you move, stop, move, stop and every other tick is a weak tick, you'll be getting the same amount of healing as you are right now on Live.
3. Movement caused by an enemy (e.g., not blocking an attack with a knockback ability) does not penalize your healing.

Yes, PvE tanks do have to move, but you're usually not constantly moving. You're usually moving in bursts and then standing still, and the movement check here is sufficiently granular.

I can't find myself fully agreeing with this, but there is a more important question here IMHO: Under the umbrella of Accessibility, how is this a good thing?

Personally, I don't like how ZOS tries to balance PvE and PvP together. PvE is very different from PvP; in the latter, your enemies react and adapt, while in the former, your enemies rely on massive stats (millions of health) and special mechanics. They're very different, and I believe that trying to balance the two together results in messy compromises.

This is one of those messy compromises.

But this policy of balancing the two together is something that has been around since the beginning and is something that the studio head has stated in past interviews as being important to the design of the game. That is to say, I imagine that any changes to this policy is going to have to come from the top and is not the kind of call that the combat team can make.

For PvE tanks, Dark Cloak in PTS 5 is in a much better place than it was in PTS 1 and PTS 3. And I'm speaking as someone who mains a NB tank and who has tested Dark Cloak in the new dungeon HMs in PTS 1, PTS 3, and PTS 5.

Now, how it compares to Live is a bit harder to say--in some situations, this is a buff compared to Live, and in some situations, it's a nerf compared to Live. But if one of those aforementioned "messy compromises" is needed, and there needed to be some way to make Dark Cloak weaker in PvP while not screwing over PvE too much, then what we have here in PTS 5 is a substantial improvement over what we had in PTS 1 or PTS 3.

In short, as far as "messy compromises" go, this is a better one than what we had.

I understand that you care only about how the ability functions for a singular playstyle but there are a lot of builds that aren't NB gank builds that also rely on it. A blanket pvp nerf would ruin the ability for a lot of playstyles and builds.

Also pvp/pve balancing is bad bandage game design since it makes things more complicated and confusing for both players and developers as two large disconnected games are formed with their own issues.

It would make far more sense to just tie the defensive power of the ability to defensive stats like both max health and resistances.

I haven't commented on the use of Dark Cloak in PvP because in PvP, I use the invisibility morph. My opinion is that if ZOS thinks that Dark Cloak is overperforming in PvP, then I would prefer that they address that in a way that doesn't adversely impact PvE.

However, I understand from reading the various feedback threads that there are people who disagree with ZOS's initial premise; they argue that it was not overperforming in PvP in the first place and thus there was no need for any nerf in any context. But since I use the other morph in PvP, I am unable to offer relevant comment on that subject, which is why I've been careful to state in my posts that I'm only writing about PvE.

Suligost

This is not type of game where you can stand still, they should be aware of it. I don't how why they've done this while at the same type DK or Templar heal exist in the game. Even while standing still it's slightly better then the old one.

Think about any solo Arena like Malestrom, Vateshraan and imagine yourself standing still entire encounter... soooo bad.
PvP? I don't even want to start with it. Honestly I felt a little better with increased health regen with lost HP%. I can't come with any idea for this.

Billium813

Suligost wrote: »

This is not type of game where you can stand still, they should be aware of it.

Think about any solo Arena like Malestrom, Vateshraan and imagine yourself standing still entire encounter... soooo bad.

It's a 3 second heal! You don't have to stand still for the entire encounter! This doesn't need 100% uptime! People stand still ALL THE TIME!

Suligost wrote: »

I don't how why they've done this while at the same type DK or Templar heal exist in the game.

First, Templar healing is kind of their thing. For class identity, I would argue their class skills should be the best at it...
Second, Templar heals are either burst (BoL) or AOE based (Extended Ritual), they don't have a HoT applied to themselves.

IMO, for class identity, some classes skills should be better at some things than other classes skill (DK should be better at armor and resistances, Templar at healing, NB at invisibility and crit). Any class skill that dips into the others specialty should either be worse, or have restrictions/hoops to jump through