New CC Immunity System

xDonMega · May 2014

And the cc immunity in DAoC was 60 seconds..

7 seconds is hardly anything to worry about.

frwinters_ESO · May 2014

NordJitsu wrote: »

Okay so @Attorneyatlawl‌ is saying that the CC immunity with no break is new to Patch 1.07, not 1.1.1.

I originally thought there was no CC immunity after the duration of hard CC's on the current live patch. There is.

However, this is still fairly new. Its been added in one of the more recent patches.

And I still dislike the system of granting CC immunity with no action from the player.

Adding a completely new system like this without including it in any of the patch notes leads to confusion (as my threads indicate rather clearly.)

Basically, the way things used to work, you were immune to CC during the duration of the current CC (obviously) and for about a second as you came out of the CC. If you did not use the Stamina costing CC break you would not gain immunity. Now you gain immunity to all CC even if you do not stamina break. The immunity lasts 7 seconds, the same duration as the Break immunity.

This discourages players from expending stamina to break CC, which discourages active combat (no reaction necessary) especially to shorter duration CCs.

I'm still beyond frustrated that we weren't told about this. Now I'm just frustrated and slightly confused.

You just dont pay attention. I have known about this for awhile and believe its been in the game longer. when you use your CC breaker, you get a swirl around you. this is the indicator you are immune to CC. You may not see this on lower video settings though.

Niffo · May 2014

RaZaddha wrote: »

Yeaaaah... Right, if only ZOS had explained every bit of mechanic before, it wouldn't have started two misconceptions about mechanics. You say terrible but I used to chain CC newbies who never stun break with my binding javelin or shield charge, I have seen people get chain pulled multiple times consecutively before, I have never seen this kind of auto cc immunity.

The point of discussing specifics about balance gets lost when we don't fully understand the mechanics and what ZOS really wants with their "balance" vision.

You were probably doing it before they implemented it. It has been in for months, this wasn't something they added a couple of patches ago.

Niffo · May 2014

joshisanonymous wrote: »

I was immediately thinking of this video and scratching my head after reading the OP.

Anyway, gaining immunity without reacting absolutely does not dumb down the game. You still have a choice: wait for the CC to end to gain and hope that you don't die or use stamina to ensure that you don't die while CC'd. In the case of very short duration CCs, like the DK pull or Crystal Shard, there's still a decision to be made.

If I just let a DK pull me, I gain immunity without expending any stamina, but I'm also right next to them (as well as whatever group they may be with). So breaking it doesn't change the immunity factor, but it does affect your positioning, which may be crucial. Furthermore, if you look at it from the DK's perspective, they actually have to be smarter about how they use this skill now. It can't simply be spammed regardless of whether someone decides to break it or not. Without the auto-immunity, using this skill was a win-win: either they wasted a bunch of stamina or you put them in a disadvantageous position. Now, there has to be an actual reason to use it. This system arguably requires more skill.

Or take Crystal Shard. This doesn't change your position at all and it's a short duration. Dumbed down, right? I don't think so. It's not as if the knockdown lasts for 0 seconds, so, situationally, it benefits you to break out of it with stamina. If you decide to let it run it 1-2 second course, that possibly high damage sorcerer (who has no cooldown on their damage spells!) has a perfect opportunity to start up whatever DPS chain they want. If you were to break it, and say you're a DK, you can immediately pull them (no cooldown), which would likely catch them off guard and turn the tide of the fight. Again, from the sorcerer's perspective, using Crystal Shard requires more thought than without the immunity timer. It has to be used to interrupt or to set up a chain only when you suspect that your enemy is low on stamina. Again, this system arguably requires more skill.

Some of you are talking as if this combat system has never been done before but it resembles DAoC in how it handles cooldowns and CC. It'd be hard to say that that game had a failed combat system since it's still going. DAoC had no cooldowns, immunity to CC whether it's manually broken or not, and no immunity to snares. It's almost a copy-and-paste thing going on.

I think people on these forums jump to conclusions way too fast about what they think will be the death of the game. Every time someone notices a new mechanic, regardless of how tested it has been in other games or how long it has been in this game, posts start popping up here about how everything is stupid and everyone should quit. Relax.

It doesn't dumb things down at all, I agree, especially with how much CC is available in the game and how easy it is to use. Being able to chain CC someone if they run out of stamina would be incredibly easy, since breakout costs almost 600 stamina to use and base stamina at VR 10 is only 1170. The people that don't want auto-immunity just want to be able to cheese their way through fights.

NordJitsu · May 2014

@jobo11b16_ESO‌

Well its a good thing ZOS's community manager commented on this issue and promised me some clarification.

None of the games most experienced testers knew about this system, which was absolutely nija'd into the game late in the development process or alternatively wasn't working throughout most of the Beta.

Regardless of which it is, we should have been told when it was fixed/added.

And its absolutely a bad system.

You should not be rewarded for failing to react to your opponent. Its dumb. Most of the CC in this game is so short duration that the CC-break feature becomes much less useful. The only long duration CC, like roots, snares, immobilize, and disorient, can't be CC broken any way and don't grant you immunity.

Its really quite backwards.

Ifthir_ESO · May 2014

To those that aren't familiar, the OP is a huge Chicken Little and has been complaining about various things "completely ruining the game" since day 1 of beta.

This to me sounds like a change that would prevent everyone in a group from spam-ccing a single target and focus killing said target before they got an attack off.

How isn't that a good thing? Because you and your guild cant all spam-cc a single target and rinse-repeat? This will create diversity in tactics instead of the same, tired-old, everyone-in-group-cc-the-same-enemy tactic that has been the status quo in most games.

Ifthir_ESO · May 2014

TheGrandAlliance wrote: »

FINNALLY no more perma-stun 1v100 shield bashing DK's causing most random problems in PvP and also able to one-man PvE targets (with critical chance buffs) as well.

Good GOod... OP is /elitewhining once agian...

^this

So much ^^this

NordJitsu · May 2014

@frwinters_ESO‌

You don't understand what this thread is about. So either take the time to figure it out or go elsewhere.

We aren't talking about the CC break feature which we obviously know about. I've been a Beta tester for the game since September, so don't presume to educate me about basic systems. I've played probably thousands of hours of PvP in that time.

We're talking about an AUTOMATIC immunity which was added at some point late in development. And apparently no-one knew about it.

Niffo · May 2014

NordJitsu wrote: »

@jobo11b16_ESO‌

Well its a good thing ZOS's community manager commented on this issue and promised me some clarification.

None of the games most experienced testers knew about this system, which was absolutely nija'd into the game late in the development process or alternatively wasn't working throughout most of the Beta.

Regardless of which it is, we should have been told when it was fixed/added.

And its absolutely a bad system.

You should not be rewarded for failing to react to your opponent. Its dumb. Most of the CC in this game is so short duration that the CC-break feature becomes much less useful. The only long duration CC, like roots, snares, immobilize, and disorient, can't be CC broken any way and don't grant you immunity.

Its really quite backwards.

You can't be happy unless you have things as easy as possible, CC is too easily applied to not have auto-immunity. And immobilize should have its own immunity system added like the hard CC one.

NordJitsu · May 2014

@jobo11b16_ESO‌

You really think preventing combos and rewarding everyone for standing around doing nothing makes things....harder?

And Immobilize should only have an immunity after you BREAK it. Just like hard CC should only give you immunity if you break it.

Between this and the AoE caps the games PvP is going to turn into zergs running around doing nothing but spamming damage skills at each other.

Ifthir_ESO · May 2014

Hard to believe the limited PTS playerbase went out of it's way to grief OP, isn't it?

/sarcasm

Niffo · May 2014

NordJitsu wrote: »

@jobo11b16_ESO‌

You really think preventing combos and rewarding everyone for standing around doing nothing makes things....harder?

And Immobilize should only have an immunity after you BREAK it. Just like hard CC should only give you immunity if you break it.

Between this and the AoE caps the games PvP is going to turn into zergs running around doing nothing but spamming damage skills at each other.

Do you think stunlocking someone from 100-0 is skilled gameplay? The Devs don't want CC to rule the game, so they put in immunities.

NordJitsu · May 2014

@Ifthir_ESO‌

Either stop trolling and start being productive or leave the thread. Are you a PTS tester?

If so you should have seen the thread about this topic on PTS forum and all of the other experienced testers who had no idea about this.

NordJitsu · May 2014

@jobo11b16_ESO‌

No. I just think you should have to DO SOMETHING to prevent me from stun locking you.

Niffo · May 2014

NordJitsu wrote: »

@jobo11b16_ESO‌

No. I just think you should have to DO SOMETHING to prevent me from stun locking you.

Considering the cost to prevent the stun lock is significantly higher than the cost to stun lock, what you want is not reasonable.

Niffo · May 2014

NordJitsu wrote: »

@Ifthir_ESO‌

Either stop trolling and start being productive or leave the thread. Are you a PTS tester?

If so you should have seen the thread about this topic on PTS forum and all of the other experienced testers who had no idea about this.

Are these the same people that didn't notice the AoE caps when they had the unlocked API? Or the ones that let Vampire spam go live? Or are these the testers that abused exploits to get ahead of everyone at early access? The ones that let the duping bugs go live? These testers are terrible at the one thing they're supposed to be doing, why would it be at all surprising that they didn't notice something that was right under their noses? Not a single mention of auto immunity for months, and all it would have taken was testing the breakout system when it was put in.

NordJitsu · May 2014

@jobo11b16_ESO‌

The break out system has been in for a long time. I believe since the Beta started, but you'd have to ask Attorney about that one. I started in September. It was in then.

Auto-immunity was not. So the two things aren't connected.

Did you see the video I posted in this thread? Do you not think we did exactly that same kind of testing during the Beta? We couldn't have "not noticed" the system.

Niffo · May 2014

NordJitsu wrote: »

@jobo11b16_ESO‌

The break out system has been in for a long time. I believe since the Beta started, but you'd have to ask Attorney about that one. I started in September. It was in then.

Auto-immunity was not. So the two things aren't connected.

Did you see the video I posted in this thread? Do you not think we did exactly that same kind of testing during the Beta? We couldn't have "not noticed" the system.

So you guys just ignored all of the other issues then? That's why they got through? Well that's different then.

Ifthir_ESO · May 2014

NordJitsu wrote: »

@Ifthir_ESO‌
Either stop trolling and start being productive or leave the thread. Are you a PTS tester?

@NordJitsu‌ It must be extremely difficult to click my user name and see that I began on the PTS in March 2013. I know it took me all of 5 seconds to see you began in September 2013.

I posted on topic but you clearly didn't want to respond to that. You just wanted to *** at people who disagree with you, as usual.

NordJitsu · May 2014

@jobo11b16_ESO‌

If you'd like to discuss those particular issues in depth, I encourage you to start a thread about it. I'm sure plenty of PTS testers would be happy to tell you how things went down and why certain issues got through.

I won't go back and forth on this, since its off topic, but give my opinion on each of those issues one time.

AoE caps weren't noticed primarily because many of them weren't working, including for the most powerful abilities like Dragon Knight Standard. Additionally, its worth remembering that even though the API was unlocked, testers had to make their own add ons to utilize it. All of the stats were hidden from us throughout the testing process. Its unrealistic to expect the testers to have been able to put in enough development time to make a complete UI, while also working in real life, having personal lives, and trying to test the game. If ZOS would have given us the tools, AoE caps would have been found much earlier.

Vampire Spam wasn't a thing for a few reasons. First, ZOS didn't even tell us how to get Vampire. We spent quite some time trying to figure it out. It might be obvious to you know, but that's because its common knowledge. The vamp population on the PTS was actually quite low. Second, Werewolves had a more powerful ultimate spam build which was fixed thanks to our feedback. Essentially, they were able to use their passives to quickly generate ANY ultimate in the game. That one got priority. Third, and most sadly, some testers did indeed hide stuff. I think I know of a few who did this and its sad. They found exploits and kept them to themselves so they could take advantage of them. Happens in every game.

Duping bug, as far as I know, was not possible on the PTS. Many of the bugs you experienced at live were ADDED with the 1.0 Patch. Do you remember people complaining about these bugs during the March weekend tests? No? That's because they weren't there. 1.0 Was a big patch that introduced many problems and we didn't get much chance to test it.

Also, don't forget that except for a handful of early weekend tests, we didn't get templates. We were a tiny testing group with sometimes poor support and poor tools at our disposal.

And finally, don't forget that just because issues made it live doesn't mean we didn't report them. A LOT of things went live that were BIG ISSUES on the PTS.

But that's just my take on it. Start a thread if you're really interested because my experience/opinion isn't the same as everyone else's. I think its a worthy topic though. Just not for this thread.

Ifthir_ESO · May 2014

jobo11b16_ESO wrote: »

Are these the same people that didn't notice the AoE caps when they had the unlocked API? Or the ones that let Vampire spam go live? Or are these the testers that abused exploits to get ahead of everyone at early access? The ones that let the duping bugs go live? These testers are terrible at the one thing they're supposed to be doing, why would it be at all surprising that they didn't notice something that was right under their noses? Not a single mention of auto immunity for months, and all it would have taken was testing the breakout system when it was put in.

1. Some of us were calling for AoE nerfs during the PTS. Others wanted it buffed. We still have a clear disconnect over which should happen.
2. Vampires were bugged in the PTS and you really couldn't level them. So it's hard to catch something you can't access due to a bug.
3. Exploits were repeatedly reported. Repeatedly. I suspect the ZoS team got about 50k bug reports though and I dont know any game that was bug/exploit free in the first few months. Please feel free to offer evidence to the contrary.
4. Demonizing the people who play-tested the game for free as "terrible" is wrong, and it makes you look like a huge *** who doesn't understand a thing about how the PTS was run.

Niffo · May 2014

@NordJitsu‌

From the patch notes, only a small number of skills weren't following cap rules.

No one was testing vampire because they were instead abusing something else that was broken? Wonderful to hear.

Your post is about the system being new, when it isn't. Added in beta and just went unnoticed probably because the testers were too focused one finding the exploits they could use at release.

There is nothing new about the system, and nothing wrong with CC not being spammable.

NordJitsu · May 2014

@jobo11b16_ESO‌

You're a clear and definitive troll. I can only hope someone from ZOS bans you from these forums or that they implement an ignore feature soon. Its down right ridiculous that you're still allowed to post.

In either case, my last response to you in any thread shall be to quote a post from the discussion on this same topic going on in the PTS thread:

Carde wrote: »

,

NordJitsu wrote: »

Judging by the fact that Atto, Atropos, Carde, Mystborn, drioskethc, ect. ect. didn't know about this either, I'm going to go ahead and guess a lot of the general player base didn't know as well.

This was absolutely, positively, not in the game on the PTS anywhere before the last 3 weeks before the game launched. If it was added then I have no idea because I stopped playing on the PTS while waiting for the game to launch.

I also didn't participate in any weekend tests except for one a week or two before I stopped playing the PTS, and it was DEFINITELY not in that build either.

I have no doubt it was likely added sometime without a single mention, but it hasn't been a part of the game for long. Anyone trying to argue that can shove it up their ass.

Carde · May 2014

The fact that a large number of PTS players quit before the first month was up should be evidence that they weren't the ones dropping the ball on these issues. Seeing so many bugs that I personally reported going live was sobering to say the least.

Oh well. We'll see how Craglorn is doing. PTS groups have been struggling to gather enough manpower to test it out for the most part. Should be great!

Niffo · May 2014

Carde wrote: »

The fact that a large number of PTS players quit before the first month was up should be evidence that they weren't the ones dropping the ball on these issues. Seeing so many bugs that I personally reported going live was sobering to say the least.

Oh well. We'll see how Craglorn is doing. PTS groups have been struggling to gather enough manpower to test it out for the most part. Should be great!

Good thing Zenimax is keeping the population for the PTS limited, it will certainly help them.

Niffo · May 2014

NordJitsu wrote: »

@jobo11b16_ESO‌

You're a clear and definitive troll. I can only hope someone from ZOS bans you from these forums or that they implement an ignore feature soon. Its down right ridiculous that you're still allowed to post.

In either case, my last response to you in any thread shall be to quote a post from the discussion on this same topic going on in the PTS thread:

Carde wrote: »

,

NordJitsu wrote: »

Judging by the fact that Atto, Atropos, Carde, Mystborn, drioskethc, ect. ect. didn't know about this either, I'm going to go ahead and guess a lot of the general player base didn't know as well.

This was absolutely, positively, not in the game on the PTS anywhere before the last 3 weeks before the game launched. If it was added then I have no idea because I stopped playing on the PTS while waiting for the game to launch.

I also didn't participate in any weekend tests except for one a week or two before I stopped playing the PTS, and it was DEFINITELY not in that build either.

I have no doubt it was likely added sometime without a single mention, but it hasn't been a part of the game for long. Anyone trying to argue that can shove it up their ass.

I remember it seeing it during the weekend beta before March.

Attorneyatlawl · May 2014

frwinters_ESO wrote: »

You just dont pay attention. I have known about this for awhile and believe its been in the game longer. when you use your CC breaker, you get a swirl around you. this is the indicator you are immune to CC. You may not see this on lower video settings though.

Yes, but that's not what the OP is talking about, we're talking about it happening with no user intervention or action. That is absolutely new and recently put in.

Niffo · May 2014

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

frwinters_ESO wrote: »

You just dont pay attention. I have known about this for awhile and believe its been in the game longer. when you use your CC breaker, you get a swirl around you. this is the indicator you are immune to CC. You may not see this on lower video settings though.

Yes, but that's not what the OP is talking about, we're talking about it happening with no user intervention or action. That is absolutely new and recently put in.

When you say recently how recent do you mean?

Attorneyatlawl · May 2014

jobo11b16_ESO wrote: »

Phoenix99 wrote: »

I am complaining about them being too strong if this bad idea of CC immunity gets to see the live patch. Good luck staying on target with it.

CC immunity has been in the game for months, since the closed beta.

That video you linked is from March 9th.... which was about a week and a half before closed beta ended, and most had already winded down testing as it was so close to launch. Nice try though. It is indeed a newer change that was snuck in but not mentioned anywhere. I noticed it on live but assumed people had been CC breaking.

EDIT: Also call me dense but what timestamp are you seeing this *AUTOMATIC* cc immunity and not someone using breakfree to get it? Because getting it automatically with no user action is absolutely new, whether it was snuck in just prelaunch or right after.

Niffo · May 2014

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

That video you linked is from March 9th.... which was about a week and a half before closed beta ended, and most had already winded down testing as it was so close to launch. Nice try though. It is indeed a newer change that was snuck in but not mentioned anywhere. I noticed it on live but assumed people had been CC breaking.

EDIT: Also call me dense but what timestamp are you seeing this *AUTOMATIC* cc immunity and not someone using breakfree to get it? Because getting it automatically with no user action is absolutely new, whether it was snuck in just prelaunch or right after.

Auto-Immunity you can see the buff after he uses Stonefist and the guy doesn't breakout of it. The buff for breakout is "CC", and the auto one is "Ability CC". I remember a guild member mentioning the immunity changes including the auto one earlier than the video.