[old thread remastered] AoE Cap and Zergtrains. Thoughts to date?

Hypertionb14_ESO

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

TheFalcon19 wrote: »

How can people not realize what would happen without the aoe cap?

The two main reasons against the aoe cap is just not valid:

1. wrecking balls exist because of the aoe cap:
yes this is true, but thanks to the aoe cap there's a limit to their damage and their individual ultimate regen, so they usually fall against numbers and they are not that hard to wipe with a smaller group if you use a proper tactic.
Now the lack of an aoe cap would give them an even bigger reason to exist since all of their aoes would hit everyone all the time. Imagine that damage output, and the fact that their dots would tick on all enemies at once, so one elemental ring->ultimate ready->infinite ultimate. You think it's bad now? Imagine pvp where everyone in the wrecking ball group is spamming infinte batswarm.

2. no aoe cap would promote solo play and individual skill:
No it wouldn't, because you could just sneak into large groups of enemies, spam aoe and infinite ultimates and you would probably win. That's no skill, that's just stupid. I mean you people call wrecking balls 'noobs who spam 2 buttons and win', yet technically you would become a 'noob who spams two buttons and wins'. Believe me, the average pvper would hate these solo aoe spammers just as much (or even more) than they hate wrecking balls.

You might say that this is just the worst case scenario and it probably wouldn't happen, but there's one thing the players of eso have proven over and over again: if there's something to abuse they will find it and abuse it. People saw that light armor and staves=higher damage and better survivability, now almost 95% players use that.
If people saw that aoe spamming=even higher damage then now, plus instant ultimates and almost garanteed survival, almost everyone would become either part of a wrecking ball or a ganker who spams Shooting Stars on groups. So we would be back to the same problem people have with pvp now, only worse.

So yeah with the current game mechanics no aoe cap is no good.

Now, if ultimate gains were different and if all skills would increase cost by 50% on every repeated cast that would be a different story.

1. There isn't a limit to their damage, Only way to stop their damage is to stack like them. You're also not wiping them with a smaller group either. Lets talk about that damage output you're talking about as well, unless you're stacking like them..Their Damage output will be the same... If you're not stacking like them, then you receive the same amount of damage as always. In otherwords, if 24 people cast 24 impulses on a group of 6, all 6 of those players are taking 24 impulses. Removing the Caps would allow that group of 6 to sneak up onto that 24 and potentially wipe a large amount of them if that 24 were stacking which is how it should be. Finally.. Ultimate in this game is capped based on Skill use. Which means that if your Impulse could hit 24 people, you'd still not get anymore ultimate then if it hit 6 people...The current cap for most abilities is 15. Now there was a bug recently that i believe was fixed that basically allowed each individual dot of fire ring to also do 15 ultimate. But that was changed.

2. Again, Ultimates have a cap..so that's wrong. As for your chances of a solo player sneaking into a Large Group..Most likely after groups were wiped a few times they wouldn't stack anymore like Herp a Derps outside a keep or tower...At least that's how it worked in DAOC. Rewarding bad players for stacking is not my idea of rewarding skill.

AOE caps would remove wrecking ball groups, aka zerg balls from the game because those groups would be ganked in seconds if they stacked.

Your fears are pretty much hilariously wrong...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2BqTrX8zVk&list=UUXpX7JMwRXtczc5GTrIYRIw

you completly ignored his points... completly.. arguements like yours are basically proof of the one sided thought process

on point 1, AOE CAP is a limit on the balls, just as it is on you.. each person in the ball can only hit 6 people, or more depending on the skill. The differance is the simply fact that greater numbers will always be greater than lesser numbers..

its simple math, 20 > 1

on point 2, thats how it was before the change and people complained ENDLESSLY about it... so yes it is right... Without the AOE cap a single person could easily gank entire zergs, and we have proof of how easily they can based on the history of this game..

your point about stacking in a tower? the removal of a cap would do nothing to combat this...



The thing is, reverting the AOE cap away would effectively combat AOE balls, as 1 or 2 skilled players could break a few before dying themselves. but this is what ZOS has done to make their game a even playing field for all players, not just the ones that dedicate themselves to it mindlessly in order to say they have "skillz"

Xsorus

Hypertionb14_ESO wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

TheFalcon19 wrote: »

How can people not realize what would happen without the aoe cap?

The two main reasons against the aoe cap is just not valid:

1. wrecking balls exist because of the aoe cap:
yes this is true, but thanks to the aoe cap there's a limit to their damage and their individual ultimate regen, so they usually fall against numbers and they are not that hard to wipe with a smaller group if you use a proper tactic.
Now the lack of an aoe cap would give them an even bigger reason to exist since all of their aoes would hit everyone all the time. Imagine that damage output, and the fact that their dots would tick on all enemies at once, so one elemental ring->ultimate ready->infinite ultimate. You think it's bad now? Imagine pvp where everyone in the wrecking ball group is spamming infinte batswarm.

2. no aoe cap would promote solo play and individual skill:
No it wouldn't, because you could just sneak into large groups of enemies, spam aoe and infinite ultimates and you would probably win. That's no skill, that's just stupid. I mean you people call wrecking balls 'noobs who spam 2 buttons and win', yet technically you would become a 'noob who spams two buttons and wins'. Believe me, the average pvper would hate these solo aoe spammers just as much (or even more) than they hate wrecking balls.

You might say that this is just the worst case scenario and it probably wouldn't happen, but there's one thing the players of eso have proven over and over again: if there's something to abuse they will find it and abuse it. People saw that light armor and staves=higher damage and better survivability, now almost 95% players use that.
If people saw that aoe spamming=even higher damage then now, plus instant ultimates and almost garanteed survival, almost everyone would become either part of a wrecking ball or a ganker who spams Shooting Stars on groups. So we would be back to the same problem people have with pvp now, only worse.

So yeah with the current game mechanics no aoe cap is no good.

Now, if ultimate gains were different and if all skills would increase cost by 50% on every repeated cast that would be a different story.

1. There isn't a limit to their damage, Only way to stop their damage is to stack like them. You're also not wiping them with a smaller group either. Lets talk about that damage output you're talking about as well, unless you're stacking like them..Their Damage output will be the same... If you're not stacking like them, then you receive the same amount of damage as always. In otherwords, if 24 people cast 24 impulses on a group of 6, all 6 of those players are taking 24 impulses. Removing the Caps would allow that group of 6 to sneak up onto that 24 and potentially wipe a large amount of them if that 24 were stacking which is how it should be. Finally.. Ultimate in this game is capped based on Skill use. Which means that if your Impulse could hit 24 people, you'd still not get anymore ultimate then if it hit 6 people...The current cap for most abilities is 15. Now there was a bug recently that i believe was fixed that basically allowed each individual dot of fire ring to also do 15 ultimate. But that was changed.

2. Again, Ultimates have a cap..so that's wrong. As for your chances of a solo player sneaking into a Large Group..Most likely after groups were wiped a few times they wouldn't stack anymore like Herp a Derps outside a keep or tower...At least that's how it worked in DAOC. Rewarding bad players for stacking is not my idea of rewarding skill.

AOE caps would remove wrecking ball groups, aka zerg balls from the game because those groups would be ganked in seconds if they stacked.

Your fears are pretty much hilariously wrong...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2BqTrX8zVk&list=UUXpX7JMwRXtczc5GTrIYRIw

you completly ignored his points... completly.. arguements like yours are basically proof of the one sided thought process

on point 1, AOE CAP is a limit on the balls, just as it is on you.. each person in the ball can only hit 6 people, or more depending on the skill. The differance is the simply fact that greater numbers will always be greater than lesser numbers..

its simple math, 20 > 1

on point 2, thats how it was before the change and people complained ENDLESSLY about it... so yes it is right... Without the AOE cap a single person could easily gank entire zergs, and we have proof of how easily they can based on the history of this game..

your point about stacking in a tower? the removal of a cap would do nothing to combat this...



The thing is, reverting the AOE cap away would effectively combat AOE balls, as 1 or 2 skilled players could break a few before dying themselves. but this is what ZOS has done to make their game a even playing field for all players, not just the ones that dedicate themselves to it mindlessly in order to say they have "skillz"

A. What part about unless you stack like them, and have more then 6, There damage isn't limited? Unless you're specifically stacking like them, You will always take all 24 Impulses if you have 6 or less people. So the only thing AOE caps benefit is people who Stack in Zerg Balls....It doesn't benefit small groups, It doesn't benefit zergs that aren't stacking...It only benefits Zerg Balls.

B. No, people complained endlessly about Batswarm, which was Capped, and was powerful not because of Caps, but because you could get it down to virtually no cost and the fact that its a high damage PBAE lifetap. The only other ability in the game that wasn't capped that people complained a lot about was Dark Talons, and again that had nothing to do with it not having a Cap, and everything to do with its Radius and the fact you got no immunity for dodge rolling out of it. Does Dark Talons give you trouble anymore? Cause it certainly don't give me any trouble.

Also Stacking outside a tower was in reference to people getting ready outside a keep, Not to sitting inside a Tower with a bunch of Oil Pots. That's countered by either knocking down the Tower....Or Learning how to run past all the oil.

Also are you claiming that ZOS put the cap in place to make Herp a Derp feels better about themselves for losing in a video game?

firstdecan

hamon wrote: »

firstdecan wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

firstdecan wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

What really bugs me about the AoE caps is that their implementation has changed pvp from somewhat realistic siege warfare into completely unrealistic train-bombing zerg groups.

If your AoE is capped at 6 targets, this encourages large groups of players to stack on top of each other as a defense to it. If you have 30 people in a 5 meter circle, you know that only 6 of them are going to get hit by that incoming AoE attack.

Train bombing groups are no fun at all, and they turn pvp into a cheesefest - a cheap tactic that outperforms all other playstyles simply because game mechanics say so.


The AoE caps need to be removed entirely. Let one AoE spell hit 50-100 players if they're within range. This will force players to spread out, it will encourage a more realistic battlefield, and it will wind up creating more spread out, small scale fights where Melee builds stand a chance.

How exactly will this help mêlée builds? All it will do is encourage increased use of AoE abilities, increase the use of "stick and dress" builds, and make mêlée even less effective. No AoE cap is going to force people to spread out, you'll just see them continuing to zerg and spamming AoEs.

The cap is fine. It isn't there to prevent a smaller group from fighting a larger group. At a 6:1 ratio, 4 people can affect a fully formed raid (assuming equal distribution, which will not happen), although realistically you wouldn't want to be outnumbered more than 4 or 3 to one. The AoE cap is there to prevent large zergs from spamming it and completely decimating anything in its path.

Queue the l2p responses in 3, 2, 1......

You really dont understand how this works, do you?

{snip}

I understand that mechanic. You want the ability that vamps used to have where a single player could walk into a crowd of enemies, spam one or two abilities with impunity and call it 'skills' or 'strategy.' You have very verbosely explained one consequence of the AoE cap, and due to a myopic preconception completely failed to understand any other ramification of the mechanic. What one player or a small number of players can do, a large number of players can do with much greater effect. If you don't think stacking 20 unlimited AoEs is more effective than stacking 2 or 3 unlimited AoEs, you should start having someone else balance your checkbook.

.

were you even in pvp when the vamp batswarm thing was the big issue? if you were you would realise it wasnt the cap per-se that was the issue there. it was that while in batswarm you cant be targetted. plus with ultimate cost reduction stacking it made batswarm pretty much spammable. the lack of cap just meant that you could kill more folk , but the problem was mainly that folk using it could spam it and couldnt be killed.

batswarm is still a nighmare cos you cant be targetted. yes the cap means its not as lethal , and ultimate cant be gained as fast. but the issue then wasnt the lack of a cap.

I've been playing since early beta. Apparently you missed the full vamp raids that would do nothing but spam the bats. The point wasn't about the bats specifically, the point was that unlimited AoEs will not stop the zerging. Many AoEs can be used to steamroll through, think about a swarm of DKs spamming talons or inhale.

Could a well placed uncapped AoE break up a zerg? Yes it could. It doesn't change the fact that that same AoE will be much more powerful when spammed by 20 people instead of a small number. And the way the cap currently is, you can still use AoEs against 6x as many players as your group is facing. A smaller group can still hold off a larger group, I've done it, there's simply limits. PvP in Cyrodiil wasn't created with the specific intention that every battle would be a recreation of Thermopylae, superior numbers is a basic strategy that's normally very successful.

Changing the caps will not have a positive effect. Cyrodiil is meant to be a large scale battlefield, if you're upset about getting killed by superior numbers (which does frustrate me from time to time), play a less populated campaign, or be patient until Zen rolls out the smaller scale PvP. Undoing the AoE caps will just make zergs stronger.

Breg_Magol

Wifeaggro13 wrote: »

Careful planning good strategy would trump numbers much like real life.
Have you ever heard the term "i would rather have army of sheep led by a lion then an army of lions led by a sheep" quote Genghis Kahn .

Superior numbers over time always win ... eventually (just challenging the general assumption of your assertion).

While individual battles may show the smaller technologically superior group to have the advantage initially, overtime conflict becomes a long war of attrition ... it appears to be a rule with asymmetric warfare.

BTW, sheep far out number lions.

To add to this I think there should be a cap of how many players can all target a single player at the same time during close quarter fighting. E.g if a large group of people are attacking you (close quarters .. so say with stick or fists), only 3 - 4 people can effectively inflict damage on you; while the rest will be waiting in line to get a hit on you @ the risk of smacking their own side in the melee. This is exacerbated when we consider the space that it takes to effectively wield a weapon .. unless all combatants agree beforehand they're just going to 'poke' (E.g. Ransack for Sword & Board).

In ESO however, as long as your pipper is on target and you're in range you can effect damage. I like to call it the ESO Bank Effect ... where you just have to get your pipper on the bank teller .. even if you can't see them .. and be able to complete the bank transaction (mind you .. this is a good feature as far as banking mechanics go!

So my take is ..
1. AoE caps are realistic and is good thing .. as long as it makes sense (they should target the 6 enemy within the immediate range around player .. not sure if this is what already happens).
2. AoE in revers .. change how players (or monsters) are able to all do damage to you ALL AT THE SAME TIME! Because this is unrealistic as well.

Breg_Magol

Daethz wrote: »

Fact is, AoE, should not be capped.
It is an AREA of EFFECT, not a area with some effect. Change it or rename it a AOSE spell.

Realistically what constitutes an "area" still has to be "defined" .. so Area of Effect can be defined to mean any number that 'they' decide it will.

Cyberdown

why don't they just reduce the size of aoes in pvp? Rather than capping it.

Seems stupid that I can lay my wall of element in pvp and have it hit 50 people and only 6 are effected by it...that doesn't seem right...

If zeni wants to force small fights...they have the tech to do it, they call that instancing...

The whole point of an open map like in this game is the epic and huge fights that occur from it.

Locking an aoe to a few targets, regardless of size is the wrong thing to do.

You mean to tell me that if I drop my storm atronoch into a mass of enemies his aoe and stun will hit only 6 people?

If im getting chased down and I drop my aoe root only 6 will get hit? Again...not a good idea.

Why not just go fill *** and have players only effected by a total of 6 attacks regardless of how many people are hitting him?

What does this accomplish other than pissing most people off?

Heres an idea, if you want better stability and performance...CAP EFFECTS RENDERED! That's right give me the option to only show raid member effects. Give me an option to reduce drawn skills on my screen.

Xsorus

firstdecan wrote: »

hamon wrote: »

firstdecan wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

firstdecan wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

What really bugs me about the AoE caps is that their implementation has changed pvp from somewhat realistic siege warfare into completely unrealistic train-bombing zerg groups.

If your AoE is capped at 6 targets, this encourages large groups of players to stack on top of each other as a defense to it. If you have 30 people in a 5 meter circle, you know that only 6 of them are going to get hit by that incoming AoE attack.

Train bombing groups are no fun at all, and they turn pvp into a cheesefest - a cheap tactic that outperforms all other playstyles simply because game mechanics say so.


The AoE caps need to be removed entirely. Let one AoE spell hit 50-100 players if they're within range. This will force players to spread out, it will encourage a more realistic battlefield, and it will wind up creating more spread out, small scale fights where Melee builds stand a chance.

How exactly will this help mêlée builds? All it will do is encourage increased use of AoE abilities, increase the use of "stick and dress" builds, and make mêlée even less effective. No AoE cap is going to force people to spread out, you'll just see them continuing to zerg and spamming AoEs.

The cap is fine. It isn't there to prevent a smaller group from fighting a larger group. At a 6:1 ratio, 4 people can affect a fully formed raid (assuming equal distribution, which will not happen), although realistically you wouldn't want to be outnumbered more than 4 or 3 to one. The AoE cap is there to prevent large zergs from spamming it and completely decimating anything in its path.

Queue the l2p responses in 3, 2, 1......

You really dont understand how this works, do you?

{snip}

I understand that mechanic. You want the ability that vamps used to have where a single player could walk into a crowd of enemies, spam one or two abilities with impunity and call it 'skills' or 'strategy.' You have very verbosely explained one consequence of the AoE cap, and due to a myopic preconception completely failed to understand any other ramification of the mechanic. What one player or a small number of players can do, a large number of players can do with much greater effect. If you don't think stacking 20 unlimited AoEs is more effective than stacking 2 or 3 unlimited AoEs, you should start having someone else balance your checkbook.

.

were you even in pvp when the vamp batswarm thing was the big issue? if you were you would realise it wasnt the cap per-se that was the issue there. it was that while in batswarm you cant be targetted. plus with ultimate cost reduction stacking it made batswarm pretty much spammable. the lack of cap just meant that you could kill more folk , but the problem was mainly that folk using it could spam it and couldnt be killed.

batswarm is still a nighmare cos you cant be targetted. yes the cap means its not as lethal , and ultimate cant be gained as fast. but the issue then wasnt the lack of a cap.

I've been playing since early beta. Apparently you missed the full vamp raids that would do nothing but spam the bats. The point wasn't about the bats specifically, the point was that unlimited AoEs will not stop the zerging. Many AoEs can be used to steamroll through, think about a swarm of DKs spamming talons or inhale.

Could a well placed uncapped AoE break up a zerg? Yes it could. It doesn't change the fact that that same AoE will be much more powerful when spammed by 20 people instead of a small number. And the way the cap currently is, you can still use AoEs against 6x as many players as your group is facing. A smaller group can still hold off a larger group, I've done it, there's simply limits. PvP in Cyrodiil wasn't created with the specific intention that every battle would be a recreation of Thermopylae, superior numbers is a basic strategy that's normally very successful.

Changing the caps will not have a positive effect. Cyrodiil is meant to be a large scale battlefield, if you're upset about getting killed by superior numbers (which does frustrate me from time to time), play a less populated campaign, or be patient until Zen rolls out the smaller scale PvP. Undoing the AoE caps will just make zergs stronger.

A. Bats was Capped, So was Inhale. Also Inhale is pretty awful even uncapped.

B. Saying AOE Caps would be stronger when spammed by 20 people instead of a Smaller number is also a hilariously bag argument. Since its stronger right now..Only the 20 have a mechanic built into the game that makes them have more effective health then 6 people just by being near one another.

C. Saying Cyrodiil is meant to be a Large Scale Battlefield thus Caps should stay is also a hilariously bad argument. You can still zerg without caps, You just can't stack like a herp a derp.

And saying AOE undoing aoe caps will make zerg stronger? rofl....They're already immune to AOE, the only thing removing caps would do is give a chance for smaller groups to blow them up.

dragnier

I think some character AoE skills should have caps and others should not. For example, Impulse is a PBAoE and should hit everything inside its radius because it is like a wave in all directions. Similar skills to this would be ground DoTAoE skills, if they are dumb enough to stand inside a fire, they should get burned so to speak.

However, other skills such as Volley that are ranged ground targeted AoE should have a cap. They only have so many projectiles and should only hit a number of targets equal to the number of projectiles. Basically, any AoE that uses projectiles, except siege, should only hit a certain number of targets BUT they should also hit each individual target much harder than the PBAoE skills hit their infinite in range targets.

Xsorus

Volley flat out needs a buff...So caps are the least of its worries.

Arsenic_Touch

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Volley flat out needs a nerf...So caps are the least of its worries.

Are you trying to be funny? volley needing a nerf? ....

Maragar

Running around in a big blob aoe everything is not pvp.... its a joke..... aoe should hit friends and enemy alike!

Xsorus

Arsenic_Touch wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Volley flat out needs a nerf...So caps are the least of its worries.

Are you trying to be funny? volley needing a nerf? ....

Blah..I meant to say buff

I'll edit that lol

Welka

Please forgive my nooby question. I haven't played pvp in any MMO but I've followed this topic. Would not friendly fire of some extent prevent zerballing?

Arsenic_Touch

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Arsenic_Touch wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Volley flat out needs a nerf...So caps are the least of its worries.

Are you trying to be funny? volley needing a nerf? ....

Blah..I meant to say buff

I'll edit that lol

Okay, had me worried for a second.

Kego

Uncapped AOE DMG in Eso wouldn't work great. There are not the right mechanics to begin with.

Some mentioned DAOC, the reason uncapped AOE worked in that game, was bound to the fragil casters. For those of you, that are not familiar with the DAOC System:

Anything could completly interrupt your casting, there has been no Instant AOE DMG, you had to cast for~1.5 to 2.5 Seconds for every AOE. During that time you could get interrupt by Melee Hits, Debuffs, just say anything that effects you for 100%. The only chance to cast all out, was with MOC, an PvP unlocked Ability.

Description:
Re-Use Timer: 10 Minutes
Grants a 100% bonus to avoid being interrupted by any form of attack when casting a spell. The effect of the spell cast will be reduced to the percentages listed.
Effect:
+ Rank 1: 25%
+ Rank 2: 35%
+ Rank 3: 50%
+ Rank 4: 60%
+ Rank 5: 75%

If the AOE cap is removed, than EVERY AOE in this Game should get a casttime around 2 Seconds.

Holycannoli

I hope everyone is sending well-worded /feedback ingame about this, including relevant links to forum threads like this one and video from youtube.

They won't hear any of this otherwise.

Kego wrote: »

Uncapped AOE DMG in Eso wouldn't work great. There are not the right mechanics to begin with.

Some mentioned DAOC, the reason uncapped AOE worked in that game, was bound to the fragil casters. For those of you, that are not familiar with the DAOC System:

Anything could completly interrupt your casting, there has been no Instant AOE DMG, you had to cast for~1.5 to 2.5 Seconds for every AOE. During that time you could get interrupt by Melee Hits, Debuffs, just say anything that effects you for 100%. The only chance to cast all out, was with MOC, an PvP unlocked Ability.

Description:
Re-Use Timer: 10 Minutes
Grants a 100% bonus to avoid being interrupted by any form of attack when casting a spell. The effect of the spell cast will be reduced to the percentages listed.
Effect:
+ Rank 1: 25%
+ Rank 2: 35%
+ Rank 3: 50%
+ Rank 4: 60%
+ Rank 5: 75%

If the AOE cap is removed, than EVERY AOE in this Game should get a casttime around 2 Seconds.

DAOC didn't have Negate Magic Yes you can run out of the negate bubble but that's what we want - for people to spread out instead of cheeseball in tight zerg clumps.

Remember how fun Cyrodiil was in beta when people didn't know of the AOE cap? According ZOS there always was a cap, only certain skills didn't have one, so we played like there was no cap. We spread out. We avoided AOE when we could. We broke through walls in multiple locations, and often broke through the outer gate with a ram as well. We tried to aim our AOE to hit the most amount of targets which wasn't always easy as the enemy was being smart and spreading out themselves.

TehMagnus

As a PVP player, I despise the large zerg groups that just move around spaming pulsar. So you're telling me that a Barrier can counteract that sad type of playing with AOE cap and actually force those players to use their skill & do something else than just run packed spaming pulsar/Elemental Ring?

Good . Ty ZOS.

Mondo

Hm AOE spamming was everytime a sign for skill in PVP like it the way it is

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO

Welka wrote: »

Please forgive my nooby question. I haven't played pvp in any MMO but I've followed this topic. Would not friendly fire of some extent prevent zerballing?

Yes, to some extent.
It would stop self centered aoes from being used in a group, and it would prevent two blobs from stacking on top of each other and stay at range.

But zerg balling would remain the dominant strategy, as it still gives at random an invulnerability to individual players. As a group, it means a passive mis chance that increases with numbers.

For instance, 12 players have 50% chances of not geting hit by an aoe.
And 12 players are a small group in ESO's context.
For a large group, like 60, that's 90% chances of not being hit.

Other factors make it even worst, like the lack of player collision, lack of friendly fire and more importantly, the smart heal mechanic.
It creates a gap of controlability between inflicting damage at random and always healing the character needing it the most.

Beating a blob is binary: Either you can out dps its smart heals, or you can't.
There is no middle ground where you can at least inflict some damage, hence encouraging aoe spamming even more.

Without aoe caps, larger groups will always win, and so they should, but they'll do so with consequences. Every skirmish would have them lose some troops, and eventually, they'll be weakened to the point of being taken down.

CapuchinSeven

I hate zergs, I hate player based AOE.

I'd like quick to deploy siege that hurts players, scales with the level of the person it's hitting AND hits harder per person the more people are hit in the single AOE hit.

ie if a group is all balled up and you hit 30 of them, 30 people are going to be dead.

That same shot only hitting 2 people because those 30 people spread out does very little damage.

Welka

Yes, I do understand now how aoe cap can lead to abuse. I was watching the video on the first page and tbh honest, this isn't what I was expecting or hoping the PVP would be. I'm keeping PVP for later when I can play with mates, and one of mine told me it was quite strategic. But seeing this and coming myself from console and many hours on Battlefield (BC2, BF3 and BF4), it just reminded me of the exploit of many medics stacking in a corridor, shooting anything that moved and self healing/reviving each other, making them nearly impossible to dislodge. However, if the opposing team was skilled and organised, a breakthrough was always possible. So, in a way, exploit + skill and organisation lead to immovable zergballs and seeing the video, it's a shame to see such a mess and I do understand the frustration stated in here.

Plus, it doesn't seem logic that an AoE is capped, it goes completely against the principle of the AoE. For more realism, I think that uncapped AoE and friendly fire is in order. Not only would it stop zergballs, but it would force players to think twice, coordonate and play with strategy rather than just rushing in head down.

I will also add that imbalance in the stamina builds (I see it all the time as my char is a redguard DK full stamina and max weapon crit) adds to the issue. But saying that, I don't mind seeing battle mages in skirts and broom being OP with spells, that's how I always imagined mages, very powerful. But they need to be more glassy. Taking my example again, I started my redguard with a tanky build, but ended up having hardly any DPS, so fights against a mob of three were long and difficult. I respecced my char to full stamina, medium armor and high weapon crit for my bow and dual wielding. I was shocked to see my armor stats only drop from heavy armor at roughly 1500 armor points to still about 1100 in medium armor. So I was a lot more effective as a DPS build because I was dealing a lot of damage but still not taking much damage with a high armore value dispite using medium armor. I don't know the armor stats for light armor, but my view is that if a DPS manages to get close enough to a Mage in robe, the DPS should beat the hell up of the Mage. But from what I read in other topics, it isn't the case.

So the fact mages are not as glassy as they should be and still dealing at lot of damages, stamina builds being slightly disadvantaged adds to the issue.

Anyways, I'm a bit off topic now. I do hope ZOS will look into it and rectify. Let people just not get overheated on subject. Shouting isn't the only way the get heard. The game is only a few months old and is very promising.

briandivisionb16_ESO

Cyberdown wrote: »

why don't they just reduce the size of aoes in pvp? Rather than capping it.

Seems stupid that I can lay my wall of element in pvp and have it hit 50 people and only 6 are effected by it...that doesn't seem right...

If zeni wants to force small fights...they have the tech to do it, they call that instancing...

The whole point of an open map like in this game is the epic and huge fights that occur from it.

Locking an aoe to a few targets, regardless of size is the wrong thing to do.

You mean to tell me that if I drop my storm atronoch into a mass of enemies his aoe and stun will hit only 6 people?

If im getting chased down and I drop my aoe root only 6 will get hit? Again...not a good idea.

Why not just go fill *** and have players only effected by a total of 6 attacks regardless of how many people are hitting him?

What does this accomplish other than pissing most people off?

Heres an idea, if you want better stability and performance...CAP EFFECTS RENDERED! That's right give me the option to only show raid member effects. Give me an option to reduce drawn skills on my screen.

*CLAPS* TOO RIGHT! EPIC POST!
[moderated]

dcincali

Remove the AOE cap, reduce the radius. Problem solved.

Kego

Problem solved, bigger Zerg will now always win the final battle @ Keep Flag

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO

Kego wrote: »

Problem solved, bigger Zerg will now always win the final battle @ Keep Flag

Like they already do, but without cap, now they would have a chance of losing.

Moltier

firstdecan wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

Could a well placed uncapped AoE break up a zerg? Yes it could. It doesn't change the fact that that same AoE will be much more powerful when spammed by 20 people instead of a small number. And the way the cap currently is, you can still use AoEs against 6x as many players as your group is facing. A smaller group can still hold off a larger group, I've done it, there's simply limits. PvP in Cyrodiil wasn't created with the specific intention that every battle would be a recreation of Thermopylae, superior numbers is a basic strategy that's normally very successful.

Non cares if the zerg blobs AoE will be uncapped, since their enemys will spread out... unless they are hitting another blob. Then both of them dies in a second, which would be funny to watch!

Kos

I agree AOE should have no cap. Make the area smaller or whatever, but there should be no limit on how many targets are affected. It's illogical and against AOE concept.

TehMagnus

AOE group?=====> Meat Bag Catapult | Archers | don't go near them untill they get frustrated of running & killing nothing. Last time we saw AD doing that we just waited in keep for them to siege it & try to capture it. They couldn't because: No Skill. As soon as they set up sieges & stop running, they got destroyed since they have to keep stacked to be useful. We just split our forces in two so they had to choose which one to engage.

dragnier

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Volley flat out needs a buff...So caps are the least of its worries.

Perhaps you missed the part where I said skills like Volley should deal more damage per hit even though they should have a cap while skills like Impulse should hit for a decent amount less but hit everything in range. Essentially, the damage for Volley only gets divided by say six while Impulse gets divided by a variable number with a minimum damage level that puts it somewhat below things like Volley on the same number of targets.

At that point, the only reason to use Impulse is for more targets than Volley. It cuts out PBAoE spamming because they become situationally better than target capped Volley type skills only when there are more enemies in range than the cap. At the same time, Impulse damage should still be high enough not to make it useless, however.

ArRashid

I never understood why they restricted the number of targets anyway.
It just makes no sense, whatever way you're looking at it. For PvE, you're getting flooded by dozens of trash mobs without a way to burn them down (eaten by mudcrabs, what a horrible fate), in PvP it literally encourages zerging, because you are literally safer in numbers than solo. WHICH.IS.BAD.

Just because noobs can't think of any tactics other than zerging... don't mind them. Battlefields should be spread out. They've always been. IRL you could stab a friend more likely than a foe, in practically any situation other than a tight formation (roman turtles, greek phalanxes, etc).

Instead of making people spread out out of fear of being hit by AoEs, you made people feel safe in numbers because they are LESS LIKELY to get hit by ANYTHING. You literally can't hit anyone twice if you're against a group of enemies. Bigger crowd wins.

Not to mention all those conditions are significantly slowing down AoE skills to the point when they take 2-3 seconds till they finally activate - like Talons. They literally take forever to finally decide who's gonna get rooted.. and by the time they root someone, about 2.5-3 seconds out of 4 second duration is OVER and the root is gone faster than you realize you're rooted..