Please do not increase channel time of beam

Taylord900 · April 17

10yr lurker, first post (that's how strongly I feel about this change and I'm a passionate PvPer). I find Arcanist highly uninteresting because of the long channel and don't play the class. I want to be doing something to earn my DPS, not sitting behind a channel for 5 seconds, I suppose it would allow me to have snack and quick drink, but I can plan ahead better than that. You all have already created Oak builds (I think they are great for accessibility, but I won't play that way). Then the Arcanist, why do we seem to be moving in the direction of allowing the game to play itself for us? It wouldn't be so bad if that skill didn't, at least in part, carry the class's DPS.

Please don't remove another class from those that I'll play, please.

Thank you for your time.

[edited for inappropriate content]

WrathOfInnos · April 18

Agreed, 5 second channels are not engaging gameplay. In my opinion, Fatecarver removes all the potential fun of Arcanist. Now we will effectively see the same thing on Templar. Really hoping this does not go live.

Ezhh · April 18

I couldn't agree more strongly and have mentioned it in a few other threads myself.

I really dislike arcanist/many-seconds-long beam gameplay and have been relying on my plar to still get me a chance to DD in trials ever since arc became meta and I realised I just can't play it. If this goes live plar will have the same problem and I'll be out of options.

Cast times of this length make for extremely unengaging gameplay.

AdmiralDigby · April 18

Taylord900 wrote: »

10yr lurker, first post (that's how strongly I feel about this change and I'm a passionate PvPer). I find Arcanist highly uninteresting because of the long channel and don't play the class. I want to be doing something to earn my DPS, not sitting behind a channel for 5 seconds, I suppose it would allow me to have snack and quick drink, but I can plan ahead better than that. You all have already created Oak builds (I think they are great for accessibility, but I won't play that way). Then the Arcanist, why do we seem to be moving in the direction of allowing the game to play itself for us? It wouldn't be so bad if that skill didn't, at least in part, carry the class's DPS.

Please don't remove another class from those that I'll play, please.

Thank you for your time.

Yes the main issue with this is it makes keeping up other skills difficult in particular POTL. Yes you can cancel beam by blocking however its a pain. If anything make it a 3 sec channel. So 2 beams = 1 potl proc.

ceruulean · April 18

Agreed. Templar has unique support skills to give synergies to tanks while still doing damage. Making Templar a beam bot is insulting.

TheDarkRuler · April 18

I'd like if you get a long Radiant Oppression morph all focussed on Dmg and long duration and leave the Radiant Glory morph as it is in update 45.

Ezhh · April 18

If PvP is the problem (but I barely ever heard anyone complain about a plar in PvP) then just apply different rules between PvE and PvP already. (Same with Hardened Ward on sorc). But if you can block and dodge beam anyway it's already easy to deal with in PvP.

The change to the length is just punishing the few plar players left in PvE.

Jaimeh · April 18

I agree with you OP, I don't like channeling skills in general, but between the two, I much prefer a rotation with the templar beam than the arcanist beam. I don't like changes that make the game slower and that are so advantageous to alternatives so that you have to use them if you want to be competitive.

fred4 · April 18

As far as I can see, you are all wrong.

In regards to PvP, the patch notes state that the beam is now dodgeable. I suppose some testing is in order, but I assume this means it can only be blocked on live, but can be dodge-cancelled on the PTS when the beam is already on you. This will, for all intents and purposes, destroy the beam as a viable execute in PvP. At the very least it is a major nerf. It will only work if the target is completely out of stamina or very low health to begin with. Simply beaming people from the back row, or beaming them speculatively, will no longer be a thing when the target can just dodge cancel. Unlike blocking, which impedes the target's movement, dodging speeds them up. They will dodge once, then head for line-of-sight, outrange, or counterattack.

In regards to PvE, the reason you're locked into the Arcanist beam, the reason you do not want to block-cancel it, is that you waste your crux. You have to rebuild that before casting the beam again, at least if you play the class properly, e.g. you are a meta player and play for maximum damage. This is not the case for templar. Furthermore, the templar beam is so strong that, when you are in the execute phase, you have very little else to do as it stands. From about 40% of boss health, basically all you do is beam. There are few other buffs to maintain. However, if you do have other skills in your execute rotation then, unlike Arcanist, it is absolutely no problem to just block cancel the beam. When you recast the beam afterwards, you simply resume beaming at full strength. There are no crux issues. This is also different from lightning and resto heavy attacks. In the case of those, you want the resource return and/or lightning explosion at the end of the heavy attack. You want to wait them out for that reason. None of that applies to the templar beam. Just about the only difference is that you'll be fitting in fewer light attacks with a longer beam, but if you're wearing Velothi-Ur, even that is not an issue.

Ezhh · April 18

fred4 wrote: »

As far as I can see, you are all wrong.

So even those of us who have not made claims about the interaction with other skills are wrong to not want the change?

A lot of players are going to have a harder time managing things like beam cancelling compared to just fitting in other actions when the beam ends. And on a longer fight you do more than just beam until you get quite a bit lower than 40%.

I've tested the new beam on PTS. I don't like how it feels. You might, but that absolutely doesn't make me or the others who dislike it wrong.

fred4 · April 18

Ezhh wrote: »

fred4 wrote: »

As far as I can see, you are all wrong.

So even those of us who have not made claims about the interaction with other skills are wrong to not want the change?

A lot of players are going to have a harder time managing things like beam cancelling compared to just fitting in other actions when the beam ends. And on a longer fight you do more than just beam until you get quite a bit lower than 40%.

I've tested the new beam on PTS. I don't like how it feels. You might, but that absolutely doesn't make me or the others who dislike it wrong.

You mean to say block-canceling the beam from time to time feels much different from light-attack weaving? It should be the same, or fewer, keystrokes. I suppose you'll block cancel, then light attack + skill, but towards the end of execute, you'll just let the beam run out, right? I suppose it impacts your rythm, if you can't queue up a light attack? Or the sense of your rotation timing? ZOS are clearly catering towards new players who don't even care about that, otherwise I'll concede you have a point. The longer beam isn't necessarily easier, or nicer, it's just different. At any rate, my point was that nothing forces you into a long beam time, whereas with Arcanist, as well as with heavy attacks, you have concrete, hard reasons for letting the beam run out, or you'll lose damage or utility. Meanwhile in PvP it's unlikely any player would let you beam them for the full duration in the first place.

Ezhh · April 18

fred4 wrote: »

Ezhh wrote: »

fred4 wrote: »

As far as I can see, you are all wrong.

So even those of us who have not made claims about the interaction with other skills are wrong to not want the change?

A lot of players are going to have a harder time managing things like beam cancelling compared to just fitting in other actions when the beam ends. And on a longer fight you do more than just beam until you get quite a bit lower than 40%.

I've tested the new beam on PTS. I don't like how it feels. You might, but that absolutely doesn't make me or the others who dislike it wrong.

You mean to say block-canceling the beam from time to time feels much different from light-attack weaving? It should be the same, or fewer, keystrokes. I suppose you'll block cancel, then light attack + skill, but towards the end of execute, you'll just let the beam run out, right? I suppose it impacts your rythm, if you can't queue up a light attack? Or the sense of your rotation timing? ZOS are clearly catering towards new players who don't even care about that, otherwise I'll concede you have a point. The longer beam isn't necessarily easier, or nicer, it's just different. At any rate, my point was that nothing forces you into a long beam time, whereas with Arcanist, as well as with heavy attacks, you have concrete, hard reasons for letting the beam run out, or you'll lose damage or utility. Meanwhile in PvP it's unlikely any player would let you beam them for the full duration in the first place.

For me personally it's not about the block casting being an issue. I simply don't enjoy inputting one skill in an (almost) 5 second window. This is too few keystrokes. It's boring. I know I could adapt, but it hits the point where I'm not engaged by the gameplay so I just don't want to. Regardless of whether I'm just playing casually with some friends or pushing the newest trifecta, I want engaging gameplay that I enjoy - or it's just not worth my time. It's the same reason I adapted to the arc meta by playing healer for my main prog group instead of switching to arc. Thankfully I was in a position to do that.

ceruulean · April 18

fred4 wrote: »

Ezhh wrote: »

fred4 wrote: »

As far as I can see, you are all wrong.

So even those of us who have not made claims about the interaction with other skills are wrong to not want the change?

A lot of players are going to have a harder time managing things like beam cancelling compared to just fitting in other actions when the beam ends. And on a longer fight you do more than just beam until you get quite a bit lower than 40%.

I've tested the new beam on PTS. I don't like how it feels. You might, but that absolutely doesn't make me or the others who dislike it wrong.

You mean to say block-canceling the beam from time to time feels much different from light-attack weaving? It should be the same, or fewer, keystrokes. I suppose you'll block cancel, then light attack + skill, but towards the end of execute, you'll just let the beam run out, right? I suppose it impacts your rythm, if you can't queue up a light attack? Or the sense of your rotation timing? ZOS are clearly catering towards new players who don't even care about that, otherwise I'll concede you have a point. The longer beam isn't necessarily easier, or nicer, it's just different. At any rate, my point was that nothing forces you into a long beam time, whereas with Arcanist, as well as with heavy attacks, you have concrete, hard reasons for letting the beam run out, or you'll lose damage or utility. Meanwhile in PvP it's unlikely any player would let you beam them for the full duration in the first place.

Have you tried the beam on PTS? It's more expensive and ticks 7 times over 4.8 seconds. On live, the beam is more dense, it ticks 3 times over 1.8 seconds. So not only does the new patch reduce the ticks/second, but we have to block/bash cancel to get a rotation out. You don't drop your other skills until around 10% boss HP left. Also, relequin is still a meta proc set and it will run out if you let the beam go on full duration. Especially with the game bug where if you try to queue a light attack, your character uses a heavy attack before beam.

Taylord900 · April 19

As others have said, 5 second channels are not engaging gameplay and would kill the class for me. I've had my Templar since prob 2016 (third class I created), I've probably played it the most of all classes and still really enjoy it. Please don't make this change.

SxFurey · April 19

This change will just push pvp plars into using the assassination skill tree or 2H execute.

Udrath · April 19

It’s pretty rough in pvp on PTS. Feels like there is a delay before it does damage. Making it undodgeable feels like a set up, so after this goes live with the jabs buff, then they’ll nerf jabs later on and we’ll be back to using weapon skills. They did this last time with power of the light.

BasP · April 19

Yeah, I tried it on the PTS as well and definitely don't enjoy the new duration either. I really hope that the change will be reverted or that the duration will be reduced to 2.8 seconds or something. If not, I'll probably swap Dawn's Wrath for Assassination on my Templars and use Impale or Killer's Blade as an execute ability instead (which would be a shame, as I like the current beam).

tsaescishoeshiner · April 20

I'm not convinced that, in practice, one 5-second channel is that different from three 1.8-second channels, especially given that it's only in execute and starting at a lower health threshold now. I definitely didn't like the feeling of missing out on damage between casts (and recasting it could be a bit janky).

It's also now an ongoing magicka cost instead of a one-time cost at the start, so you can use the skill for as long or as little as you like before blocking for another skill or swapping bars. It makes it more active because of the resource management choices—you can toast the boss for a second before your next action, or give it the whole five seconds. And switch targets much more responsively without losing magicka.

To be fair, the changes are big enough that some will like it and some won't. It's not necessarily all better.

To me, Fatecarver is different because you have to use it the whole fight and you can't end it early or else you lose DPS because you have to build crux up first. I find it satisfying, but admittedly repetitive.

randconfig · April 20

WrathOfInnos wrote: »

Agreed, 5 second channels are not engaging gameplay. In my opinion, Fatecarver removes all the potential fun of Arcanist. Now we will effectively see the same thing on Templar. Really hoping this does not go live.

Disagree, the change is needed because it's a broken execute on a stamplar, despite being designed for a magicka templar. With the execute threshold being 50%, and it being 1.8s in channel time, you barely use magicka and can one-shot people with <20k max health when they're at 100% hp.

Besides, you can still end the channel early by tapping block or roll dodging, and it's arguably a buff to sustain since you don't pay the full ability cost when you have to cancel early.

Also I just gotta say, it feels bad to have to spam press the button when it's a channeled ability, which makes light attack weaving feel awkward.

Major_Mangle · April 20

randconfig wrote: »

WrathOfInnos wrote: »

Agreed, 5 second channels are not engaging gameplay. In my opinion, Fatecarver removes all the potential fun of Arcanist. Now we will effectively see the same thing on Templar. Really hoping this does not go live.

Disagree, the change is needed because it's a broken execute on a stamplar, despite being designed for a magicka templar. With the execute threshold being 50%, and it being 1.8s in channel time, you barely use magicka and can one-shot people with <20k max health when they're at 100% hp.

Besides, you can still end the channel early by tapping block or roll dodging, and it's arguably a buff to sustain since you don't pay the full ability cost when you have to cancel early.

Also I just gotta say, it feels bad to have to spam press the button when it's a channeled ability, which makes light attack weaving feel awkward.

Me when I lie and exaggerate

Edit: Also no such thing as mag-/stamplar, hasn´t been for a very very long time

necro_the_crafter · April 20

Dawns Wrath is already packed with not so good skills, nefring jesus beam just made it trash tier. Nobody will pick up this line, and plars would swap it out as soon as they get an opportunity to do so. So much for build diversity.

I cant fathom the thought process of ZoS coming up with those changes. Dawns Wrath had two appealing things - execute, and minor sorc. passive. Yea lets nerf the only appealing ability without puting any power back so noone picks this line. Meanwhile Assassination, that is already quite an appealing line packed with strong skills and passives gets a major buff without any drawbacks. Insane.

In perfect scenario I would love to see each and every line brought to a power level of assassination. It will be unbalanced mess but would be a fun one.

Ezhh · April 20

randconfig wrote: »

Disagree, the change is needed because it's a broken execute on a stamplar, despite being designed for a magicka templar. With the execute threshold being 50%, and it being 1.8s in channel time, you barely use magicka and can one-shot people with <20k max health when they're at 100% hp.

Ehh, I've never been one shot by a beamplar in PvP from 100% hp even on a character with as low as 22k hp. When a plar beams me and I'm at 100% hp, it feels like a gift, because they are telling me they are probably an easy kill.

And if it's okay for NB to double bow proc in a row, but live beam is so terrible in PvP that it has to be made into an even longer channel than arc beam to fix it , then I don't know what to say.

Also any class can use both mag and stam skills now. My magplar runs Potl and often a bow backbar. My magsorc has a stam spamable. My stamblade has several mag skills. Hybridisation happened.

All that said - I mostly care about PvE when it comes to beam and if somehow PvP is a problem (honestly... how? all the complaints I see are usually about sorc, NB, or ballgroups), then PLEASE just start balancing the skill differently between the two modes.

ceruulean · April 20

randconfig wrote: »

WrathOfInnos wrote: »

Agreed, 5 second channels are not engaging gameplay. In my opinion, Fatecarver removes all the potential fun of Arcanist. Now we will effectively see the same thing on Templar. Really hoping this does not go live.

Disagree, the change is needed because it's a broken execute on a stamplar, despite being designed for a magicka templar. With the execute threshold being 50%, and it being 1.8s in channel time, you barely use magicka and can one-shot people with <20k max health when they're at 100% hp.

Besides, you can still end the channel early by tapping block or roll dodging, and it's arguably a buff to sustain since you don't pay the full ability cost when you have to cancel early.

Also I just gotta say, it feels bad to have to spam press the button when it's a channeled ability, which makes light attack weaving feel awkward.

Wow, your marker for whether a skill is balanced, is whether it can 1 shot a 20k HP PvE build noob? A subpar NB can kill those with just snipe, too.

Beam does not execute players who block or CC the templar. And the amount of easy mode sorcerers who facetank with hardened ward, while self healing out of execute range, is silly.

Also the overall cost of the skill has gone up on PvE. Instead of costing 3k mag for 3 ticks, it costs 1k per second, but you have to guess when to cancel it early to get the most ticks, and bash weave. Alright, let's make the rotation more complicated for hardcore PvE players except you pay the price for bash canceling too early because the ticks don't line up 1 per second like instant cast skills.... So basically, it's not even about the skill level of the player. All templar players who want to use the beam are screwed by this change.