Should Vampire Fire weakness scale with stages?

dsalter

basicly stage based fire weakness that increases as you become starved
Stage 1 : 20%
Stage 2 : 30%
Stage 3 : 40%
Stage 4 : 50% (as the default is)

this way it'll encourage feeding at the cost of not having less ability cost giving you a decision over power or survival

dsalter

Yes

Since the fire weakness is a flat 50%, gives me no reason not to starve, as i'll be completely more powerful at my "weakest" point, i'd happly sacrifice power for survival even if it means higher vampire ability cost in exchange for less weakness

Nox_Aeterna

Yes

I will agree with those % , but i dont agree with going up to 100% and so on.

dsalter

Yes

Nox_Aeterna wrote: »

I will agree with those % , but i dont agree with going up to 100% and so on.

it wouldn't be additive it would replace the older one as stages increase, with stage 4 being the default 50% (highest weakness)

ChampionSheWolf

No

I don't see the trade off. Even with a reduction to fire resist penalty, a starving vamp is the better option thanks to resistance gear.

Nox_Aeterna

Yes

ChampionSheWolf wrote: »

I don't see the trade off. Even with a reduction to fire resist penalty, a starving vamp is the better option thanks to resistance gear.

Which honestly , is the standard in any ES i played.

Only true downside that made people feed is the power to interact with NPCs.

You could heal more than the sun dmg , you could bypass the problem with fire ...

Only problem are the NPCs , which skyrim removed. Honestly , i dont even remember how to feed in skyrim and my last char got to lvl 90+ almost the entire time being a vampire (which i rushed to get :P).

dsalter

Yes

ChampionSheWolf wrote: »

I don't see the trade off. Even with a reduction to fire resist penalty, a starving vamp is the better option thanks to resistance gear.

7% skill cost reduction down from 24% is a pretty big trade off, especially since it applies to bat swarm, and 20% down from 50% fire weakness is going to have a huge impact in VR area's and PvP due to the high amount of fire damage and spells

ChampionSheWolf

No

dsalter wrote: »

ChampionSheWolf wrote: »

I don't see the trade off. Even with a reduction to fire resist penalty, a starving vamp is the better option thanks to resistance gear.

7% skill cost reduction down from 24% is a pretty big trade off, especially since it applies to bat swarm, and 20% down from 50% fire weakness is going to have a huge impact in VR area's and PvP due to the high amount of fire damage and spells

Exact opposite really. 50% increased fire damage isn't really that big when you consider it all, and no matter how it's viewed, a 75 reduction to magicka costs is actually quite big. Especially considering some of the magicka costs of powers. There is still no trade off and the answer is still clear... starve to get stronger.

Brittany_Joy

Yes

Not a vampire but this seems like a good idea. The weaknesses should be in stages for werewolves and vampires. The weakness only gets more stronger the longer they go without feeding.

bloodenragedb14_ESO

Yes

even before the nerf,there was no real reason to feed. the health regen was pointless for those with self healing, and the fire weakness is still easy enough to live with, but for the sake of realism, yes it should scale with stages, but having it any higher than 50percent would give TOO great a weakness. it should be 50 at stage 4 and decrease in increments of 15

dsalter

Yes

bloodenragedb14_ESO wrote: »

even before the nerf,there was no real reason to feed. the health regen was pointless for those with self healing, and the fire weakness is still easy enough to live with, but for the sake of realism, yes it should scale with stages, but having it any higher than 50percent would give TOO great a weakness. it should be 50 at stage 4 and decrease in increments of 15

in all honest i feel 15's is to large per stage, going up in 10's starting from 20 seemed reasonable as at fully fed you are only taking less then a quarter of bonus fire damage but reducing vampire spellcosts by only 1/10 of it's cost, meaning you wont be spamming mist or bats as often as you would at stage 4. but you wont burn so fast either

Zhoyzu

Yes

yes cause that way its like every other TES game

Sleepydan

There should be a risk reward choice for your vampirism stage. I don't thing the health reduction is phasing anyone presently. stage 4 should be much more risky, and probably a tad more powerful.

dr_zed

No

Yes, but not like that. It should be:
Stage 1: 25%
Stage 2: 50%
Stage 3: 75%
Stage 4: 100%

dsalter

Yes

dr_zed wrote: »

Yes, but not like that. It should be:
Stage 1: 25%
Stage 2: 50%
Stage 3: 75%
Stage 4: 100%

to steep as this would give DK's an edge over all vampires
also if you vote yes why vote on no?

TheGrandAlliance

No

This thread doesn't make any sense.... in theory you should be getting weaker, fire resistance (becomming more of a "true vampire"), if anything as you advance.

dsalter

Yes

TheGrandAlliance wrote: »

This thread doesn't make any sense.... in theory you should be getting weaker, fire resistance (becomming more of a "true vampire"), if anything as you advance.

when you are hungry you are weaker. same logic should really apply to vampires as weakness has shown in past ES games, being well fed and looked after to put it simply, you are stronger vitality wise. so should have more of a resistance

dsalter

Yes

glad to see the vote nummbers but more would be welcome, from persona experience i refuse to feed because i gain more from starving and lose more for feeding it's pretty bad

dsalter

Yes

dr_zed wrote: »

Yes, but not like that. It should be:
Stage 1: 25%
Stage 2: 50%
Stage 3: 75%
Stage 4: 100%

100% would kill you on many boss encounters nearly instantly. especially with the amount of fire damage in the game, theres a reason i didnt scale it to 100%

Shagreth

Yes

Absolutely.

In general, I feel there should be more reasons to feed, more significant penalties for stage 4, but more power as well.

Then again, the cost reduction is currently bugged, along with most of the vampire passives & one of our actives (mist form). I'd rather see those fixed for now, and later they can improve on the feeding system, which is definitely weak right now.

Krow

Yes

I say Vampire Abilities should cost the least at Stage 1, and the most at stage 4. This encourages feeding, which I never do because of a consistent fire debuf and hp regen being unimportant when Drain and Devouring Swarm are on your bar.

Grim13

Yes

I'd also like to point out that I'm unsure that wearing fire resist jewelry makes a difference... I currently have over 4000 fire resistance and I still burn the same as before... is it a known issue?

dsalter

Yes

been a while so thought i would bump this seeing people in zone chat questioning a guy who feeds explaining it's a negitive thing.

Drachdhar

No

See my vote... Probably should have voted Yes instead...

Especially since currently being a higher stage does nothing but nerf your health regen since the cost reductions stop working every time you move to a new area that requires a loading screen.

Drachdhar

No

Grim13 wrote: »

I'd also like to point out that I'm unsure that wearing fire resist jewelry makes a difference... I currently have over 4000 fire resistance and I still burn the same as before... is it a known issue?

You will never ever get more than a 25% reduction as a vampire... Which means that you will still take 25% more dmg from fire attacks.
And the cap is way below what you have... Like somewhere between 2600 and 3000 combined Spell Resistance and Fire Resistance.

indigoblades

No

i am surprized people are running stage 4 now.... me even with every HR buff i can find i find i am better staying between stage 2 and 3 ever since they changed stage buffs from 20% to 7% ... but since then i only keep drain essence and ultimate in one weapon slot not 2 and its my 2ndary attack for emergencys. At stage 4 i die alot.

demonlkojipub19_ESO

Yes

If it scaled there would be an actual reason to feed. Most vampires stay stage 4 because there is very little benefit to dropping below that. Increased health regen is not a very big survivability boost imo, and lower stages could do a lot better than that to give people clear reasons to be stage 4 and clear reasons to drop below that.

Gwarok

Yes

Today...

....we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, @Common_Sense,
who is gone, but not forgotten.

No one knows for sure how old s/he was, since his/her birth records were long ago apparently lost in BETA bureaucratic red tape; and because as kewl as s/he really was, s/he really won't be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons such as:

-Knowing when to move OUT of of the circle of death.
-Following "House Hlaalu's Philosophy of Trade" in order to survive.
-Why the early bird doesn't always necessarily get the worm right out of the chute.
-Life isn’t always fair; and maybe it really was your own damned fault..

Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies, don’t spend more than you can earn...

... and adults, not children, are in charge.

And though try as much as s/he did try to maintain...

...his/her health began to deteriorate rapidly when well-intentioned but overbearing regulations were set in place.

Reports of an Elder V-6 kissing an understudy group member (BTW who was a V-1) and mistaking them for a g.i r.l .in the process...

...and the High Elder being fired for reprimanding that unruly student, only worsened the Mage's Guild own condition.

Common Sense lost ground when The Elders attacked other Elders for doing the job that they themselves had failed to do in disciplining their unruly followers.

And it declined even further when academies were required to get 'parental' consent to administer sun lotion or Skooma to a student.

Common Sense also lost the will to live as the masses became businesses demanding a global AUCTION HOUSE; and criminals received better treatment than their victims.

Common Sense took a beating when s/he couldn’t defend himself from a bunch of ganking noob in their own Alliance of all things..and then that noob COULD sue him/her for the actual assault.

Sadly...Common Sense finally gave up the will to live ,

Common Sense was preceded in death...



By his/her parents: Truth and Trust,

By his/her wife/husband: Discretion,

By his/her daughter/son Responsibility,

S/He ALSO is survived by his/her 5 stepbrothers;
When will it be F2P?
I Know My Rights…
Someone Else Is To Blame …
I Want It Now…

...(and wait for it)...

I’m A Victim.

Not many attended his/her funeral because so few realized s/he was gone.

poodlemasterb16_ESO

dsalter wrote: »

TheGrandAlliance wrote: »

This thread doesn't make any sense.... in theory you should be getting weaker, fire resistance (becomming more of a "true vampire"), if anything as you advance.

when you are hungry you are weaker. same logic should really apply to vampires as weakness has shown in past ES games, being well fed and looked after to put it simply, you are stronger vitality wise. so should have more of a resistance

Vampires are not quite undead but really weakness is relative. I keep mine at stage 4 most of the time. I can go nuts with Drain Essence etc and that's how vampires gain strength. From other people. They are not inherently healthy creatures you understand.

Darkeus

Yes

the 50% fire weakness for vamps is insane, and btw vamps should weak vs light not vs fire, at least no way that much, so this idea with more fire weakness the greater the stage is perfect.

dsalter

Yes

so far 70% of people who willingly voted have agreed, lets push those numbers for better data