Experiment: The definitive Teleport Strike Thread

Minno · December 2015

Lifecode666 wrote: »

this thread has ended up as another nerf nightblade thread.

nightblades are fine.

It's not the NB per se. It's the way ZOS coded gap closers, and the stealth mechanic allows three animation cancelled skills to be considered as an "attack" from stealth that an issue. Cloak is fine as is. Ambush is fine (except minimum range not consistent with other gap closers.)

leepalmer95 · December 2015

The gap closer thing is just a terrible idea, it makes pvp seems really choppy and not a smooth gameplay either.

It's also now actually impossible for templars or dk's to move n a fight they either win the fight or die, running is not an option.

Even repositioning is hard e.g. around a rock, because as soon as they line of sight your immediately froze in place. The snare/stun also stops you using skills i went to use an ult to regen some hp/mag/stam in a fight, just wb'd the guy was about to take flight when some gap closed me 20m+ away and my character just stopped responding in the middle of the fight? The guy also got up and popped a pot. He should of died with the take flight, he would of pre the snare change.

I just find it annoying even in group pvp, i feel that i can no longer buff up and riskily run into the enemy's group or take flight into the group to kill a low hp enemy because as soon as i do someone gap closes me and the delay means i'm, already dead.

Takes-No-Prisoner · December 2015

heystreethawk wrote: »

I have purge, and other people in my group run it too. Dark cloak removes DoTs, but not heal debuffs, snares, marks, etc. I also receive 10% additional magicka regen from having purge slotted. If I'm running purge and barrier on the same bar, lock up your daughters, because I have 20% additional magicka regen. I like having purge.

^^^^This @ running purge on your bar as a NB. Some folks would consider this really weird, but all those debuffs hawk mentioned are contributing factors that cause NB to die quicker-- is because they don't have access to debuff removals on their class skill trees like Templars Ritual does. And holy crap is Purifying ritual amazing for removing debuffs.

Having a debuffer such as purge on your bar as a NB is such a god send-- especially considering its in the Support skill line for Pvp which means its pretty seamless to get to. It blows my mind to pieces how good it is 1.0

Reminder to self, put this back on your bar I dont know why I even took it off....

leepalmer95 wrote: »

The gap closer thing is just a terrible idea, it makes pvp seems really choppy and not a smooth gameplay either.

It's also now actually impossible for templars or dk's to move n a fight they either win the fight or die, running is not an option.

As someone that uses Toppling Charge to engage in a fight, if you take this 'gap-closer' away from me, you need to give me something that will compliment my play style. At least something that allows me to stay in the fight longer, or allows me to disengage from the fight.

Because I will tell you what, as long as I can get the knock down on my opponent first, I am more likely to win in that situation then I am from a distance as a Templar. I need that gap closing hit to get to them first because other wise I am not winning a fight if my enemy attacks me first with a gap closer.

So, that brings us back to square one-- what should replace the gap closing meta? A dis engage option? Or the 'stay in the fight longer' option?

We all see people hating on Cloak and Bolt Escape for being really good dis engaging options. But what if DK and Templars suddenly got this? Imagine what the meta would be like in PVP then..?

Tankqull · December 2015

Brrrofski wrote: »

It just needs a minimum range. Like all others gap closer. It won't be an issue then.

jep it would be broken then...
if it gets a minimum range simultaniously the casting time MUST be taken away too.
they actually must invest more than 5sec of dev-time by changing a snare value from 100% to 60% or what ever but have an overhaul of the entire charge mechanic to a system where the charging path is contniously adjusted to match the targets movement.

Crown · December 2015

Consider that there is no cast time (it's instant), there's just an animation (I call it the flying-squat) to delay the effect taking place. It's that delay that lets people go through doors..

Tankqull · December 2015

Crown wrote: »

Consider that there is no cast time (it's instant), there's just an animation (I call it the flying-squat) to delay the effect taking place. It's that delay that lets people go through doors..

as you cant animation cancel it it is a true casting time.
you can cancel it by breaking los for a milisec via crossing behind a birch in cyro as the charged person wich is not the case with any other instant charge.
if it was a true instant the issue of porting through doors would not happen either...

nordickittyhawk · December 2015

Minno wrote: »

Lifecode666 wrote: »

this thread has ended up as another nerf nightblade thread.

nightblades are fine.

It's not the NB per se. It's the way ZOS coded gap closers, and the stealth mechanic allows three animation cancelled skills to be considered as an "attack" from stealth that an issue. Cloak is fine as is. Ambush is fine (except minimum range not consistent with other gap closers.)

So Nbs are not the problem at all. its just how the mechanic works.. Nightblades as the class them selves are fine (people just get upset cause they refuse put counters on there bar) its just they need fix the mechanics with camo hunter and stealth bonus n so on. NOT the class but the game

Komma · December 2015

I didnt read all the replies but as I main a NB i will say our gap closer should be in line with all gap closers.

"You flash through the shadows and ambush enemy". Does one really need to flash through the shadows if the enemy is standing next to them? This need to have a minimum distance just like all the other gap closers. This isnt a nerf it is a correction and the right thing to do.

As for gap closers. There should be no effect holding them in place for a free shot. If the skill has a stun or snare added to it, it should be applied after contact. If you go out of range then so be it. You also shouldnt go through doors. This is usually a bad thing for NB's anyway and usually doesnt end well in keeps in particular.

Cathexis · December 2015

Give teleport strike an increasing cost per cast within 4s.

BigTone · December 2015

@Crown great post overall.

Personally I think that the snare should be completely removed.It is a bad game mechanic overall and it hinders the fluidity of combat and encourages bads to spam it. If someone moves out of the range then the move should fail.

Also, it shouldn't pull you out of cloak. If I can cloak a meteor or crystal frag or any other projectile I shouldn't be pulled out of stealth by a gap closer.

Crown · December 2015

@BigTone If it doesn't pull the target out of cloak, should it still port you to them? I like that idea.. You flash through the shadows and wonder why the heck you're there..

leepalmer95 · December 2015

Cathexis wrote: »

Give teleport strike an increasing cost per cast within 4s.

Thats a bit severe for a gap closing skill?

Just give it a minimum range like every other gap closer.

Crown · December 2015

I've updated the original post with more information and opinions. We had a nice hour long debate about this in TS last night.

@ZOS_GinaBruno Thanks for the response - and please bug whoever the right people are.

@Wrobel Please read (or re-read if you've already seen it) the post on top - I've put the conclusions so far in bold.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler I'm not sure if you're involved in the skill / class balancing, but I'm including you here anyway.

Xeniph · December 2015

While I am fine with giving TS a minimum range, there would be one downside. It would allow it to be macroable.

Currently you can't efficiently macro it, since it can be cast in the targets face. Unlike other gap closers, which can me macro'd into a poor mans cast sequence.

I mean lets be honest here, 3.5 meters (the minimum range of all other gap closers) is laughable. If you want to spam them you just roll once and close, or take 2 steps back. I do it all the time with invasion and toppling on various other toons.

The real complaint and issue here is the lazy coding implemented to make gap closers reliable (As they should be). Presumably Ambush/Lotus should be the easiest to fix as there is no actual "flight path".

BigTone · December 2015

Crown wrote: »

@BigTone If it doesn't pull the target out of cloak, should it still port you to them? I like that idea.. You flash through the shadows and wonder why the heck you're there..

That is exactly what I was imagining. You gap close to the person but if they cloak the move does not hit.It would take an aoe/mage light/ detect pots/ etc... to pull them out of stealth

Cathexis · December 2015

Issues I have withe the "intelligent" arguments proposed in the original post by @Crown

(1) If the target moves out of range while you are teleporting to the target there is no justification logically that it should extend further than its range. You are teleporting to where the target was in physical space, not where they will be. The grey area in this argument is that the shadows somehow guide you to your target, however that can't be the case since if you are travelling instantaneously folding time and space, upon casting it, there would be no time to calculate the difference of the targets location between the time you enter the shadows and the time you exit. This only leaves the "because magic" justification which I think most should logically agree can't hold up as a justification to give TS special powers that other gap closers don't have. Later in your post you suggest that it is not instantaneous through the example of teleporting through doors. Thats fine, but then your second argument about land based gap closers applies as well; you are expending a finite amount of resources and as such those resources should then only allow you to travel a maximum distance. Of course, this argument also disqualifies the notion that you would move farther than its maximum range because the teleport is not instantaneous, again leaving the only remaining argument the "because magic" argument. So either way, no it wouldn't extend beyond its maximum range.

Many will argue the "because magic" argument is more than sufficient, but by the same argument I could then turn around and say we'll my sorcerer should be able to call down an army of dragons from the sky that do 99999 damage to 60+ players at once because, hey, magic obvi.

(2) The argument that overland based gap closers should only extend to their maximum range because they are expending a finite amount of resources is only justifiable if the resources consumed then scale up as distance is travelled. As you and I both know, a critical rush does not only consume 10% of its resource cost if you only travel 10% of its maximum distance. To justify its maximum distance based on resources expended would then necessitate this kind of resource scaling. Are you prepared to give land based gap closers this kind of buff?

Also as a side note; land based gap closers currently slow down your travel speed at progressively closer distances which makes absolutely no sense sonce you should logically arrive sooner at your target if you are closer.

(3) There is no grounds to justify a gap closer not removing stealth if it makes contact after a player has entered stealth. If you are striking at the space a player is standing within when they are hidden, you are still going to hit them. Stealth doesnt make you ethereal. It doesn't make you impervious to damage or transport you to an alternate dimension. You are still there. You are still hit (whether invisible or stealth - in both cases taking damage will remove you from either one).

Crown · December 2015

Cathexis wrote: »

If the target moves out of range while you are teleporting to the target there is no justification logically that it should extend further than its range. You are teleporting to where the target was in physical space, not where they will be. The grey area in this argument is that the shadows somehow guide you to your target, however that can't be the case since if you are travelling instantaneously folding time and space, upon casting it, there would be no time to calculate the difference of the targets location between the time you enter the shadows and the time you exit. This only leaves the "because magic" justification which I think most should logically agree can't hold up as a justification to give TS special powers that other gap closers don't have. Later in your post you suggest that it is not instantaneous through the example of teleporting through doors. Thats fine, but then your second argument about land based gap closers applies as well; you are expending a finite amount of resources and as such those resources should then only allow you to travel a maximum distance. Of course, this argument also disqualifies the notion that you would move farther than its maximum range because the teleport is not instantaneous, again leaving the only remaining argument the "because magic" argument. So either way, no it wouldn't extend beyond its maximum range.

That is actually the biggest debate about the skill at present, and the majority of people we discuss this with are more in favour of you teleporting to the target, not to where the target was. There should be no movement by the target as this is an instant, though with the wind-up animation there's about 3/4 of a second for the target to move. The primary reasoning for the way it's written in my first post at present is that you are moving through the shadows to the target, and the shadow zone (for lack of a better term) has no distance as the real world would.

Other gap closers are all overland, and should be subjected to the maximum distance rule (proposed).

I believe that this should come down to what lore we are basng teleporting on!

Cathexis wrote: »

The argument that overland based gap closers should only extend to their maximum range because they are expending a finite amount of resources is only justifiable if the resources consumed then scale up as distance is travelled. As you and I both know, a critical rush does not only consume 10% of its resource cost if you only travel 10% of its maximum distance. To justify its maximum distance based on resources expended would then necessitate this kind of resource scaling. Are you prepared to give land based gap closers this kind of buff?

That's also an interesting argument, and we've not heard that one before. The simple answer is that they can't scale up. Your critical rush uses (I don't recall how much so I'm using 3000 as a base number) 3000 stamina. That 3000 stamina is put into the need to cast the spell, which can only get you (again I don't recall how much so I'm using 25 meters for this example) 25 meters. You can't channel more stamina into the spell, but you can cast it again.

Comparing that to Teleport Strike, your (once more I don't recall numbers) 3000 magicka isn't used to rush overland, it's to teleport. If our lore says that the shadow realm has the same distance measurements as the real world then you may be right. If however *magic* turns you into energy, and then back to matter wherever it is that the *tag* (target) happens to be when you change back from energy to matter is, then the idea that is up there now stands - that you can target a player within the distance on the tooltip, but you can end up elsewhere, wherever that target is when you re-materialize.

Cathexis wrote: »

Also as a side note; land based gap closers currently slow down your travel speed at progressively closer distances which makes absolutely no sense once you should logically arrive sooner at your target if you are closer.

I believe that it's the wind-up time. Even if they're instant casts, there's still that small animation "getting ready to move" type of thing.

Cathexis wrote: »

There is no grounds to justify a gap closer not removing stealth if it makes contact after a player has entered stealth. If you are striking at the space a player is standing within when they are hidden, you are still going to hit them. Stealth doesnt make you ethereal. It doesn't make you impervious to damage or transport you to an alternate dimension. You are still there. You are still hit (whether invisible or stealth - in both cases taking damage will remove you from either one).

Stealth causes projectiles to miss, which was the theory behind that. I believe this should be discussed more too. With overland gap closers, the player moving can be considered a projectile. With teleport strike, you probably *should* still hit the target as you're teleported right beside it.

@Cathexis I'll update the original post later tonight or tomorrow morning once we've discussed your points a bit more. Thanks much for the input!

Cathexis · December 2015

@Crown I'm glad you appreciate my input!

I hadn't considered that the delay was a wind up time, and I'll certainly l have to think about that when using my gap closer when I'm back from the holidays.

With regard to projectiles missing when stealth is activated, I think that is more of a problem with projectiles hithing than stealth not dodging melee attacks. The other issue is there are a lot of inconsistencies when it comes to dodging or reflecting projectiles and I think to ONLY fix and/or balance stealth to work "correctly" in that regard is somewhat biased (whatever correctly may mean). To be more specific, defensive stance and BoL for instance only absorb/reflect spells even though you could logically justify all projectiles in general. Evasion does not work on all abilities.

Lastly, after I posted last night I got to thinking a bit more about the dilemma I have with teleport strike, and I think I need to elaborate a bit more on my problem in that regard.

Many of the special circumstances around teleport strike are justified as the idea that teleport strike is a teleport and not a land based charge and so it is not subject to the laws of gap closers like a minimum or maximum range.

While I don't necessarily have a problem with this argument, teleport abilities as a category also generally subscribe to a different set of physics in the elder scrolls online universe. If you are going to set standards for teleport strike as a teleport ability instead of a gap closer then it should logically subscribe to the same laws as other teleport abilities. At present the only other teleport ability in the game is bolt escape (+morphs).

The physics presently underlying bolt escape suggest that folding time/space has a maximum distance per cast (15m), only travels on a single axis (no up or down), is not able to travel through physical objects, and has an exponentially increasing cost per cast.

Teleport strike at present does not seem to subscribe to either the principles of gap closers or the principles of teleports. Not to say I am advocating for either to apply specifically, but in all other areas of character development, there is a shift toward standardized character mechanics (for example, the changes to minor/major bonuses).

OdinForge · December 2015

I don't entirely hate the new "Charge Snare" mechanic, added in 1.7 by surprise. Although it can be very annoying at times.

If ZOS intends to keep this mechanic, they should add a minimum distance to teleport strike and its morphs. To bring it more in line with other gap closers, I don't think this is unreasonable. Even with a minimum distance, ambush is still a compelling choice over other options.

Cathexis · December 2015

OdinForge wrote: »

I don't entirely hate the new "Charge Snare" mechanic, added in 1.7 by surprise. Although it can be very annoying at times.

If ZOS intends to keep this mechanic, they should add a minimum distance to teleport strike and its morphs. To bring it more in line with other gap closers, I don't think this is unreasonable. Even with a minimum distance, ambush is still a compelling choice over other options.

To take a stance on the issue, I fundamentally agree. Not so much because it needs to be in line with gap closers but because in its current state TS and morphs have no skill component involved - you literally just press tab and then button mash.

For me it brings to mind the argument that was made about bolt escape being an auto-escape and how it should only be a chance to escape. In the present state of TS and morphs, it is an auto gap closer and I think no skill should have a 100% automatic function.