Game Mechanic Nerfs Need to be for Everyone, Not a Penalty for Group Size and Skill

LoganSpencer1 · August 23

While it is widely agreed upon by high-end PvPers that damage shields need a rebalance, the current group-scaling approach on the PTS sets a dangerous precedent. Targeting damage shields based strictly on group size doesn't fix a balance issue—it actively penalizes player organization, skill expression, and optimization.

If shields are overperforming, they should receive a flat-value, absolute nerf for everyone. Here is why the current group-scaling model is a step in the wrong direction:

1. It Penalizes the Hours Invested in Optimization

High-end, coordinated groups do not just "win" by default. Behind every successful small-to-mid-sized group are dozens of hours spent:

Theorycrafting: Endlessly tweaking group compositions, gear sets, and skill bars.

Recruitment: Finding and vetting players who possess the mechanical skill and willingness to execute a specific role.

Log Review: Spending hours analyzing combat logs to fix positioning errors, resource management issues, and rotational gaps.

Shotcalling & Execution: Managing real-time battlefield positioning while coordinating up to 7 damage or support abilities to fire off at the exact same split-second. This level of synergy is a definitive skill in and of itself.

2. The Equity Illusion: Catering to the Skill Floor

The current scaling model attempts to create "equity" for casual players and uncoordinated zergs who refuse to put critical thought into their own builds or group synergy. Expecting a casual solo player or an uncoordinated group to compete with a tightly optimized team that treats PvP with high competitive seriousness is a fundamental misunderstanding of PvP progression. Highly optimized groups make up less than 1% of the total PvP population; systematically dismantling their toolkit just to appease the loudest voices on the forums harms the competitive health of Cyrodiil.

3. The Double Standard: The 40-Man Negate Carpet

The most glaring issue with this change is the blatant double standard regarding what is deemed "broken."

Coordinated Groups: Get hit with compounding penalties (previous HoT limits, and now Update 51's aggressive shield-scaling cap down to 60%).

Massive Zergs: Are continually allowed to stack health-scaling heals and abuse zero-skill tactics. A 40-man discord zerg carpet-bombing a zone with dozens of concurrent Negates—completely turning off game mechanics for everyone else—is treated as perfectly acceptable.

By tying the Battle Spirit shield cap to group size, ZOS is punishing coordination while actively rewarding numerical weight. If shields (or anything else) are mathematically overpowered, apply a flat-value nerf across the board. Make everyone play by the exact same baseline rules. Stop artificially raising the floor for uncoordinated play while introducing math ceilings designed to break the players who actually spent the time to master your game’s systems.

Athometodd · August 23

When this approach was first revelead, I was supportive, but after more I have put more thought into it I agree with you. As someone who likes to group up with friends in cyrodill in a very very much uncoordinated way, I am seeing how this approach is problematic. Most of my experience in groups of 12 have been with guild events looking to bring new players into pvp, and not at all optimized, and in no way would anyone mistake us for a ballgroup. So I agree, limits on stacking shields and hots should be more universal and not tied to whether one is grouped (and the group size) or not. Ultimately there are so many work arounds - the coordination comes more from voice comms imo - and I do agree that a group that is wlling to put the time and effort in to be optimized and skilled, should be difficult to take on. Ultimately even with this approach there is way to min-max it.

merevie · August 23

You are 100% right. And I know three guilds who do all those things to perform with 12, but frankly have the numbers for 8. They're the best.

A negate in a zerg though is not being followed by an ulti dump, no one knows if it's friendly or not, and frankly, it hasn't rendered for the random strangers to see it either.

Truth is, most of us in Pvp do know how to do builds and groups at that level and we don't want to because we're kinda lazy and like to randomly chase things. That's really an 'us' problem. Most of us could, probably, put together a very good 6-8 man in 40 mins, with minimal effort.

Not so sure this would be 'bad' for Pvp.

CatalinaWineMixer2 · August 23

This is the direct result of Ball Groups. I'd rather see the game randomly assign Groups on top of this. Even then, the population is so low it's likely people would just end up with the same people over and over again anyway. This is a good change. I like the idea that Ball Groups and Guilds should be worried about Solo Players. I was surprised to see this, but it tells me Zos is finally coming to grips with an 11 year problem.

Luneca · August 23

HP scaling shields are a bad mechanic and need removal IMO. There is absolutely nothing skillful about a group of people spamming one skill that gives them absolute immunity from damage except in "ideal" conditions where it can be countered.

Groups were already powerful stacking HP long before shields came into play. Scribing and the changes that ZOS has made over the last 5 years brought them up to another level.

Having a complete defensive solution with the click of a button isn't skill nor skill-based at all. It's a systematic advantage that creates a gulf that cannot realistically be overcome with skill at any point in time.

And this is why it's getting nerfed. Becasue the SYSTEM does not have a proper counter to HP stacking in the first place already, and with shields added, there isn't any counter at all.

For anyone in a ball group that thinks it isn't an issue, why don't you just try a simple task: go and wipe another ball group stacking shields and HP, except do it while you aren't with your group and alone in a "zerg".

We all know what's going to happen. You aren't going to do it. And you aren't going to do it because it isn't something experience can overcome: either the right combination is present or it's not. And when it's not, then there is nothing that can be done with skill at all versus shield stacking.

I know it's hard for players to admit and accept that they've been carried by a balance issue, but reality is not something you can always avert your eyes from just because it's inconvienient.

Making the argument that you spent time optimizing is a pointless one when no one knows the validity of that statement. I spent over 7/10 of my time on the game optimising builds and finding broken things, does that mean ZOS should never nerf my builds and let me cheese with things like that recursive static reverbation build that just got cut? No way.

Skill arguments? Come on. Buddy, please explain how it's skillful for someone to play in a way that has ZERO real counter and every advantage possible versus those that don't? The game is inherently unbalanced at its core and when ZOS tries to adjust a mechanic that is problematic, you want to bring up the skill argument? Explain how it's skillful. Because no one outside of the people using said mechanic to overpower and win without any real threat of losing thinks it is skillful.

Lastly, the "40-man zerg" argument falls flat on its face for a number of reasons. Here's the biggest one: because there is strength in numbers, regardless of the method. <-- This same argument is used all the time by ball groups to justify group sets and advantages gained from things that should only be in PvE, so let's use that exact logic right now.

There's strength in numbers. It's up to you to use SKILL to overcome that. Now ballgroups have an avenue to demonstrate it to everyone the absolute pinnacle of skill they've always gone on and on about on these forums, and instead we have a call to nerf everyone else so the ball groups stay relatively more powerful than everyone else?

No way. Complete disagree.

Valkanos · August 23

I completely agree with the title, and I think this principle should apply to PvE as well.
The problem isn't only in PvP.

In PvE, we've reached a point where high DPS allows players to skip mechanics entirely. Because of that, new players don't even learn what the mechanics are. Then, when a group doesn't have enough DPS to skip them, we wipe, lose time, and the game becomes even more frustrating because nobody knows, or even cares, what they're supposed to do. We can't burn the boss? Kick someone\leave group, replace them, and try again. Can't do it? Disband. That's what the game is becoming.

We're even starting to see groups using only one tank to complete trials. Players aren't learning or executing the mechanics the encounters were designed around, they're learning how to kill the boss before the mechanics happen. But that only works when they have enough DPS.

Let me give you just two examples:

- vRG Oaxiltso: Pugs now often use 1T, pure DPS, and simply burn the boss. At the same time, players don't even understand that they shouldn't cleanse in the back pools because the boss will Charge into the group. They don't care about poisoning other players, so there is no reason for them to understand the cleansing mechanic. And when they do use the pools, they often use the wrong ones anyway. None of this makes much sense.

- vDSR Twins: Burn the boss. Then nobody knows that the Atros can be killed after the teleport. Nobody cares about that mechanic because the group is simply trying to burn through the fight as fast as possible. I see so many disbands in this trial alone, more than in all the other trials put together. High DPS has turned the game into this. It's completely ridiculous.

PvE shouldn't be about skiping mechanics just because players have enough DPS to bypass them. If the developers want mechanics to matter, encounters need to be designed and balanced so those mechanics actually have time to happen.
Or, if the intention is to completely ignore mechanics, then remove them altogether and let us complete trials through DPS checks. We can't have both. We can't design encounters around mechanics and then make those mechanics irrelevant because the DPS is high enough to skip them, or disband the group when the DPS isn't enough.

Right now, we're slowly turning more and more content into a DPS check where knowing the mechanics is optional. And honestly, that's making the game worse, way worse. It's becoming boring and, yes, incredibly ridiculous.

**High DPS shouldn't be a way to fail the game by never learning how to play it.**

LoganSpencer1 · August 23

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

This is the direct result of Ball Groups. I'd rather see the game randomly assign Groups on top of this. Even then, the population is so low it's likely people would just end up with the same people over and over again anyway. This is a good change. I like the idea that Ball Groups and Guilds should be worried about Solo Players. I was surprised to see this, but it tells me Zos is finally coming to grips with an 11 year problem.

this is just so absolutely and fundamentally wrong. no, solo players should absolutely not be able to kill a decent coordinated, commed group unless said group is just kind of.. terrible.

LoganSpencer1 · August 23

Luneca wrote: »

HP scaling shields are a bad mechanic and need removal IMO. There is absolutely nothing skillful about a group of people spamming one skill that gives them absolute immunity from damage except in "ideal" conditions where it can be countered.

Groups were already powerful stacking HP long before shields came into play. Scribing and the changes that ZOS has made over the last 5 years brought them up to another level.

Having a complete defensive solution with the click of a button isn't skill nor skill-based at all. It's a systematic advantage that creates a gulf that cannot realistically be overcome with skill at any point in time.

And this is why it's getting nerfed. Becasue the SYSTEM does not have a proper counter to HP stacking in the first place already, and with shields added, there isn't any counter at all.

For anyone in a ball group that thinks it isn't an issue, why don't you just try a simple task: go and wipe another ball group stacking shields and HP, except do it while you aren't with your group and alone in a "zerg".

We all know what's going to happen. You aren't going to do it. And you aren't going to do it because it isn't something experience can overcome: either the right combination is present or it's not. And when it's not, then there is nothing that can be done with skill at all versus shield stacking.

I know it's hard for players to admit and accept that they've been carried by a balance issue, but reality is not something you can always avert your eyes from just because it's inconvienient.

Making the argument that you spent time optimizing is a pointless one when no one knows the validity of that statement. I spent over 7/10 of my time on the game optimising builds and finding broken things, does that mean ZOS should never nerf my builds and let me cheese with things like that recursive static reverbation build that just got cut? No way.

Skill arguments? Come on. Buddy, please explain how it's skillful for someone to play in a way that has ZERO real counter and every advantage possible versus those that don't? The game is inherently unbalanced at its core and when ZOS tries to adjust a mechanic that is problematic, you want to bring up the skill argument? Explain how it's skillful. Because no one outside of the people using said mechanic to overpower and win without any real threat of losing thinks it is skillful.

Lastly, the "40-man zerg" argument falls flat on its face for a number of reasons. Here's the biggest one: because there is strength in numbers, regardless of the method. <-- This same argument is used all the time by ball groups to justify group sets and advantages gained from things that should only be in PvE, so let's use that exact logic right now.

There's strength in numbers. It's up to you to use SKILL to overcome that. Now ballgroups have an avenue to demonstrate it to everyone the absolute pinnacle of skill they've always gone on and on about on these forums, and instead we have a call to nerf everyone else so the ball groups stay relatively more powerful than everyone else?

No way. Complete disagree.

this is the most "i have no actual idea what's going on, i just hate group players!!!!" type post I've ever seen.

TheAwesomeChimpanzee · August 23

LoganSpencer1 wrote: »

While it is widely agreed upon by high-end PvPers that damage shields need a rebalance, the current group-scaling approach on the PTS sets a dangerous precedent. Targeting damage shields based strictly on group size doesn't fix a balance issue—it actively penalizes player organization, skill expression, and optimization.

If shields are overperforming, they should receive a flat-value, absolute nerf for everyone. Here is why the current group-scaling model is a step in the wrong direction:

1. It Penalizes the Hours Invested in Optimization

High-end, coordinated groups do not just "win" by default. Behind every successful small-to-mid-sized group are dozens of hours spent:

Theorycrafting: Endlessly tweaking group compositions, gear sets, and skill bars.

Recruitment: Finding and vetting players who possess the mechanical skill and willingness to execute a specific role.

Log Review: Spending hours analyzing combat logs to fix positioning errors, resource management issues, and rotational gaps.

Shotcalling & Execution: Managing real-time battlefield positioning while coordinating up to 7 damage or support abilities to fire off at the exact same split-second. This level of synergy is a definitive skill in and of itself.

2. The Equity Illusion: Catering to the Skill Floor

The current scaling model attempts to create "equity" for casual players and uncoordinated zergs who refuse to put critical thought into their own builds or group synergy. Expecting a casual solo player or an uncoordinated group to compete with a tightly optimized team that treats PvP with high competitive seriousness is a fundamental misunderstanding of PvP progression. Highly optimized groups make up less than 1% of the total PvP population; systematically dismantling their toolkit just to appease the loudest voices on the forums harms the competitive health of Cyrodiil.

3. The Double Standard: The 40-Man Negate Carpet

The most glaring issue with this change is the blatant double standard regarding what is deemed "broken."

Coordinated Groups: Get hit with compounding penalties (previous HoT limits, and now Update 51's aggressive shield-scaling cap down to 60%).

Massive Zergs: Are continually allowed to stack health-scaling heals and abuse zero-skill tactics. A 40-man discord zerg carpet-bombing a zone with dozens of concurrent Negates—completely turning off game mechanics for everyone else—is treated as perfectly acceptable.

By tying the Battle Spirit shield cap to group size, ZOS is punishing coordination while actively rewarding numerical weight. If shields (or anything else) are mathematically overpowered, apply a flat-value nerf across the board. Make everyone play by the exact same baseline rules. Stop artificially raising the floor for uncoordinated play while introducing math ceilings designed to break the players who actually spent the time to master your game’s systems.

I strongly disagree. At the moment, ball groups are arguably the strongest they have ever been, perhaps only slightly weaker than they were before the sticky HoT/Battle Spirit changes.

Shields are a major problem, but I think the more fundamental issue is how group sets scale. By their nature, group sets become disproportionately more valuable as you add players. Take Powerful Assault as a simple example: in a 3-man, that 307 Weapon and Spell Damage is benefiting three players; in a 12-man, it is benefiting twelve. The individual bonus is the same, but the total value the set provides to the group goes from 307×3 to 307×12. The same principle applies to most of the support sets and group-wide buffs used in optimized ball groups.

Because of that, a 12-man is not merely “twice as strong” as a 6-man. It has access to far more overlapping group buffs, support sets, healing, mitigation, ultimates, synergies, and specialized roles. The game’s mechanics actively reward stacking more coordinated players together, and after years of adding increasingly powerful support sets, that scaling has gotten out of hand—especially in 10–12 player groups.

I agree that coordinated and optimized players should outperform uncoordinated players. They should absolutely be rewarded for good compositions, min-maxing, positioning, and execution. I play in ball groups myself. But there is a difference between rewarding coordination and designing systems where simply adding more members causes the group’s effective power to scale disproportionately.

For that reason, I actually think larger groups should receive penalties in more than one area as additional members are added. The game already gives them enormous multiplicative advantages through group mechanics, so some counter-scaling is reasonable. Ideally, I would rather see the underlying way group sets scale reworked entirely, but until then, mechanics like the shield cap are a reasonable way of addressing part of the problem.

That said, I do think the current shield scaling is too aggressive. I would rather see something like a 100% cap at 5 players, followed by roughly a 7% reduction per additional group member up to 12. Five- and six-man groups can already use shields extremely effectively, so I don’t think they should be almost completely exempt, but the penalty also shouldn’t fall off a cliff simply because a group reaches 10–12 players.

Luneca · August 23

LoganSpencer1 wrote: »

Luneca wrote: »

HP scaling shields are a bad mechanic and need removal IMO. There is absolutely nothing skillful about a group of people spamming one skill that gives them absolute immunity from damage except in "ideal" conditions where it can be countered.

Groups were already powerful stacking HP long before shields came into play. Scribing and the changes that ZOS has made over the last 5 years brought them up to another level.

Having a complete defensive solution with the click of a button isn't skill nor skill-based at all. It's a systematic advantage that creates a gulf that cannot realistically be overcome with skill at any point in time.

And this is why it's getting nerfed. Becasue the SYSTEM does not have a proper counter to HP stacking in the first place already, and with shields added, there isn't any counter at all.

For anyone in a ball group that thinks it isn't an issue, why don't you just try a simple task: go and wipe another ball group stacking shields and HP, except do it while you aren't with your group and alone in a "zerg".

We all know what's going to happen. You aren't going to do it. And you aren't going to do it because it isn't something experience can overcome: either the right combination is present or it's not. And when it's not, then there is nothing that can be done with skill at all versus shield stacking.

I know it's hard for players to admit and accept that they've been carried by a balance issue, but reality is not something you can always avert your eyes from just because it's inconvienient.

Making the argument that you spent time optimizing is a pointless one when no one knows the validity of that statement. I spent over 7/10 of my time on the game optimising builds and finding broken things, does that mean ZOS should never nerf my builds and let me cheese with things like that recursive static reverbation build that just got cut? No way.

Skill arguments? Come on. Buddy, please explain how it's skillful for someone to play in a way that has ZERO real counter and every advantage possible versus those that don't? The game is inherently unbalanced at its core and when ZOS tries to adjust a mechanic that is problematic, you want to bring up the skill argument? Explain how it's skillful. Because no one outside of the people using said mechanic to overpower and win without any real threat of losing thinks it is skillful.

Lastly, the "40-man zerg" argument falls flat on its face for a number of reasons. Here's the biggest one: because there is strength in numbers, regardless of the method. <-- This same argument is used all the time by ball groups to justify group sets and advantages gained from things that should only be in PvE, so let's use that exact logic right now.

There's strength in numbers. It's up to you to use SKILL to overcome that. Now ballgroups have an avenue to demonstrate it to everyone the absolute pinnacle of skill they've always gone on and on about on these forums, and instead we have a call to nerf everyone else so the ball groups stay relatively more powerful than everyone else?

No way. Complete disagree.

this is the most "i have no actual idea what's going on, i just hate group players!!!!" type post I've ever seen.

Post a refutation. Can you do it? Also keep in mind I'm not the one making a skill argument abd then asking for the game to be tilted in a way that favors me. Of course, it's convenient to forget that tidbit when attempting to bait.

I don't know who you are or what knowledge you think and claim you have. I'm not that interested either. I'm only interested in what you've posted and I can tell you this: I am not convinced. And since I am not, I am in opposition. Really, it's that simple.

spartaxoxo · August 23

A diminishing return on stacking up effects is necessary for balance. Competitive game design shouldn't be balanced around what people do when they lack coordination and skill. But around what the peak potential at the highest end skill looks like.

That uncoordinated groups would be impacted too is something to keep in mind but not something that should prevent necessary balancing. And no they shouldn't nerf something that isn't over powered because a strategy that is overpowered got a nerf. Nerfs should be targeted towards problem areas not blankets that don't address the underlying problem because it didn't change the fundamental problem with tipping of the scales.

RedMamba · August 23

Health based heals & shields shouldn't exist in the game.

Goregram1 · August 23

To bad zos wont read this its very insightful might as well scream into a trash can sadly

LoganSpencer1 · August 23

TheAwesomeChimpanzee wrote: »

LoganSpencer1 wrote: »

While it is widely agreed upon by high-end PvPers that damage shields need a rebalance, the current group-scaling approach on the PTS sets a dangerous precedent. Targeting damage shields based strictly on group size doesn't fix a balance issue—it actively penalizes player organization, skill expression, and optimization.

If shields are overperforming, they should receive a flat-value, absolute nerf for everyone. Here is why the current group-scaling model is a step in the wrong direction:

1. It Penalizes the Hours Invested in Optimization

High-end, coordinated groups do not just "win" by default. Behind every successful small-to-mid-sized group are dozens of hours spent:

Theorycrafting: Endlessly tweaking group compositions, gear sets, and skill bars.

Recruitment: Finding and vetting players who possess the mechanical skill and willingness to execute a specific role.

Log Review: Spending hours analyzing combat logs to fix positioning errors, resource management issues, and rotational gaps.

Shotcalling & Execution: Managing real-time battlefield positioning while coordinating up to 7 damage or support abilities to fire off at the exact same split-second. This level of synergy is a definitive skill in and of itself.

2. The Equity Illusion: Catering to the Skill Floor

The current scaling model attempts to create "equity" for casual players and uncoordinated zergs who refuse to put critical thought into their own builds or group synergy. Expecting a casual solo player or an uncoordinated group to compete with a tightly optimized team that treats PvP with high competitive seriousness is a fundamental misunderstanding of PvP progression. Highly optimized groups make up less than 1% of the total PvP population; systematically dismantling their toolkit just to appease the loudest voices on the forums harms the competitive health of Cyrodiil.

3. The Double Standard: The 40-Man Negate Carpet

The most glaring issue with this change is the blatant double standard regarding what is deemed "broken."

Coordinated Groups: Get hit with compounding penalties (previous HoT limits, and now Update 51's aggressive shield-scaling cap down to 60%).

Massive Zergs: Are continually allowed to stack health-scaling heals and abuse zero-skill tactics. A 40-man discord zerg carpet-bombing a zone with dozens of concurrent Negates—completely turning off game mechanics for everyone else—is treated as perfectly acceptable.

By tying the Battle Spirit shield cap to group size, ZOS is punishing coordination while actively rewarding numerical weight. If shields (or anything else) are mathematically overpowered, apply a flat-value nerf across the board. Make everyone play by the exact same baseline rules. Stop artificially raising the floor for uncoordinated play while introducing math ceilings designed to break the players who actually spent the time to master your game’s systems.

LoganSpencer1 wrote: »

While it is widely agreed upon by high-end PvPers that damage shields need a rebalance, the current group-scaling approach on the PTS sets a dangerous precedent. Targeting damage shields based strictly on group size doesn't fix a balance issue—it actively penalizes player organization, skill expression, and optimization.

If shields are overperforming, they should receive a flat-value, absolute nerf for everyone. Here is why the current group-scaling model is a step in the wrong direction:

1. It Penalizes the Hours Invested in Optimization

High-end, coordinated groups do not just "win" by default. Behind every successful small-to-mid-sized group are dozens of hours spent:

Theorycrafting: Endlessly tweaking group compositions, gear sets, and skill bars.

Recruitment: Finding and vetting players who possess the mechanical skill and willingness to execute a specific role.

Log Review: Spending hours analyzing combat logs to fix positioning errors, resource management issues, and rotational gaps.

Shotcalling & Execution: Managing real-time battlefield positioning while coordinating up to 7 damage or support abilities to fire off at the exact same split-second. This level of synergy is a definitive skill in and of itself.

2. The Equity Illusion: Catering to the Skill Floor

The current scaling model attempts to create "equity" for casual players and uncoordinated zergs who refuse to put critical thought into their own builds or group synergy. Expecting a casual solo player or an uncoordinated group to compete with a tightly optimized team that treats PvP with high competitive seriousness is a fundamental misunderstanding of PvP progression. Highly optimized groups make up less than 1% of the total PvP population; systematically dismantling their toolkit just to appease the loudest voices on the forums harms the competitive health of Cyrodiil.

3. The Double Standard: The 40-Man Negate Carpet

The most glaring issue with this change is the blatant double standard regarding what is deemed "broken."

Coordinated Groups: Get hit with compounding penalties (previous HoT limits, and now Update 51's aggressive shield-scaling cap down to 60%).

Massive Zergs: Are continually allowed to stack health-scaling heals and abuse zero-skill tactics. A 40-man discord zerg carpet-bombing a zone with dozens of concurrent Negates—completely turning off game mechanics for everyone else—is treated as perfectly acceptable.

By tying the Battle Spirit shield cap to group size, ZOS is punishing coordination while actively rewarding numerical weight. If shields (or anything else) are mathematically overpowered, apply a flat-value nerf across the board. Make everyone play by the exact same baseline rules. Stop artificially raising the floor for uncoordinated play while introducing math ceilings designed to break the players who actually spent the time to master your game’s systems.

I strongly disagree. At the moment, ball groups are arguably the strongest they have ever been, perhaps only slightly weaker than they were before the sticky HoT/Battle Spirit changes.

Shields are a major problem, but I think the more fundamental issue is how group sets scale. By their nature, group sets become disproportionately more valuable as you add players. Take Powerful Assault as a simple example: in a 3-man, that 307 Weapon and Spell Damage is benefiting three players; in a 12-man, it is benefiting twelve. The individual bonus is the same, but the total value the set provides to the group goes from 307×3 to 307×12. The same principle applies to most of the support sets and group-wide buffs used in optimized ball groups.

Because of that, a 12-man is not merely “twice as strong” as a 6-man. It has access to far more overlapping group buffs, support sets, healing, mitigation, ultimates, synergies, and specialized roles. The game’s mechanics actively reward stacking more coordinated players together, and after years of adding increasingly powerful support sets, that scaling has gotten out of hand—especially in 10–12 player groups.

I agree that coordinated and optimized players should outperform uncoordinated players. They should absolutely be rewarded for good compositions, min-maxing, positioning, and execution. I play in ball groups myself. But there is a difference between rewarding coordination and designing systems where simply adding more members causes the group’s effective power to scale disproportionately.

For that reason, I actually think larger groups should receive penalties in more than one area as additional members are added. The game already gives them enormous multiplicative advantages through group mechanics, so some counter-scaling is reasonable. Ideally, I would rather see the underlying way group sets scale reworked entirely, but until then, mechanics like the shield cap are a reasonable way of addressing part of the problem.

That said, I do think the current shield scaling is too aggressive. I would rather see something like a 100% cap at 5 players, followed by roughly a 7% reduction per additional group member up to 12. Five- and six-man groups can already use shields extremely effectively, so I don’t think they should be almost completely exempt, but the penalty also shouldn’t fall off a cliff simply because a group reaches 10–12 players.

This point of view is fine and fair, and I still disagree, but if this type of group-scaling nerf is going to be the precedent, it should be for all exploitable abilities. 40 man discord call groups shouldn't be able to blanket an area in spam negates to the point you literally aren't allowed to play the game. Make it even, not equitable only to casual groups. You cannot intentionally nerf thought out compositions and commed groups while ignoring the things that casual zergs do to abuse the game's systems as well. And to all the people claiming I am only advocating to keep ballgroups strong and that my insights are just wrong, I strongly encourage any of you to come try out and see things from the other PoV instead of just ranting that you're tired of dying to groups that are, and rightfully so, killing you and that it's bad because reasons

ItsNotLiving · August 23

“We’ll just put the game in a state where it’s optimal to stack health because of hybridization and then add a million shields that all scale with health. What could go wrong?”

LoganSpencer1 · August 23

spartaxoxo wrote: »

A diminishing return on stacking up effects is necessary for balance. Competitive game design shouldn't be balanced around what people do when they lack coordination and skill. But around what the peak potential at the highest end skill looks like.

That uncoordinated groups would be impacted too is something to keep in mind but not something that should prevent necessary balancing. And no they shouldn't nerf something that isn't over powered because a strategy that is overpowered got a nerf. Nerfs should be targeted towards problem areas not blankets that don't address the underlying problem because it didn't change the fundamental problem with tipping of the scales.

If this is the case, then what is even the point of having different shielding mechanisms in the game? Part of building an organized comped group is where to fit everything and having people play them reliably. What is the point of building a set that has someone with a gibber, a person with a barrier, one with a magma shell, etc, if it just becomes redundant? You should still be able to use all the abilities present and at your disposal, no matter your group size. A flat value shield nerf across the board keeps the playing field even for all parties, while still reducing the effectiveness of the broken mechanic outright. It seems more and more like the game is penalizing people for actually putting thought into the game, [snip]
[edited for baiting]

Lagzee · August 24

LoganSpencer1 wrote: »

While it is widely agreed upon by high-end PvPers that damage shields need a rebalance, the current group-scaling approach on the PTS sets a dangerous precedent. Targeting damage shields based strictly on group size doesn't fix a balance issue—it actively penalizes player organization, skill expression, and optimization.

If shields are overperforming, they should receive a flat-value, absolute nerf for everyone. Here is why the current group-scaling model is a step in the wrong direction:

1. It Penalizes the Hours Invested in Optimization

High-end, coordinated groups do not just "win" by default. Behind every successful small-to-mid-sized group are dozens of hours spent:

Theorycrafting: Endlessly tweaking group compositions, gear sets, and skill bars.

Recruitment: Finding and vetting players who possess the mechanical skill and willingness to execute a specific role.

Log Review: Spending hours analyzing combat logs to fix positioning errors, resource management issues, and rotational gaps.

Shotcalling & Execution: Managing real-time battlefield positioning while coordinating up to 7 damage or support abilities to fire off at the exact same split-second. This level of synergy is a definitive skill in and of itself.

2. The Equity Illusion: Catering to the Skill Floor

The current scaling model attempts to create "equity" for casual players and uncoordinated zergs who refuse to put critical thought into their own builds or group synergy. Expecting a casual solo player or an uncoordinated group to compete with a tightly optimized team that treats PvP with high competitive seriousness is a fundamental misunderstanding of PvP progression. Highly optimized groups make up less than 1% of the total PvP population; systematically dismantling their toolkit just to appease the loudest voices on the forums harms the competitive health of Cyrodiil.

3. The Double Standard: The 40-Man Negate Carpet

The most glaring issue with this change is the blatant double standard regarding what is deemed "broken."

Coordinated Groups: Get hit with compounding penalties (previous HoT limits, and now Update 51's aggressive shield-scaling cap down to 60%).

Massive Zergs: Are continually allowed to stack health-scaling heals and abuse zero-skill tactics. A 40-man discord zerg carpet-bombing a zone with dozens of concurrent Negates—completely turning off game mechanics for everyone else—is treated as perfectly acceptable.

By tying the Battle Spirit shield cap to group size, ZOS is punishing coordination while actively rewarding numerical weight. If shields (or anything else) are mathematically overpowered, apply a flat-value nerf across the board. Make everyone play by the exact same baseline rules. Stop artificially raising the floor for uncoordinated play while introducing math ceilings designed to break the players who actually spent the time to master your game’s systems.

This change takes nothing away from however much time you, or whoever, has put into optimizing your ball group. Its just like any other time that something is extremely broken and then gets nerfed. You adapt and move on. You will still do better than 90% of players because you're putting in more effort than they are. And imo this nerf isnt enough. Ball groups were always extremely strong long before shields were as broken as they are. A coordinated ball group of 12 players has no issue wiping groups triple their size, or more. And its always been this way to some degree.

I think the biggest thing you are missing here is that the way changes are made dont have to be 1 to 1. A sorc using their shield is not the same as your group spamming shields endlessly and rotating shield ults. One thing has nothing to do with the other. So why would zos nerf shields all together when the only problem with shields, in cyrodiil, is ball groups?

I mean i wish shields wouldnt scale off of health as much as anyone but zos, for some reason, wont back track on this. I think playing a tanky build should be more than enough, with health and resist, midigation, why give people crazy shields as well? But this is where we are.

Again, you are exploiting something broken, at the highest level it can be exploited, just like everyone always does with everything in eso. These things happen time and time again over the years. From whatever proc set you can think of being broken, to skills being broken, or classes being too strong. Something is over performing, in certain situations and, in this situation, it is your playstyle that is over performing. You dont see this issue from solo players, or even zergs. But dont worry, this type of thing happens to everyone eventually.

I guess it could be an issue in small scale groups, but it isnt nearly as bad because they can die to big groups. Its 8-12 man ball groups, running through a keep, farming 100s of players endlessly, sometimes not even taking the keep, with little to no chance of dying, and only leaving when they get bored, to go do it again somewhere else. You will still do this even after a nerf like this, no doubt, but its bad for pvp in general.

Im a solo player, i dont fight ball groups. If a ball group targets me il just kite away. Normally they dont chase one player long, if at all. But if you cant see that this is really bad for pvp, especially considering where we are now, then idk how to convince you. What i care about more than anything is pvp getting better and getting more players. And with ball groups the way they are now, the opposite has been happening, and will keep happening.

Also ive never seen anything close to a 40 man zerg looking like they were coordinated in discord. The only time ive ever been carpet bombed by negates has been from, you guessed it, ball groups. Im sure there are huge zergs in discord sometimes, im just saying its not even close to how prevalent ball groups are.

But anyway, this is long enough so ill end with this. I really think you're over estimating the skill and effort involved in ball grouping. Ive played in ball groups and known many people who have. Many ball group players might as well be 100 hour players when you catch them alone. Its actually wild how bad many of them play. Of course plenty of sweaty people ball group, im just saying not every ball group player is a good pvper. Not even close. But even more to the point, where does the skill come in? From the group lead telling you exactly what to use? For whatever role you want to play? And then spending the night telling you how to play it?

I only bring this up to say that you are completely wrong about the skill/effort involved. Playing in a ball group, esp in this meta, does not mean you're skilled. Or even putting in more effort than others. Yes, some people are skilled, but Its not skill to exploit broken mechanics that should not exist. And its not a lack of effort from other players to just get outclassed by healing, shields, and coordinated ults. The way you make it sound every player should be in a ball group or they arent putting in enough effort. You can give almost anyone a list of what to run, tell them how to play, and if they follow orders, sure youll do great. Obviously you need an group lead with experience that knows about pvp, so maybe thats what you're referring to.

Ofc some people that lead ball groups are very competitive with putting their players and comp together, taking it very serious. In fact ive known some. And ive also known some that just got information from other people who ball group, about what to run, and then used it to do well in their own ball group. Some people are very secretive but certainly not everyone. These differences matter when ball groups used to actually fight eachother, but that doesnt happen anymore.

Firstmep · August 24

I used to play in a mid to large group in cyro, way back when we didn't have all the convenient crutch groups have available to them these days.
No pull sets, no subclassing so everyone could spam negate, and no massive stacking hp scaled shields.
We had 1 maybe 2 negates, we had 1 maybe 2 barriers for shields. We had to coordinate every move, even set up and use siege in some cases to even the odds against much larger numbers.
And guess what we had fun and we were fine.

But i do think zos is making a mistake with the battle spirit shield changes. They shouldn't not stack at all in the first place.
Also for the millionth time, Zos please cap.max hp in pvp. Khtxbye

Turtle_Bot · August 24

TheAwesomeChimpanzee wrote: »

I strongly disagree. At the moment, ball groups are arguably the strongest they have ever been, perhaps only slightly weaker than they were before the sticky HoT/Battle Spirit changes.

Shields are a major problem, but I think the more fundamental issue is how group sets scale. By their nature, group sets become disproportionately more valuable as you add players. Take Powerful Assault as a simple example: in a 3-man, that 307 Weapon and Spell Damage is benefiting three players; in a 12-man, it is benefiting twelve. The individual bonus is the same, but the total value the set provides to the group goes from 307×3 to 307×12. The same principle applies to most of the support sets and group-wide buffs used in optimized ball groups.

Because of that, a 12-man is not merely “twice as strong” as a 6-man. It has access to far more overlapping group buffs, support sets, healing, mitigation, ultimates, synergies, and specialized roles. The game’s mechanics actively reward stacking more coordinated players together, and after years of adding increasingly powerful support sets, that scaling has gotten out of hand—especially in 10–12 player groups.

I agree that coordinated and optimized players should outperform uncoordinated players. They should absolutely be rewarded for good compositions, min-maxing, positioning, and execution. I play in ball groups myself. But there is a difference between rewarding coordination and designing systems where simply adding more members causes the group’s effective power to scale disproportionately.

For that reason, I actually think larger groups should receive penalties in more than one area as additional members are added. The game already gives them enormous multiplicative advantages through group mechanics, so some counter-scaling is reasonable. Ideally, I would rather see the underlying way group sets scale reworked entirely, but until then, mechanics like the shield cap are a reasonable way of addressing part of the problem.

That said, I do think the current shield scaling is too aggressive. I would rather see something like a 100% cap at 5 players, followed by roughly a 7% reduction per additional group member up to 12. Five- and six-man groups can already use shields extremely effectively, so I don’t think they should be almost completely exempt, but the penalty also shouldn’t fall off a cliff simply because a group reaches 10–12 players.

To add on to this point as well, since it's not just the scaling power of group sets, but the opportunity cost of running those sets that also scales the larger a group gets.

A single 5 piece set in a 3 man group is 5 pieces out of 42 total slots (assuming all 3 are in some front bar, back bar, mythic, monster, 1 pc trainee, setup), or roughly 12% of that groups total slots available for sets.

A single 5 piece set in a 12 man group is 5 out of 168 total slots (again, assuming all 12 are on the front bar, back bar layout above), or roughly 3% of the 12 man groups total slots available for sets.

This is a key aspect that often gets overlooked, but if a solo player were to have access to this kind of opportunity cost in their build, every single individual gear piece they slot would have to have the equivalent of 2.5 full 5 piece sets worth of power/effects just to match 12 man ball groups opportunity cost in running 1 single group set (this also ignores that these group sets scale in total power value for each group member as you originally pointed out).

It's compounded scaling and it has really been one of the big drivers behind why ball groups power (and group set power in general) scales so aggressively the bigger the group gets.

Tra_Lalan · August 24

Sorry but I don't care about those hours of work and coordination and skill that are beein put into.. spoiling cyrodill for everyone else.

Ball groups are the biggest downside of eso's pvp. This problem has to be adressed somehow.

Every year new players come to expierience cyrodil during mayhem, they start to kinda like it, and then they realise about the ball groups. Most of people just don't want to waste their time on this nonsense, it's simply not fun.

LadyGP · August 24

My take: The health of the game (and retaining players) takes priority over peoples feelings.

No one who has an ounce of honesty in them can say that ball groups (for the sake of this conversation lets say the top 3 ball groups because yes... not all ball groups are created equal) are having a positive impact in ESO.

Yes, a 12 person group who spends hours late into the night/early am looking at logs, theory crafting,etc should be better than everyone else - no one disputes that.

The problem is how much better and when is "better enough" enough. The gap right now is absolutely insane - so much so that certain groups can farm endlessly and almost never die.. people just log out and they are only going to log out so many times before they never log back in.

You can 100% put mechanics in place that target these people - who says you can't? Why, because it isn't fair? Who cares about fair, who cares... it's the studios job to make sure people play their game and want to keep playing - that is literally their only goal.. make a game people want to play.

If there are mechanics in place that are impacting 95% of the player base in PVP in a negative way they have to take a look at it. Compressing the gap a bit isn't going to hurt the top 5% of people.. they are still going to be the top 5%.. it's just going to be slightly more difficult for them.

I don't see what is wrong with that. Sure, you can complain that people just suck and are tired of being farmed - yup.. you nailed it. And you know what.. these people you insult.. the casuals.. are the ones you need to keep a game alive. Just look at the data behind this... studio after studio that let the top 5% of players run free... the majority of casuals just move along and then the pvp dies.

Ball groups have been an issue for 3 years now (yes they have been around much longer but they NEVER could farm the way they can now.. and for how long they can now). You've had your time to grief/troll.

I'm glad zos is doing more and honestly I wish they would focus on ball groups more and put even more things in place on the pvp side to hinder them - they are destroying cyrodiil (the top 3 ball groups). They know they are... and they genuinely don't care.

* I say all of this as someone who has ran in ball groups for 6 years and would hop in a ball group right now.... (just not a top 3 ball group).

LPapirius · August 24

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

This is the direct result of Ball Groups. I'd rather see the game randomly assign Groups on top of this. Even then, the population is so low it's likely people would just end up with the same people over and over again anyway. This is a good change. I like the idea that Ball Groups and Guilds should be worried about Solo Players. I was surprised to see this, but it tells me Zos is finally coming to grips with an 11 year problem.

Not every group is a ball group. This hurts pug groups while doing little to hinder comped groups.

Changes like this make it seem like nobody at ZOS plays PvP or they'd have a better understanding or what changes will and will not work to achieve balance.

LadyGP · August 24

LPapirius wrote: »

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

This is the direct result of Ball Groups. I'd rather see the game randomly assign Groups on top of this. Even then, the population is so low it's likely people would just end up with the same people over and over again anyway. This is a good change. I like the idea that Ball Groups and Guilds should be worried about Solo Players. I was surprised to see this, but it tells me Zos is finally coming to grips with an 11 year problem.

Not every group is a ball group. This hurts pug groups while doing little to hinder comped groups.

Changes like this make it seem like nobody at ZOS plays PvP or they'd have a better understanding or what changes will and will not work to achieve balance.

You're right, not every ball group is a ball group... but ball groups are killing PVP.

How do you tell a top 3 ball group apart from a 12 person pug group? If you asked me and gave me 2 seconds to answer I wouldn't be able to.

So yes, the 12 person pug group will 100% suffer from this chance... and we have to sacrifice a few for the majority here. Sorry boucha... Until Zos figures out a way to identify or reign in the insane burst dps, insane shields, insane healing, from these top groups and bring it back to normal levels (where they can still be the toughest groups in cyro mind you.. just not god tier).. I have zero problem with 12 person groups getting hit across the board.

That is how bad the top 3 ball groups are killing cyro right now.

Turtle_Bot · August 24

LPapirius wrote: »

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

This is the direct result of Ball Groups. I'd rather see the game randomly assign Groups on top of this. Even then, the population is so low it's likely people would just end up with the same people over and over again anyway. This is a good change. I like the idea that Ball Groups and Guilds should be worried about Solo Players. I was surprised to see this, but it tells me Zos is finally coming to grips with an 11 year problem.

Not every group is a ball group. This hurts pug groups while doing little to hinder comped groups.

Changes like this make it seem like nobody at ZOS plays PvP or they'd have a better understanding or what changes will and will not work to achieve balance.

This change will directly hit ball groups more then PuGs because PuGs aren't the ones abusing shield stacking mechanics the same way ball groups are and any claim to the contrary is just completely disingenuous and/or completely misinformed.

Sure, the good ball groups will adapt and change their strategies, but none will be able to rely on having 100k shields up at all times anymore to be essentially immortal while they steamroll their way across the map. They will have to use skill, movement, coordination, communication and other defensive mechanics to survive, or significantly lower their damage output to compensate, and doing any of this will allow other counterplay options in the game the chance to do their intended jobs without needing to try and push through 100k worth of constantly refreshing shields.

ceruulean · August 24

It's pretty simple, make all sets only affect the wearer and not the entire group. That way the group's skill is more important than the gear. It won't affect small groups much because they tend to run solo builds and aren't too coordinated. It would reign in the free stats from large groups. There's still scribing and class mastery to give free stats to groups.

LadyGP · August 24

Turtle_Bot wrote: »

LPapirius wrote: »

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

This is the direct result of Ball Groups. I'd rather see the game randomly assign Groups on top of this. Even then, the population is so low it's likely people would just end up with the same people over and over again anyway. This is a good change. I like the idea that Ball Groups and Guilds should be worried about Solo Players. I was surprised to see this, but it tells me Zos is finally coming to grips with an 11 year problem.

Not every group is a ball group. This hurts pug groups while doing little to hinder comped groups.

Changes like this make it seem like nobody at ZOS plays PvP or they'd have a better understanding or what changes will and will not work to achieve balance.

This change will directly hit ball groups more then PuGs because PuGs aren't the ones abusing shield stacking mechanics the same way ball groups are and any claim to the contrary is just completely disingenuous and/or completely misinformed.

Sure, the good ball groups will adapt and change their strategies, but none will be able to rely on having 100k shields up at all times anymore to be essentially immortal while they steamroll their way across the map. They will have to use skill, movement, coordination, communication and other defensive mechanics to survive, or significantly lower their damage output to compensate, and doing any of this will allow other counterplay options in the game the chance to do their intended jobs without needing to try and push through 100k worth of constantly refreshing shields.

100% this.

The vast majority of groups aren't hitting the cap anyways and are simply seeing "12 person groups" getting a nerf and they are screaming about it.

This change will have a slight impact (wish they went harder to be honest) on maybe... 8 groups who are 100% hitting the cap.

Turtle_Bot · August 24

LadyGP wrote: »

Turtle_Bot wrote: »

LPapirius wrote: »

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

This is the direct result of Ball Groups. I'd rather see the game randomly assign Groups on top of this. Even then, the population is so low it's likely people would just end up with the same people over and over again anyway. This is a good change. I like the idea that Ball Groups and Guilds should be worried about Solo Players. I was surprised to see this, but it tells me Zos is finally coming to grips with an 11 year problem.

Not every group is a ball group. This hurts pug groups while doing little to hinder comped groups.

Changes like this make it seem like nobody at ZOS plays PvP or they'd have a better understanding or what changes will and will not work to achieve balance.

This change will directly hit ball groups more then PuGs because PuGs aren't the ones abusing shield stacking mechanics the same way ball groups are and any claim to the contrary is just completely disingenuous and/or completely misinformed.

Sure, the good ball groups will adapt and change their strategies, but none will be able to rely on having 100k shields up at all times anymore to be essentially immortal while they steamroll their way across the map. They will have to use skill, movement, coordination, communication and other defensive mechanics to survive, or significantly lower their damage output to compensate, and doing any of this will allow other counterplay options in the game the chance to do their intended jobs without needing to try and push through 100k worth of constantly refreshing shields.

100% this.

The vast majority of groups aren't hitting the cap anyways and are simply seeing "12 person groups" getting a nerf and they are screaming about it.

This change will have a slight impact (wish they went harder to be honest) on maybe... 8 groups who are 100% hitting the cap.

Majority of PuG groups rarely even have shields on them at all, let alone multiple shields, and the only time they get shields is if a healer built for it joins the group, but typically most healers in PuGs are still on healing builds, not shielding builds, and PuGs are also typically so spread out that the shields won't be stacking on every member at all times too, so the chance of this change randomly affecting PuGs is very minimal if it even will affect them at all.

NovelliESO · August 24

ceruulean wrote: »

It's pretty simple, make all sets only affect the wearer and not the entire group. That way the group's skill is more important than the gear. It won't affect small groups much because they tend to run solo builds and aren't too coordinated. It would reign in the free stats from large groups. There's still scribing and class mastery to give free stats to groups.

This is never a good idea. Nerfing shield and heal stacking is perfectly fine, it's already happened and more is coming in the future patches. Hopefully something to abilities scaling off HP at some point as well. Changing sets to just not work on other players completely ruins how the game has developed and just turns it into vengeance light.

TheAwesomeChimpanzee · August 24

Turtle_Bot wrote: »

TheAwesomeChimpanzee wrote: »

I strongly disagree. At the moment, ball groups are arguably the strongest they have ever been, perhaps only slightly weaker than they were before the sticky HoT/Battle Spirit changes.

Shields are a major problem, but I think the more fundamental issue is how group sets scale. By their nature, group sets become disproportionately more valuable as you add players. Take Powerful Assault as a simple example: in a 3-man, that 307 Weapon and Spell Damage is benefiting three players; in a 12-man, it is benefiting twelve. The individual bonus is the same, but the total value the set provides to the group goes from 307×3 to 307×12. The same principle applies to most of the support sets and group-wide buffs used in optimized ball groups.

Because of that, a 12-man is not merely “twice as strong” as a 6-man. It has access to far more overlapping group buffs, support sets, healing, mitigation, ultimates, synergies, and specialized roles. The game’s mechanics actively reward stacking more coordinated players together, and after years of adding increasingly powerful support sets, that scaling has gotten out of hand—especially in 10–12 player groups.

I agree that coordinated and optimized players should outperform uncoordinated players. They should absolutely be rewarded for good compositions, min-maxing, positioning, and execution. I play in ball groups myself. But there is a difference between rewarding coordination and designing systems where simply adding more members causes the group’s effective power to scale disproportionately.

For that reason, I actually think larger groups should receive penalties in more than one area as additional members are added. The game already gives them enormous multiplicative advantages through group mechanics, so some counter-scaling is reasonable. Ideally, I would rather see the underlying way group sets scale reworked entirely, but until then, mechanics like the shield cap are a reasonable way of addressing part of the problem.

That said, I do think the current shield scaling is too aggressive. I would rather see something like a 100% cap at 5 players, followed by roughly a 7% reduction per additional group member up to 12. Five- and six-man groups can already use shields extremely effectively, so I don’t think they should be almost completely exempt, but the penalty also shouldn’t fall off a cliff simply because a group reaches 10–12 players.

To add on to this point as well, since it's not just the scaling power of group sets, but the opportunity cost of running those sets that also scales the larger a group gets.

A single 5 piece set in a 3 man group is 5 pieces out of 42 total slots (assuming all 3 are in some front bar, back bar, mythic, monster, 1 pc trainee, setup), or roughly 12% of that groups total slots available for sets.

A single 5 piece set in a 12 man group is 5 out of 168 total slots (again, assuming all 12 are on the front bar, back bar layout above), or roughly 3% of the 12 man groups total slots available for sets.

This is a key aspect that often gets overlooked, but if a solo player were to have access to this kind of opportunity cost in their build, every single individual gear piece they slot would have to have the equivalent of 2.5 full 5 piece sets worth of power/effects just to match 12 man ball groups opportunity cost in running 1 single group set (this also ignores that these group sets scale in total power value for each group member as you originally pointed out).

It's compounded scaling and it has really been one of the big drivers behind why ball groups power (and group set power in general) scales so aggressively the bigger the group gets.

Indeed, I didn’t include this in my original post because I didn’t want to make it too long, but this is another major part of the issue. The power of ball groups scales disproportionately as they approach 12 players. The increased value of group-wide sets, combined with the decreasing opportunity cost of dedicating individual builds to those sets, compounds together. The result is effectively exponential scaling compared to smaller groups.

TheAwesomeChimpanzee · August 24

Turtle_Bot wrote: »

LPapirius wrote: »

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

This is the direct result of Ball Groups. I'd rather see the game randomly assign Groups on top of this. Even then, the population is so low it's likely people would just end up with the same people over and over again anyway. This is a good change. I like the idea that Ball Groups and Guilds should be worried about Solo Players. I was surprised to see this, but it tells me Zos is finally coming to grips with an 11 year problem.

Not every group is a ball group. This hurts pug groups while doing little to hinder comped groups.

Changes like this make it seem like nobody at ZOS plays PvP or they'd have a better understanding or what changes will and will not work to achieve balance.

This change will directly hit ball groups more then PuGs because PuGs aren't the ones abusing shield stacking mechanics the same way ball groups are and any claim to the contrary is just completely disingenuous and/or completely misinformed.

Sure, the good ball groups will adapt and change their strategies, but none will be able to rely on having 100k shields up at all times anymore to be essentially immortal while they steamroll their way across the map. They will have to use skill, movement, coordination, communication and other defensive mechanics to survive, or significantly lower their damage output to compensate, and doing any of this will allow other counterplay options in the game the chance to do their intended jobs without needing to try and push through 100k worth of constantly refreshing shields.

Correct. Ball groups will be the most affected by this change, especially large 12-man groups. They’ll once again be susceptible to coordinated burst damage, which historically has been one of the best counters to ball groups, and that’s how it should be. They shouldn’t be allowed to run around with effectively 120k health while also maintaining 20k HPS. It should be one or the other, not both.

Even then, I still think a flat healing-taken reduction should scale with group size, and the current sticky HoT mechanic should be removed entirely. That would address the underlying problem more directly instead of letting larger groups stack extreme survivability with very little meaningful tradeoff.

TheAwesomeChimpanzee · August 24

ceruulean wrote: »

It's pretty simple, make all sets only affect the wearer and not the entire group. That way the group's skill is more important than the gear. It won't affect small groups much because they tend to run solo builds and aren't too coordinated. It would reign in the free stats from large groups. There's still scribing and class mastery to give free stats to groups.

If all support sets had similar downscaling to Rallying Cry, that would be a good way to rein in the exponential power scaling of ball groups. Rallying Cry still gains more total value when it affects 12 players instead of one, but the downscaling prevents that value from becoming absurd simply because the group is larger.

That’s the kind of scaling group support sets should generally have: larger groups still benefit from coordinating around them, but the effectiveness per player decreases as more people receive the effect. It preserves the purpose of support sets without letting a single five-piece set generate disproportionately more total power just because it’s being used in a 12-man.