Maintenance for the week of November 25:
• [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 27, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 27, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 27, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 27, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
Area-of-Effect Abilities - Maximum Target Cap Clarification
-
Tankqull✭✭✭✭✭
✭
its even below that 1:1.1 to1.5 once the attacked forces are more than 12. because thats where healing starts to kick your ass if your are outnumbered even slighty.
It's not true because you need ressources like magicka/stamina to kill other players. And you will run out of this ressources with this cap bevore a significant number of enemies will go down. I guess, the ratio is ~1:2 and not 1:6.Meh. If I understand the math of this correctly, it means that you will never be able to beat a group more than 6 times your size.
If you have one player AoE bombing, he can hit 6 enemies. If you have 2 players AoE bombing, they can hit 12. If you have 12 players AoE bombing, they can hit 72 enemies.
Seems fairly reasonable to me.
Greetings
as it always boils down to regardless if you use singeltarget dmg or ae dmg - its always scattered dmg[lack of effective assist options and ae caps ] vs concentratet healing because lowest healthpool to be healed first.
this if both sides are not primarily afk will lead to a win of the forces with higher numbers.
spelling and grammar errors are free to be abused
Sallington wrote: »Anything useful that players are wanting added into the game all fall under the category of "Yer ruinin my 'mersion!"0 -
Trayyacakes✭✭✭✭All the aoe cap will accomplish is taking away a small coordinated groups ability to annihilate an unorganized zerg... which btw a small coordinated group should be able to take out an unorganized swarm. The siege argument is a valid point, but siege can't be set up everywhere at all times. There are also places that siege can't hit. Many/most keeps have a vulnerable side where the invaders can have high ground and be untouched by siege from the keep. The counter to this is to send out a small group to flank the enemy. This tactic won't work anymore unless you send out more than the invaders have. With the aoe cap strategies become more limited. It also does nothing for the Vampire emperor problem. I just don't understand how aoe caps can be a good thing for this game...Bjorn Uldnost2 -
RaZaddha✭✭✭You want this game to become siege wars? Really? Think about it, without siege the battles will be based around turtling and who has the most numbers, all you will be doing is spamming your own heals and AoE damage, look at GW2, seriously, play GW2 for a while and tell me if you think stacking&spamming is the way to go, tell me how high is the skill cap of a hammer train.
Do you know why my whole guild laughed whenever we saw a Arrow Cart in the middle of the open field? Because it's cheap, it requires no effort, all you do is build one and let one of your guys spam the AC aoe, tell me, how much "skill" is there? How much "skilled" was the group that won because they had an AC on the open? And look, siege in GW2 is far more useful but guild groups never use it in the open you only ever saw it on defenses of objectives because its not fun to use it, because its a cheap win, you didn't win because of skill and coordination.
You tell 3 of your guys to break of the zerg and put at the same time 3 ballistas and fire at the same time, wow, much skill, so pro, instead of it being a combination of individual player skill, team synergy and good strategy you are winning just because you put siege on the ground.
In the end, people won't use siege, because its a cheap tactic and the enemy will laugh at you, you will be the laughing stock of the community because you can't win without siege, even blobing takes more skill than putting down siege. The game combat must be balanced on its most basic form, which is: 2 gorups meet in a plain field without stealth and siege. First you make the basics of the combat fun, you must make this form of combat the one with the highest skill cap, the most varied one, not something as stale as turtling, then you balance around it, you are doing something wrong if to make the most basic form fun you have to add additional variables like siege and terrain.
Look at this: http://www.twitch.tv/prydatv/c/4091868. This is exactly like GW2, one group walks together blobing up, healing each other and simply walking over the enemy and spamming AoE. You think this requires a high skill cap? You think turtling won't happen? Think again, you are just spamming a few skills and rolling over the enemy, it's already happening.Edited by RaZaddha on 29 April 2014 18:553 -
bsmorrowb14_ESO✭✭✭The vast majority of your player base does NOT want AoE Caps. This is precisely the reason I left Guild Wars 2. Please don't repeat those mistakes.6 -
Digerati✭✭✭✭prana33b14_ESO wrote: »Lava_Croft wrote: »Thanks for the informative post and thanks for bringing the last few remaining AoE abilities in line with the rest.
To the very small but very vocal minority acting like they speak on behalf of the ESO community: Please don't.
I suggest you see the poll in the AvA forum section. Over 90% say no caps. Minority lolz.
the hardcore types love to post of the forums, forum posters are probably less than 5% of the gamebase. AOE caps need to be in there for balance.
Can you substantiate this claim at all? How do AoE caps balance abilities? If an AoE is imbalanced, isn't it imbalanced whether it hits 1 or 100 targets?0 -
Digerati✭✭✭✭nathan_bri wrote: »You might want the check the total number of votes for that poll.
Over 3000. Real-life election polls where i live usually go with 1000-1200 to get a 95% accuracy(in a country with about 5 million voters).
So while it's a minority compared to the total game population, the results are certainly statistically significant.
The results of that poll are skewed by selection bias and thus can be tossed. The only reliable way to poll is to randomly select those being polled, not allow those with the biggest gripes to self-select.
3000+ people representing more than $120,000 and $45,000/month in revenue have issued a complaint about this design-direction. Where these people came from or just how big of a percentage of the population they are is irrelevant.Edited by Digerati on 29 April 2014 19:442 -
Cuddler✭✭✭nathan_bri wrote: »You might want the check the total number of votes for that poll.
Over 3000. Real-life election polls where i live usually go with 1000-1200 to get a 95% accuracy(in a country with about 5 million voters).
So while it's a minority compared to the total game population, the results are certainly statistically significant.
The results of that poll are skewed by selection bias and thus can be tossed. The only reliable way to poll is to randomly select those being polled, not allow those with the biggest gripes to self-select.
3000+ people representing more than $120,000 and $45,000/month in revenue have issued a complaint about this design-direction. Where these people came from or just how big of a percentage of the population they are is irrelevant.
The 3000 people represent less than 0.1% of ESO's player base. The vast majority of players don't even care enough to vote in the poll. No sane game developer would make design decisions based on blackmail from a tiny but extremely vocal minority of its customers.
0 -
RaZaddha✭✭✭nathan_bri wrote: »You might want the check the total number of votes for that poll.
Over 3000. Real-life election polls where i live usually go with 1000-1200 to get a 95% accuracy(in a country with about 5 million voters).
So while it's a minority compared to the total game population, the results are certainly statistically significant.
The results of that poll are skewed by selection bias and thus can be tossed. The only reliable way to poll is to randomly select those being polled, not allow those with the biggest gripes to self-select.
3000+ people representing more than $120,000 and $45,000/month in revenue have issued a complaint about this design-direction. Where these people came from or just how big of a percentage of the population they are is irrelevant.
The 3000 people represent less than 0.1% of ESO's player base. The vast majority of players don't even care enough to vote in the poll. No sane game developer would make design decisions based on blackmail from a tiny but extremely vocal minority of its customers.
Where did you get those numbers? 0.1%? We have no idea whats the population at.Edited by RaZaddha on 29 April 2014 20:030 -
Xaei✭✭✭I don't really see the point of an AoE cap either. If your whole group got hit by a single AoE, I'm sorry, your group was just doing it wrong and letting people farm you like trashmobs.
I also don't think it's a technical problem. If siege has no AoE cap and some skills currently don't, and it isnt causing problems, then why would be a problem?
But what people have to realise is that GW2's zerg isn't solely caused by a lack of AoE caps. One of the major reasons is that it's pointless to defend a keep, you barely get any points or rewards for doing it, so people just go around in huge zergs to cap
I think some skills like talons definitely should not be AoEs but just multi-target skills (giving priority to your cursor target if it's in range) because an AoE immobilise is way too strong to affect everyone in range. But frankly if you stepped into Negate Magic and got wrecked because you didn't move out of it, then well, gg, you deserve to die.
Also, if it's possible, wouldn't it be best to have separate servers for both rulesets. One certain campaigns, AoEs have a 6 man limit, some 12, and rest unlimited, that way players can really tailor the PvP experience to their preferences.
They should really conduct a poll for significant changes like this. RuneScape does polls constantly and it works, it engages players, allows them to feel that the game is made for them, and it avoids stupid decisions which the devs only find out normally after spending a lot of resources developing it.Edited by Xaei on 29 April 2014 20:130 -
j3w3l✭
Also, if it's possible, wouldn't it be best to have separate servers for both rulesets. One certain campaigns, AoEs have a 6 man limit, some 12, and rest unlimited, that way players can really tailor the PvP experience to their preferences.
That's actually a decent way to let the players decide.. They've already said they have the capabilities to change the server rulsets. I'm not sure if that relates to player abilities though.
0 -
Xaei✭✭✭
Also, if it's possible, wouldn't it be best to have separate servers for both rulesets. One certain campaigns, AoEs have a 6 man limit, some 12, and rest unlimited, that way players can really tailor the PvP experience to their preferences.
That's actually a decent way to let the players decide.. They've already said they have the capabilities to change the server rulsets. I'm not sure if that relates to player abilities though.
Even if it isn't possible at the moment, I think they should really strive towards it if its the best solution to this mess, because if you want to charge people $15 a month to play your game instead of the MMO market norm of nothing, your game has to have an edge over the other games out there.0 -
cliveklgb14_ESO✭✭✭Well, it appears I wasted my time and money. I guess I'll go back to blobbing in GW2 since it's free.
So you are quitting a game that had an AOE cap all along, and is just fixing that, to go back to a game that has an AOE.
I wonder how many of these I'm quitting posts are actually real, and just idle threats.
1 -
cliveklgb14_ESO✭✭✭
That's actually a decent way to let the players decide.. They've already said they have the capabilities to change the server rulsets. I'm not sure if that relates to player abilities though.
They've also said they don't want to create a bunch of different rule sets and I can see why. Then they'll have people begging for 50 different rule set variants and threatening to quit if they don't get their way just like people are with this.
1 -
cliveklgb14_ESO✭✭✭prana33b14_ESO wrote: »
I suggest you see the poll in the AvA forum section. Over 90% say no caps. Minority lolz.
As if the number of people posting in the forums represent the majority of the game base. Most games in the past suggest that regular forum posting is about 10% of the community max.
No AoE cap is for people without the skill to play and just want to spam those abilities without thinking.
1 -
RaZaddha✭✭✭cliveklgb14_ESO wrote: »Well, it appears I wasted my time and money. I guess I'll go back to blobbing in GW2 since it's free.
So you are quitting a game that had an AOE cap all along, and is just fixing that, to go back to a game that has an AOE.
I wonder how many of these I'm quitting posts are actually real, and just idle threats.
We didn't knew there was a cap, this game was marketed as "spiritual successor" od DAoC, but turtling and AoE cap isn't anywhere near the spirit of DAoC, atleast GW2 is free... Hurray...1 -
cliveklgb14_ESO wrote: »Well, it appears I wasted my time and money. I guess I'll go back to blobbing in GW2 since it's free.
So you are quitting a game that had an AOE cap all along, and is just fixing that, to go back to a game that has an AOE.
I wonder how many of these I'm quitting posts are actually real, and just idle threats.
Really? an AoE cap all along???? How about telling the truth. Strange there putting in AoE caps if all AoE has always been caped.....
The truth is most but not all AoE had caps, and it's those AoE Ults with no caps that have been wiping the Zergs.0 -
Xsorus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Anyone else find it funny that Matt Firor sent Jesse here to deliver the news, instead of coming in here and explaining his reasoning for Caps.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXpX7JMwRXtczc5GTrIYRIw
ESO and GW2 PvP videos1 -
cliveklgb14_ESO✭✭✭valkaneer2b14_ESO wrote: »Well I guess PvP in this game is going to become the same as every other Zerg .. but here you have a sub to pay.
No AOE cap is what promotes massive zerg balls of stacking AoE in EZ mode laziness.
1 -
cliveklgb14_ESO✭✭✭xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »Anyone else find it funny that Matt Firor sent Jesse here to deliver the news, instead of coming in here and explaining his reasoning for Caps.
No, I do think it is funny you trying to read something into it that isn't there.
1 -
cliveklgb14_ESO✭✭✭valkaneer2b14_ESO wrote: »
Really? an AoE cap all along???? .
Yes it has always been there. Just because you were too blind to notice it was only a few skills without it, doesn't mean it wasn't there.
1 -
cliveklgb14_ESO✭✭✭but turtling and AoE cap isn't anywhere near the spirit of DAoC, atleast GW2 is free... Hurray...
You do realize no AOE caps are what promote zerg ball turtling? It is ridiculous EZ mode PvP with no thought at all. Just spam your AoEs.
Bunching together are what armies of the times did.
Edited by cliveklgb14_ESO on 29 April 2014 20:341 -
Trayyacakes✭✭✭✭cliveklgb14_ESO wrote: »valkaneer2b14_ESO wrote: »Well I guess PvP in this game is going to become the same as every other Zerg .. but here you have a sub to pay.
No AOE cap is what promotes massive zerg balls of stacking AoE in EZ mode laziness.
Please explain this logic.Bjorn Uldnost0 -
cliveklgb14_ESO✭✭✭I don't really see the point of an AoE cap either. If your whole group got hit by a single AoE, I'm sorry, your group was just doing it wrong and letting people farm you like trashmobs.
And the same could be said about no AoE cap. If you are relying on no cap AoE spam to hit a bunch of people in EZ mode, you are doing it wrong.
0 -
RaZaddha✭✭✭cliveklgb14_ESO wrote: »but turtling and AoE cap isn't anywhere near the spirit of DAoC, atleast GW2 is free... Hurray...
You do realize no AOE caps are what promote zerg ball turtling? It is ridiculous EZ mode PvP with no thought at all. Just spam your AoEs.
Bunching together are what armies of the times did.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIRY8VantWw
No AoE cap = you bunch up some crazy guy will come screaming at you and blow everyone up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hyK9tLzG5o
AoE Cap = you bunch up and stand still AoEing your enemy until your healers run out of magicka and everyone dies horribly.
Also this if you want more footage:
http://www.twitch.tv/prydatv/c/4091868Edited by RaZaddha on 29 April 2014 20:391 -
cliveklgb14_ESO✭✭✭Trayyacakes wrote: »
Please explain this logic.
Stacking AoE EZ mode spam.
What it comes down to is people crying about losing their easy mode abilities.
Edited by cliveklgb14_ESO on 29 April 2014 20:380 -
cliveklgb14_ESO wrote: »valkaneer2b14_ESO wrote: »Well I guess PvP in this game is going to become the same as every other Zerg .. but here you have a sub to pay.
No AOE cap is what promotes massive zerg balls of stacking AoE in EZ mode laziness.
Ya.. I know.. and I agree, just look at post after post in which I have been saying that.0