Fixing Sorceres in 1.6

Vahrokh

Shunravi wrote: »

I really wish people would take the time to actually do research instead of basing their perceptions entirely arround a name.

Yeah we are going to do like in my country, where in order to avoid sexes discrimination they don't call "mother" and "father" but an aseptic "parent 1" and "parent 2".

Soon in ESO, we'll have:

Class 1
Class 2
Class 3
Class 4

Class names don't matter, not even to suggest a class flavour.

Shunravi

Vahrokh wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

I really wish people would take the time to actually do research instead of basing their perceptions entirely arround a name.

Yeah we are going to do like in my country, where in order to avoid sexes discrimination they don't call "mother" and "father" but an aseptic "parent 1" and "parent 2".

Soon in ESO, we'll have:

Class 1
Class 2
Class 3
Class 4

Class names don't matter, not even to suggest a class flavour.

There should not even be classes!

And if you are a TES fan, sorcerer should suggest a summoner/defensive caster. Which summarizes the majority of ESO sorcerer skills. If you want to base your perceptions on something, base it on that.

But sure, continue break away bits and pieces of a whole description or argument to support your argument. I will continue to bring the full concept to bear against you.

Fayaburn

Shunravi wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

Fayaburn wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

Nightreaver wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

I don't see a minimum range on those ranged abilities.

I don't see one on Bow abilities either and yet I've never seen anyone using a bow for melee.

Yes, but sorc skills don't have a passive that increases damage based on distance to target. Bow does.

Trolling at a whole new level...

In all seriousness though, everyone is so set on sorcs being casters, even though they have very few casting abilities. If sorc abilities did indeed scale with distance, I would be inclined to agree that it's intended for a ranged caster class. But this is not the case. The skills are effective at any range below max range. Heck, I would even argue that by using lightning form, it can be potentially easier to execute a target because disintegrate procs off of lightning damage. Which is something lightning form has a good many chances of.

As I stated in a previous post, I do not care whereas a Sorcerer should be using Magicka/Stamina, Ranged/Melee, Pets/No pets...
What I am concerned about is having only 2 out of 15 class skills useful for a DPS build (3 if you insist on playing melee with Thundering presence). And as I mentionned before, the passives of 2 out of 3 sorc skill lines are barely useful at the moment.
Those two things combined cuts a huge chunk out of the whole class and will need more that a few buffs on Pets to get Sorcerers back in the "well thought out classes" category.

So please drop the sterile discussion about which playstyle a Sorcerer should have and focus on the true class problems.

Shunravi

Fayaburn wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

Fayaburn wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

Nightreaver wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

I don't see a minimum range on those ranged abilities.

I don't see one on Bow abilities either and yet I've never seen anyone using a bow for melee.

Yes, but sorc skills don't have a passive that increases damage based on distance to target. Bow does.

Trolling at a whole new level...

In all seriousness though, everyone is so set on sorcs being casters, even though they have very few casting abilities. If sorc abilities did indeed scale with distance, I would be inclined to agree that it's intended for a ranged caster class. But this is not the case. The skills are effective at any range below max range. Heck, I would even argue that by using lightning form, it can be potentially easier to execute a target because disintegrate procs off of lightning damage. Which is something lightning form has a good many chances of.

As I stated in a previous post, I do not care whereas a Sorcerer should be using Magicka/Stamina, Ranged/Melee, Pets/No pets...
What I am concerned about is having only 2 out of 15 class skills useful for a DPS build (3 if you insist on playing melee with Thundering presence). And as I mentionned before, the passives of 2 out of 3 sorc skill lines are barely useful at the moment.
Those two things combined cuts a huge chunk out of the whole class and will need more that a few buffs on Pets to get Sorcerers back in the "well thought out classes" category.

So please drop the sterile discussion about which playstyle a Sorcerer should have and focus on the true class problems.

A agree with your argument, and was not addressing your perspective. I am just sick and tired of the argument that I was going against.

The class has some real issues in basic design when it comes to playing the different roles.

For instance, I have heard that the passive 'blood magic' does not work, or works inconsistently. This was supposed to be the sustain solution for sorc tanks, and would be 'the other heal.' If frags proc did not carry that dps loss casting time penalty, dark magic would have it's own semi consistent (low) form of sustain.

I believe they said that they are buffing pet aoe resistance so they are more viable. This is probably one of the best changes for the summoning line. There still is the problem of valuable bar space with the line though...

Also, curse. I heard they are changing it so it buffs pet damage, but not too much else. Will curse still do it's own damage? And more importantly, will one sorcs curse overwrite another? That is one of the biggest things I'm worried about....

Stormcalling could be considered to be pretty solid as is. But I'm not so sure about their change to surge. If you want to go caster, you do risk that sustain loss. Are they tightening up frags, and are saying that with the blood magic passive will be the sustain? Because that seems.... weak.

One of the more interesting questions I have is about the passives, and if they are making a balance pass over them. One of the strongest things sorcerers have is their passives. These will give the class an edge in spellcrafting, so I hope they don't get nerfed.

Derra

Shunravi wrote: »

I keep doing this thing where I say they shouldn't be caster, when that isn't my arguargument at all. I should really try to improve on that... If it didn't spark such good discussions.

I don't care what the name sorcerer means in other media. Given the chance I would have a good long talk with the guy who named and based them after the morrowind and oblivion version of sorcerers. In this game, they are very clearly based off the TES archetype, not the classic fantasy glass cannon the name indicates.

What should have helped to tip you off about casting not being exclusive to sorcerers is things like 'play the way you want' and 'any class can fill any role.'

I really wish people would take the time to actually do research instead of basing their perceptions entirely arround a name.

In fact, they are not. Just read up the class description eso gives (yes, you can look at the class description of the game we´re all playing instead of a definition of an 8 year old game) of a sorcerer.
It is very much closer to the sorcerer found in other media than the morrowind and oblivion version.

One could argue you are the one with the perception problem as you base your opinion about the class around some fixed idea in your head that is somehow related to morrowind.

Shunravi

Derra wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

I keep doing this thing where I say they shouldn't be caster, when that isn't my arguargument at all. I should really try to improve on that... If it didn't spark such good discussions.

I don't care what the name sorcerer means in other media. Given the chance I would have a good long talk with the guy who named and based them after the morrowind and oblivion version of sorcerers. In this game, they are very clearly based off the TES archetype, not the classic fantasy glass cannon the name indicates.

What should have helped to tip you off about casting not being exclusive to sorcerers is things like 'play the way you want' and 'any class can fill any role.'

I really wish people would take the time to actually do research instead of basing their perceptions entirely arround a name.

In fact, they are not. Just read up the class description eso gives (yes, you can look at the class description of the game we´re all playing instead of a definition of an 8 year old game) of a sorcerer.
It is very much closer to the sorcerer found in other media than the morrowind and oblivion version.

One could argue you are the one with the perception problem as you base your opinion about the class around some fixed idea in your head that is somehow related to morrowind.

Again with names and descriptions. As if those mean anything. The templar description used to read 'deals massive damage with solar magic' or something like that. Look how well that turned out... Nightblades are rogues, right? Well, many of the best tanks I know are nightblades. How well does that fit into the archetype? DKs make great knights, but who woulda thunk that the 'dragon' part would be what everyone uses them for?

Yes, I'm using the morrowind and oblivion descriptions in my argument, because they fit. In morrowind, they are summoners with defensive skills, and are armored. How does that not fit the summoning line + lightning form? They make use of other weapons in addition to casting. How does surge not support this?

The same can be said about oblivions description. The entire dark magic skill line is essentially cc. Aka defensive spells. The oblivion sorc's forte'. Along with ward, bound armor, and lightning form, I would say that's pretty dang defensive.

Please break it down to me how I am wrong. I have been waiting since I started arguing about it on the class skills subforum. The closest anyone has gotten imo, is Nightreaver with his 'no melee skills' argument, everyone else used descriptions and semantics. Which I countered here.

So, go ahaid and break it down for me how the class is not based on morrowind and oblivion. I'm waiting.

Oh, and here is ESO's description of the class, for those of you curious;

'Sorcerers can use conjuration and destruction spells to hurl lightning bolts and create shock fields, weild dark magic to snare and stun, and summon Daedric combat followers from Oblivion to assist them.'

I see destruction lightning spells, but no fire or ice. I see dark magic for cc. Specifically cc. And I see summoning. How exactly is that more the traditional sorc, and not the TES sorc? Did you stop at "destruction spells?"

Derra

So you say descriptions don´t mean anything. Yet you´re obsessed with descriptions of classes in a game we´re not even playing. Makes absolute sense to me.

I DO NOT SAY YOU ARE WRONG. What i say is that only because you perceive it as the design philosophy it must not be true (i would dare to say it was the design philosophy of ONE skilltree - that´d be daedric summoning - when creating the sorcerer class, which has three skilltrees). Edit: I would even go so far as saying the design philosophy of eso being "play as you want" contraticts everything you say in regards to sorcerers because what you say is the exact opposite of that design philosophy.
I can not read a heavy armor summoner into the class description under any circumstance and not when I look at dark magic and stormcalling.

You are talking to people like they are idiots when they want to play a class named sorcerer like a spellcaster. I agree that every class can be a spellcaster by the design philosophy of eso. Yet, only the sorcerer fails to be competetive when playing as one?

I might add that it is the only class pointing people to robes (it depicts light armor when you create the character).
This results in me postulating the sorcerer was designed as a light armor wearing Mage that would teleport to avoit melee combatants, hurl lightning bolts and destruction magic, use magic shields to avoid incoming damage, wield staves and utilize cc to keep enemys at range. Prove me wrong.
(I give you a hint: You can´t because i will choose to ignore the points you are making and only insist on everything empowering my own perception)

Last: when you´re putting templars and nbs on the playing field... Is eso perhaps the game where no class matches the expectations the class description might give you (not dks of course, they even got an ingame book about how op they are)?

What is wrong on these forums with so many know it alls running around?

Shunravi

Derra wrote: »

So you say descriptions don´t mean anything. Yet you´re obsessed with descriptions of classes in a game we´re not even playing. Makes absolute sense to me.

I DO NOT SAY YOU ARE WRONG. What i say is that only because you perceive it as the design philosophy it must not be true (i would dare to say it was the design philosophy of ONE skilltree - that´d be daedric summoning - when creating the sorcerer class, which has three skilltrees).
I can not read a heavy armor summoner into the class description under any circumstance and not when I look at dark magic and stormcalling.

You are talking to people like they are idiots when they want to play a class named sorcerer like a spellcaster. I agree that every class can be a spellcaster by the design philosophy of eso. Yet, only the sorcerer fails to be competetive when playing as one?

I might add that it is the only class pointing people to robes (it depicts light armor when you create the character).
This results in me postulating the sorcerer was designed as a light armor wearing Mage that would teleport to avoit melee combatants, hurl lightning bolts and destruction magic, use magic shields to avoid incoming damage, wield staves and utilize cc to keep enemys at range. Prove me wrong.
(I give you a hint: You can´t because i will choose to ignore the points you are making and only insist on everything empowering my own perception)

Last: when you´re putting templars and nbs on the playing field... Is eso perhaps the game where no class matches the expectations the class description might give you (not dks of course, they even got an ingame book about how op they are)?

What is wrong on these forums with so many know it alls running around?

I wish we didn't have classes in ESO.
I wish there were no grounds on which we could have this discussion
I wish I did not feel the need to prove ESO's class design for the class is based upon the TES archetype because people want to ignore the intent of 2/3 of the class skills. (Daedric summoning and dark magic)
I wish you didn't see my useing these descriptions as an 'obsession'

But we can't always get what we wish for. I honestly don't care what so ever about the descriptions. They could be talking about beauty products for all I care. TES classes were never this bound into what skill lines are available. However, the skill lines that are available seem to be heavily influenced by the descriptions of the TES archetypes.

Yes, I am talking down to people with what I am saying. Just as I find they talk down to and belittle those who don't play the sorc as a caster. If they are going to be ***-holes to those sorcs, I'm gong to be an ***-hole right back.

With one of the sorc trees being cc, and the other being lackluster summoning, is it any wonder that caster dps is low?

I have no reason or need to prove you wrong. The class can and is played that way. I could go on about how I don't see the creation screen as any form of viable indicator on class design, but you said you will just ignore that, so I won't.

And, yes, ESO is indeed a game where the class description is worthless.

In any further arguments, I will be sure not to mention previous games at all. I will argue based purely on skills and passives. It's not that hard to do so.

I wish you a nice day.

Shunravi

Here is an interesting breakdown of caster-sorc potential endgame dps if anyone is interested. Far from low dps. Of course, it banks on perfect conditions, but still.

Cyhawk wrote: »

Septimus_Magna wrote: »

JuL1aN wrote: »

Septimus_Magna wrote: »

Alcast wrote: »

That are the DPS numbers that you can approx get on Serpent fight:
DK: 1,6k
Sorc: 1,4k
NB: 1,6k
Temp: 1,3k

I assume its a stamina sorc build which does 1,4k dps?
Hopefully the change from weapon to spell damage for the destro staff will balance the dps field. Sorcs supposed to be the magicka dps class.

Our Sorc can get this DPS as Magicka User.

Oh, thats very impressive. Im curious about his or her build. I usually get around 900 on trail bosses (1,1k on daedric/undead bosses). But this was without Razor Caltrops, now I might get 100 dps more.

Simple enough actually. Infallible Aether, Spawn of Meph 2pc, 3pc Destructive Mage &/or 3pc Soulshine^1, Master Destro (Lightning/Precise-Pen Preferred)

Soulshine is the choice if you need the extra crit, but Destructive will give you more damage overall. (2% damage vs 40ish flat damage from Destructive assuming it does 500 base @ 60% crit. Theres quite a bit of math involved with determining this. Also your group NEEDs to be medium weaving, this seems to only be popular in more... hmm, better trial groups)

You're essentially doing the exact same thing as before, MA->Crushing Repeat while keeping Crit Surge up, basics of the damage output are assuming 60% crit and non-shadow mundus, perfect weaving etc:

* Crushing = (450b * 1.6) = 720
* MA = (250b * 1.6) = 400
* Infal Aether = 85
* Spawn of Meph = 100~
* Destructive Mage = 40
* Clanfear (lawl) = 50
* Magicka Restore enchantment = 7
* Ing Weapons = 45

Subtotal: (720 + 400 + 85 + 100 + 40 + 50 + 7 + 45) = 1,447

* Spell Pot Potion on Cooldown with Enchantments = 8.5%~ = 1,570
* Combat Prayer = 11% (*1.11) = 1,742.7
* Infal Aether 3pc bonus = 2%~ = 1,777.554
* Ele Drain = 4%~ = 1,848.66, or 1850

(there are other ways to get more damage, but these are enough for the argument)

So we get about 1850 base DPS. This assumes perfect lag, perfect weaving, perfect a lot.. When accounting for buffs falling off, recasting Crit Curge, Spell syming, movement, blocking, your healer sucking cause they can't keep CP up, different boss resistances, not wanting to get laughed at for using a Clanfear, lag effecting MA weaves, and plain ole fatigue from long ass fights it drops a bit. However high DPS numbers are easy to sustain.

So yeah, you don't need a dual wield sorc to achieve these DPS numbers, those are the averages from top end players where things like CP/Ele Drain are always on, your group may differ. As you can see, those last few group oriented buffs are the most important.

Quick edit: I totally forgot Flawless Dawnbreaker. Screw it im not redoing the math.

daemonios

Shunravi wrote: »

Here is an interesting breakdown of caster-sorc potential endgame dps if anyone is interested. Far from low dps. Of course, it banks on perfect conditions, but still.

Cyhawk wrote: »

Septimus_Magna wrote: »

JuL1aN wrote: »

Septimus_Magna wrote: »

Alcast wrote: »

That are the DPS numbers that you can approx get on Serpent fight:
DK: 1,6k
Sorc: 1,4k
NB: 1,6k
Temp: 1,3k

I assume its a stamina sorc build which does 1,4k dps?
Hopefully the change from weapon to spell damage for the destro staff will balance the dps field. Sorcs supposed to be the magicka dps class.

Our Sorc can get this DPS as Magicka User.

Oh, thats very impressive. Im curious about his or her build. I usually get around 900 on trail bosses (1,1k on daedric/undead bosses). But this was without Razor Caltrops, now I might get 100 dps more.

Simple enough actually. Infallible Aether, Spawn of Meph 2pc, 3pc Destructive Mage &/or 3pc Soulshine^1, Master Destro (Lightning/Precise-Pen Preferred)

Soulshine is the choice if you need the extra crit, but Destructive will give you more damage overall. (2% damage vs 40ish flat damage from Destructive assuming it does 500 base @ 60% crit. Theres quite a bit of math involved with determining this. Also your group NEEDs to be medium weaving, this seems to only be popular in more... hmm, better trial groups)

You're essentially doing the exact same thing as before, MA->Crushing Repeat while keeping Crit Surge up, basics of the damage output are assuming 60% crit and non-shadow mundus, perfect weaving etc:

* Crushing = (450b * 1.6) = 720
* MA = (250b * 1.6) = 400
* Infal Aether = 85
* Spawn of Meph = 100~
* Destructive Mage = 40
* Clanfear (lawl) = 50
* Magicka Restore enchantment = 7
* Ing Weapons = 45

Subtotal: (720 + 400 + 85 + 100 + 40 + 50 + 7 + 45) = 1,447

* Spell Pot Potion on Cooldown with Enchantments = 8.5%~ = 1,570
* Combat Prayer = 11% (*1.11) = 1,742.7
* Infal Aether 3pc bonus = 2%~ = 1,777.554
* Ele Drain = 4%~ = 1,848.66, or 1850

(there are other ways to get more damage, but these are enough for the argument)

So we get about 1850 base DPS. This assumes perfect lag, perfect weaving, perfect a lot.. When accounting for buffs falling off, recasting Crit Curge, Spell syming, movement, blocking, your healer sucking cause they can't keep CP up, different boss resistances, not wanting to get laughed at for using a Clanfear, lag effecting MA weaves, and plain ole fatigue from long ass fights it drops a bit. However high DPS numbers are easy to sustain.

So yeah, you don't need a dual wield sorc to achieve these DPS numbers, those are the averages from top end players where things like CP/Ele Drain are always on, your group may differ. As you can see, those last few group oriented buffs are the most important.

Quick edit: I totally forgot Flawless Dawnbreaker. Screw it im not redoing the math.

That break-down of sorc dps reminds me of the joke about spherical cows in a vacuum. The thing is, we constantly get all sorts of lag (server lag, skill lag, weapon swap lag, etc) and distractions (dodging, blocking, etc) such that those perfect conditions never apply.

I go back to a previous post I made about this issue: about 50% of top trials groups have no sorcs of any kind (magicka or stamina). Sorcs make up 10% of players in the top 2 or 3 teams for trials, with Dragonknights accounting for over 50%. This does not happen because people are "whiney" and don't want to learn their class. It happens because there are serious class imbalance issues.

Shunravi

daemonios wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

Here is an interesting breakdown of caster-sorc potential endgame dps if anyone is interested. Far from low dps. Of course, it banks on perfect conditions, but still.

Cyhawk wrote: »

Septimus_Magna wrote: »

JuL1aN wrote: »

Septimus_Magna wrote: »

Alcast wrote: »

That are the DPS numbers that you can approx get on Serpent fight:
DK: 1,6k
Sorc: 1,4k
NB: 1,6k
Temp: 1,3k

I assume its a stamina sorc build which does 1,4k dps?
Hopefully the change from weapon to spell damage for the destro staff will balance the dps field. Sorcs supposed to be the magicka dps class.

Our Sorc can get this DPS as Magicka User.

Oh, thats very impressive. Im curious about his or her build. I usually get around 900 on trail bosses (1,1k on daedric/undead bosses). But this was without Razor Caltrops, now I might get 100 dps more.

Simple enough actually. Infallible Aether, Spawn of Meph 2pc, 3pc Destructive Mage &/or 3pc Soulshine^1, Master Destro (Lightning/Precise-Pen Preferred)

Soulshine is the choice if you need the extra crit, but Destructive will give you more damage overall. (2% damage vs 40ish flat damage from Destructive assuming it does 500 base @ 60% crit. Theres quite a bit of math involved with determining this. Also your group NEEDs to be medium weaving, this seems to only be popular in more... hmm, better trial groups)

You're essentially doing the exact same thing as before, MA->Crushing Repeat while keeping Crit Surge up, basics of the damage output are assuming 60% crit and non-shadow mundus, perfect weaving etc:

* Crushing = (450b * 1.6) = 720
* MA = (250b * 1.6) = 400
* Infal Aether = 85
* Spawn of Meph = 100~
* Destructive Mage = 40
* Clanfear (lawl) = 50
* Magicka Restore enchantment = 7
* Ing Weapons = 45

Subtotal: (720 + 400 + 85 + 100 + 40 + 50 + 7 + 45) = 1,447

* Spell Pot Potion on Cooldown with Enchantments = 8.5%~ = 1,570
* Combat Prayer = 11% (*1.11) = 1,742.7
* Infal Aether 3pc bonus = 2%~ = 1,777.554
* Ele Drain = 4%~ = 1,848.66, or 1850

(there are other ways to get more damage, but these are enough for the argument)

So we get about 1850 base DPS. This assumes perfect lag, perfect weaving, perfect a lot.. When accounting for buffs falling off, recasting Crit Curge, Spell syming, movement, blocking, your healer sucking cause they can't keep CP up, different boss resistances, not wanting to get laughed at for using a Clanfear, lag effecting MA weaves, and plain ole fatigue from long ass fights it drops a bit. However high DPS numbers are easy to sustain.

So yeah, you don't need a dual wield sorc to achieve these DPS numbers, those are the averages from top end players where things like CP/Ele Drain are always on, your group may differ. As you can see, those last few group oriented buffs are the most important.

Quick edit: I totally forgot Flawless Dawnbreaker. Screw it im not redoing the math.

That break-down of sorc dps reminds me of the joke about spherical cows in a vacuum. The thing is, we constantly get all sorts of lag (server lag, skill lag, weapon swap lag, etc) and distractions (dodging, blocking, etc) such that those perfect conditions never apply.

I go back to a previous post I made about this issue: about 50% of top trials groups have no sorcs of any kind (magicka or stamina). Sorcs make up 10% of players in the top 2 or 3 teams for trials, with Dragonknights accounting for over 50%. This does not happen because people are "whiney" and don't want to learn their class. It happens because there are serious class imbalance issues.

Well, we both did state prefect conditions. And I did clearly state that it was merely interesting. So you are indeed right. Still though, members of hodor are able to achieve 1.4k magica builds. It's not impossible.

But for your second bit about leaderboards I will post the next comment in that very same thread.

Tripwyr wrote: »

This thread is nostalgic. I remember back when Alacrity cleared AA in 9 minutes there was a massive outrage because we had no Nightblades. Players used this as evidence that Nightblades need a fix, when the reality was that we simply didn't have any Nightblades in our guild. This had nothing to do with the class, but merely random luck.

Never assume that the raid layout is indicative of class strength in this game. This isn't WoW, Hodor and LP don't have thousands of players lining up to play with them. Raid makeups are based on who happens to be in the guild, not how good their class is.

Derra

Shunravi wrote: »

I wish we didn't have classes in ESO.
I wish there were no grounds on which we could have this discussion
I wish I did not feel the need to prove ESO's class design for the class is based upon the TES archetype because people want to ignore the intent of 2/3 of the class skills. (Daedric summoning and dark magic)
I wish you didn't see my useing these descriptions as an 'obsession'

But we can't always get what we wish for. I honestly don't care what so ever about the descriptions. They could be talking about beauty products for all I care. TES classes were never this bound into what skill lines are available. However, the skill lines that are available seem to be heavily influenced by the descriptions of the TES archetypes.

Yes, I am talking down to people with what I am saying. Just as I find they talk down to and belittle those who don't play the sorc as a caster. If they are going to be ***-holes to those sorcs, I'm gong to be an ***-hole right back.

With one of the sorc trees being cc, and the other being lackluster summoning, is it any wonder that caster dps is low?

I have no reason or need to prove you wrong. The class can and is played that way. I could go on about how I don't see the creation screen as any form of viable indicator on class design, but you said you will just ignore that, so I won't.

And, yes, ESO is indeed a game where the class description is worthless.

In any further arguments, I will be sure not to mention previous games at all. I will argue based purely on skills and passives. It's not that hard to do so.

I wish you a nice day.

In which world does everything the dark magic skillline offers not work with a classic sorcerer in other games? It is based around CC. Which mage does not have CC?
I´m sorry but your argument is based solely around daedric summoning. Which is on third of th class skills (In DAoC you will even find a sorcerer class with a pet - though it is not summoned).
With that interpretation you can argue either way 2 skilllines for your idea of the eso sorcerer. 2 skilllines for a classic sorc build (because dark magic suits that one just as well).

Who in this thread talks down to other builds? Do i belittle someone just because i have a different opinion? All power to those people who envision their sorcerer not as a classic caster archetype. May they play however the hell they want and be just as effective as I am with a magica build. I don´t care about those. Is that what you´re offended about?
I want to play mine as one and you are the one telling me (and other ppl) that this is something wrong and we have a perception problem with the class? What the actual f*** is your problem? Nobody wants to take away from your idea. We just don´t share it.
Are you this zealous in every aspect of your life when you´re encountering different opinions?

You say that for you the char creation screen is no indicator on class design yet Oblivion which was released in 2006 is? How can dismiss the opinion of people claiming that Oblivion is NOT an indicator of class design in eso? That seems awfully bigot to me.

Nightreaver

Jaerlach wrote: »

Critical surge is a melee ability.

1) I think any Sorcerer with a Destro staff using Crushing Shock will disagree. It can obviously be used for both melee and ranged. And although it increases damage it doesn't actually do any. I can't select a target a spam Critical Surge and expect to kill something with it.
2) It's not a melee offensive ability. It's not a ranged offensive ability. It's a buff.

Jaerlach wrote: »

Lightning form is a melee ability.

Lightning form???
It increases physical resistance by 1750.
It increases Magical resistance by 1750.
It does a whopping 48 DPS to anyone standing in the small circle around you.
And you are calling this an Offensive ability? Seriously? Sounds more like a defensive ability to me. I mean I can just imagine those DKs shaking in fear while I chase them with my mighty 48 DPS.

As I said, my disagreement was against your statement that there is no design preference between the classes.
I never said they couldn't be viable though viable doesn't mean equal.
It is completely acceptable for other classes to be viable when your own class is on top.
No one accepts their own class as being viable when knowing others are better.
I never said I wanted any other class nerfed.

What I want is to have more useful class abilities. I want a Magicka build that can match not only other classes but a Stamina build as well.

Shunravi wrote: »

Yes, but sorc skills don't have a passive that increases damage based on distance to target. Bow does.

Wait, so abilities that don't have passives to increase damage based on range are really melee? Apparently a new definition of Ranged that I've previously been unaware of.

Shunravi wrote: »

In all seriousness though, everyone is so set on sorcs being casters, even though they have very few casting abilities.

True, we only have a few casting abilities in comparison to our melee abilities. Oh wait, we have no abilities that do physical damage or any offensive melee abilities. but I guess a few is better than none.

Shunravi wrote: »

Heck, I would even argue that by using lightning form, it can be potentially easier to execute a target because disintegrate procs off of lightning damage. Which is something lightning form has a good many chances of.

Let's see. I can either use Crushing Shock which also includes Lightning damage to proc disintegrate and is the best DPS option for a Destro wielding Sorcerer and can be used at range..... or I could run up to the target and convince it to stay still without damaging me while I hug it and hope my mighty 50 DPS ability procs that 6% chance for for extra damage. Well that is a hard choice.

Shunravi wrote: »

Again with names and descriptions. As if those mean anything.

followed by

Shunravi wrote: »

Yes, I'm using the morrowind and oblivion descriptions in my argument, because they fit.

So basically, names and descriptions don't mean anything unless they've come from a completely different game created years before ZOS even began development on ESO because you prefer that description.

Shunravi wrote: »

Oh, and here is ESO's description of the class, for those of you curious;

'Sorcerers can use conjuration and destruction spells to hurl lightning bolts and create shock fields, weild dark magic to snare and stun, and summon Daedric combat followers from Oblivion to assist them.'

I see destruction lightning spells, but no fire or ice. I see dark magic for cc. Specifically cc. And I see summoning. How exactly is that more the traditional sorc, and not the TES sorc? Did you stop at "destruction spells?"

The fact that the description begins with *destruction spells* tends to make me believe that that is the intended focus of the Sorcerer role. The fact that pets are mentioned last and even then described as "Followers from Oblivion to assist them" indicates to me that their intention it just that, to assist the Sorcerer or add additional support, not act as the primary means of fulfilling their role.

Shunravi wrote: »

Here is an interesting breakdown of caster-sorc potential endgame dps if anyone is interested. Far from low dps. Of course, it banks on perfect conditions, but still.

Cyhawk wrote: »

* Crushing = (450b * 1.6) = 720
* MA = (250b * 1.6) = 400
* Infal Aether = 85
* Spawn of Meph = 100~
* Destructive Mage = 40
* Clanfear (lawl) = 50
* Magicka Restore enchantment = 7
* Ing Weapons = 45

Subtotal: (720 + 400 + 85 + 100 + 40 + 50 + 7 + 45) = 1,447
* Spell Pot Potion on Cooldown with Enchantments = 8.5%~ = 1,570
* Combat Prayer = 11% (*1.11) = 1,742.7
* Infal Aether 3pc bonus = 2%~ = 1,777.554
* Ele Drain = 4%~ = 1,848.66, or 1850
(there are other ways to get more damage, but these are enough for the argument)
So we get about 1850 base DPS.

Wow, those are some impressive numbers. So let's see, out of the 1850 DPS how much of it was due to Sorcerer abilities?

* Clanfear (lawl) = 50

So 50 out of 1850, guess we're better than I thought.

Tankqull

Nightreaver wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

Here is an interesting breakdown of caster-sorc potential endgame dps if anyone is interested. Far from low dps. Of course, it banks on perfect conditions, but still.

Cyhawk wrote: »

* Crushing = (450b * 1.6) = 720
* MA = (250b * 1.6) = 400
* Infal Aether = 85
* Spawn of Meph = 100~
* Destructive Mage = 40
* Clanfear (lawl) = 50
* Magicka Restore enchantment = 7
* Ing Weapons = 45

Subtotal: (720 + 400 + 85 + 100 + 40 + 50 + 7 + 45) = 1,447
* Spell Pot Potion on Cooldown with Enchantments = 8.5%~ = 1,570
* Combat Prayer = 11% (*1.11) = 1,742.7
* Infal Aether 3pc bonus = 2%~ = 1,777.554
* Ele Drain = 4%~ = 1,848.66, or 1850
(there are other ways to get more damage, but these are enough for the argument)
So we get about 1850 base DPS.

Wow, those are some impressive numbers. So let's see, out of the 1850 DPS how much of it was due to Sorcerer abilities?

* Clanfear (lawl) = 50

So 50 out of 1850, guess we're better than I thought.

am i wrong or were crits only 50% dmg increasement and not a 100%?
thus the 720 dmg will be only 585, and the 400 MA (wich aint possible anyway because of the channel mechanic with a lightning staff as suggested in that post) would only be 325.
so in summ it would be 585+325+85+100+40+50+7+45 = 1237
and if his calculation would be correct even the slightest as you have highlighted (no class skills involved) every class would use that as it would trump any other existing top-DPS build by 250-600 DPS...

Shunravi

Derra wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

I wish we didn't have classes in ESO.
I wish there were no grounds on which we could have this discussion
I wish I did not feel the need to prove ESO's class design for the class is based upon the TES archetype because people want to ignore the intent of 2/3 of the class skills. (Daedric summoning and dark magic)
I wish you didn't see my useing these descriptions as an 'obsession'

But we can't always get what we wish for. I honestly don't care what so ever about the descriptions. They could be talking about beauty products for all I care. TES classes were never this bound into what skill lines are available. However, the skill lines that are available seem to be heavily influenced by the descriptions of the TES archetypes.

Yes, I am talking down to people with what I am saying. Just as I find they talk down to and belittle those who don't play the sorc as a caster. If they are going to be ***-holes to those sorcs, I'm gong to be an ***-hole right back.

With one of the sorc trees being cc, and the other being lackluster summoning, is it any wonder that caster dps is low?

I have no reason or need to prove you wrong. The class can and is played that way. I could go on about how I don't see the creation screen as any form of viable indicator on class design, but you said you will just ignore that, so I won't.

And, yes, ESO is indeed a game where the class description is worthless.

In any further arguments, I will be sure not to mention previous games at all. I will argue based purely on skills and passives. It's not that hard to do so.

I wish you a nice day.

In which world does everything the dark magic skillline offers not work with a classic sorcerer in other games? It is based around CC. Which mage does not have CC?
I´m sorry but your argument is based solely around daedric summoning. Which is on third of th class skills (In DAoC you will even find a sorcerer class with a pet - though it is not summoned).

Who in this thread talks down to other builds? Do i belittle someone just because i have a different opinion? All power to those people who envision their sorcerer not as a classic caster archetype. May they play however the hell they want and be just as effective as I am with a magica build. I don´t care about those. Is that what you´re offended about?
I want to play mine as one and you are the one telling me (and other ppl) that this is something wrong and we have a perception problem with the class? What the actual f*** is your problem? Nobody wants to take away from your idea. We just don´t share it.
Are you this zealous in every aspect of your life when you´re encountering different opinions?

You say that for you the char creation screen is no indicator on class design yet Oblivion which was released in 2006 is? How can dismiss the opinion of people claiming that Oblivion is NOT an indicator of class design in eso? That seems awfully bigot to me.

No, Im just bored because I'm not in game, and l like heated discussions on the internet. You are providing a really fun one.

Though, I'm wondering if you are having reading comprehension issues, or if I'm just not making myself clear enough.

Sure then, 1/3 of the class skills since you are so emotionally adamant about it. But the part I'm really curious about is how are they exclusive? I know my writing is a bit convoluted, but how does saying they based it on oblivions description rule out cc coming from other archetypes? Sure I'm saying people ignore them, but that's mostly because I hear people saying they are worthless and unuseable, and that outside of negate, not many are able to find a place on the . Sure, call for buffs then. It certainly would not hurt.

Now let's cite what I am responding to, if you bothered to read the entire thread.

Two concerns here.
1) Why a dual wield Sorc?If he wants to melee then wouldn't he be better off as a DK or NB? Both of which do better DPS and have class abilities that actually support melee.
2) It confirms that Stamina Sorc builds do better than Magicka Sorc builds AND YET in 1.6 they are nerfing Surge for Magicka builds while leaving it the same for Stamina builds. How does that make sense?

I take that and comments like it as belittleing to stamina sorcs.

Now my response was 'I see no minimum range on those ranged spells.' This is both a direct challenge to his assertion that sorcerers have nothing for melee range, and it's also part of an ongoing flamewar between us.

Now, here is the post that got me started on the series of arguments that would bring me here arguing the same thing.

frostbreeze wrote: »

Imo now that staves will scale from spell damage its irrational for surge(morphless) to add weapon damage! The class is called sorcerer ffs its meant to weild staves and magic.Sure u can go stamina build if u want but thats personal choice hence they should make surge give spell damage then be morphable to something that adds weapon damage and scale from stamina for all you stamina sorcs(srsly u made a sorc to go stamina?srsly?) and make add sp+heal to crit surge. Besides stamina builds will get a stamina based heal from the new alliance war skill theyre implementing so plz dont nerf us magica sorcs again and do the right thing here zos

Yes, srsly, people chose the sorc to have a stamina build.

But I'm also a bit put off when people make the statement 'the sorc is the caster class but other classes do casting better.' In ESO there is no single 'caster class' there are four classes, and sorc happens to have great synergy with the lightning side of desrtruction casting. DKs happen to have good synergy with fire.

Now, I'm curious why it is you think I'm offended. Are my assertions that it seems like the class is based on previous archetypes so strong that it sounds like I'm offended anyone would chose it for something else? In that case, I may need to readjust my tone... from my perspective you are reading far too much into what I am saying. Is me saying that a line dedicated to cc and a lacklustre summoning line make for poor dps somehow saying you are stupid for trying to dps with the class? To me that's saying that those areas need improvement.

The only thing I intend with my arguments is to open discussion about more than just the caster side of the sorc, and to demonstrate the precident of what the class is based on, and why the skills are designed as they are. Hence the quoting of the previous archetypes.

When did I ever state that you can't play the sorcerer how you want to? The first thing you quoted from me even had a retraction and explanation that it was not my intent to say sorcs can't be casters. Or did you not read that? What do you think this meant?

I have no reason or need to prove you wrong. The class can and is played that way.

did you think I was somehow disagreeing with your playstyle? As it clearly says, I have no need or reason to say that you can't play the class as a caster with avoidance skills. How is that saying

that this is something wrong and we have a perception problem with the class?

And, yes, the character design screen is meaningless. But I think you miss my point. I'm saying it's meaningless both here and in previous TES titles. Hence the 'classes were never this restrictive' bit. The only thing that I'm saying, and the only intent of what I have said is that ZOS based their class around the description in previous games. Games that I may point out, were never as restrictive as ESO's. The intent behind saying that is that isn't that sorcs are not casters, because TES sorcs are casters. But instead that what they based a good amount of the skills around comes from a class that is highly versatile, so you should not discount it in melee range.

So, sure, saying that I don't care about what the class has been in other media is dismissive. But is it exclusive? Does me saying that I strongly feel that the class is based off of previous TES archetypes invalidate comparison to those other archetypes? Sure I don't care about how other media but the IP did the concept. Why should I? TES is its own thing.

Holycannoli

Shunravi wrote: »

Though spellcasters by vocation, sorcerers rely most on summonings and enchantments. They are greedy for magic scrolls, rings, armor and weapons, and commanding undead and Daedric servants gratifies their egos.

Exactly why I wonder why we don't have zombie thralls for summons, or even skeletons or those morrowind ghosts (I forget their name).

My favorite skill so far in any TES game is dead thrall with the passives that give you two permanent ones. I love reanimating NPCs to do my bidding with their powers and it's something ESO should have had from the start.

Shunravi

Holycannoli wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

Though spellcasters by vocation, sorcerers rely most on summonings and enchantments. They are greedy for magic scrolls, rings, armor and weapons, and commanding undead and Daedric servants gratifies their egos.

Exactly why I wonder why we don't have zombie thralls for summons, or even skeletons or those morrowind ghosts (I forget their name).

My favorite skill so far in any TES game is dead thrall with the passives that give you two permanent ones. I love reanimating NPCs to do my bidding with their powers and it's something ESO should have had from the start.

I know right? We are limited to Daedra for the time being, but I hear that spellcrafting may come with necromancy .

I will admit, I was hoping for nightblade's shades to be a bit more like the summon Lucien Lachance spell, or have some wraiths or something. But I am honestly happy with the way they look and feel... Even if I do wish they were more like dopplegangers, or made you look like them.

I am very excited for spellcrafting, and it will be interesting to see if other classes' passives will find good synergies in the system, or if sorcs will have an advantage with their regens and reductions.

We will see though.

Vahrokh

Shunravi wrote: »

Well, we both did state prefect conditions. And I did clearly state that it was merely interesting. So you are indeed right. Still though, members of hodor are able to achieve 1.4k magica builds. It's not impossible.

But for your second bit about leaderboards I will post the next comment in that very same thread.

Tripwyr wrote: »

This thread is nostalgic. I remember back when Alacrity cleared AA in 9 minutes there was a massive outrage because we had no Nightblades. Players used this as evidence that Nightblades need a fix, when the reality was that we simply didn't have any Nightblades in our guild. This had nothing to do with the class, but merely random luck.

Never assume that the raid layout is indicative of class strength in this game. This isn't WoW, Hodor and LP don't have thousands of players lining up to play with them. Raid makeups are based on who happens to be in the guild, not how good their class is.

How you are wrong:

1) It hugely reminds one of those "car fuel consumption per 100km" data released by the car manufacturers magazine ads. Those that somehow say your car should consume 30% less fuel than you ever managed to experience, even if you REALLY try testing it with no winds against, a perfect road, regular driving.
By the way, where's the comparative DPS report about the other classes, in identical ideal conditions?

2) It happens that I actually do those instances people here fable about. Depending on guild progress, The only sure way to have issues with one of:

• 3rd AA boss (DPS check)
• last AA boss (burn phase)
• last HR boss (last "sword high" phases)
• 1st Sanctum boss (Mantikora) "black hole" mini-boss

is to have 3+ sorcs. Whereas you could have only DKs / NBs + 1 sorc negate bot and clear them while sleeping. It's very evident in Sanctum, if you do the sub-groups "bad" and 2 sorcs end in the black hole then they either are quite above average or they don't kill it before the timer runs out and the whole raid wipes. Usually you don't exactly do Sanctum with undergeared monkeys either as guilds usually farm AA and HR for a good time before starting Sanctum.

3) I also actually happen to have an Hodor player in my guild (obviously to him mine is his "relax" secondary guild). He's maniac with performance, he is a protagonist in those "kill first" videos and stuff.
He used to play a sorc. Then he smarted up and now he plays a DK.
Shall we all have to "smarten up" and reroll DK? You know, they are dime a dozen as is.

Shunravi

Vahrokh wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

Well, we both did state prefect conditions. And I did clearly state that it was merely interesting. So you are indeed right. Still though, members of hodor are able to achieve 1.4k magica builds. It's not impossible.

But for your second bit about leaderboards I will post the next comment in that very same thread.

Tripwyr wrote: »

This thread is nostalgic. I remember back when Alacrity cleared AA in 9 minutes there was a massive outrage because we had no Nightblades. Players used this as evidence that Nightblades need a fix, when the reality was that we simply didn't have any Nightblades in our guild. This had nothing to do with the class, but merely random luck.

Never assume that the raid layout is indicative of class strength in this game. This isn't WoW, Hodor and LP don't have thousands of players lining up to play with them. Raid makeups are based on who happens to be in the guild, not how good their class is.

How you are wrong:

1) It hugely reminds one of those "car fuel consumption per 100km" data released by the car manufacturers. Those that somehow say your car should consume 30% less fuel than you ever managed to experience, even if you REALLY try testing it with no winds against, a perfect road, regular driving.
By the way, where's the comparative DPS report about the other classes, in identical ideal conditions?

2) It happens that I actually do those instances people here fable about. Depending on guild progress, The only sure way to have issues with one of:

• 3rd AA boss (DPS check)
• last AA boss (burn phase)
• last HR boss (last "sword high" phases)
• 1st Sanctum boss (Mantikora) "black hole" mini-boss

is to have 3+ sorcs. Whereas you could have only DKs / NBs + 1 sorc negate bot and clear them while sleeping. It's very evident in Sanctum, if you do the sub-groups "bad" and 2 sorcs end in the black hole then they either are quite above average or they don't kill it before the timer runs out and the whole raid wipes. Usually you don't exactly do Sanctum with undergeared monkeys either as guilds usually farm AA and HR for a good time before starting Sanctum.

3) I also actually happen to have an Hodor player in my guild (obviously to him mine is his "relax" secondary guild). He's maniac with performance, he is a protagonist in those "kill first" videos and stuff.
He used to play a sorc. Then he smarted up and now he plays a DK.
Shall we all have to "smarten up" and reroll DK? You know, they are dime a dozen as is.

As I said, its an idea. Its not necessarily my words or my perspective. I'm simply sharing something I found interesting on the subforum. If you have issues with the ideas, take it up with the origonal posters.

I do trials too, you know, I do agree with what you are saying.

Vahrokh

Shunravi wrote: »

I'm simply sharing something I found interesting on the subforum. If you have issues with the ideas, take it up with the origonal posters.

I do trials too, you know, I do agree with what you are saying.

I have issues with the "ideas" and I take it with you because you - and not somebody else - chose to re-post it here.

Shunravi

Vahrokh wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

I'm simply sharing something I found interesting on the subforum. If you have issues with the ideas, take it up with the origonal posters.

I do trials too, you know, I do agree with what you are saying.

I have issues with the "ideas" and I take it with you because you - and not somebody else - chose to re-post it here.

Fine then. Sorry for trying to bring some faint hope of light into the gloom I created on this thread, no matter how false that light may be.

Vahrokh

Shunravi wrote: »

Vahrokh wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

I'm simply sharing something I found interesting on the subforum. If you have issues with the ideas, take it up with the origonal posters.

I do trials too, you know, I do agree with what you are saying.

I have issues with the "ideas" and I take it with you because you - and not somebody else - chose to re-post it here.

Fine then. Sorry for trying to bring some faint hope of light into the gloom I created on this thread, no matter how false that light may be.

There are hard facts and there are precedents.

ZoS has not blessed us with facts yet, so we go by precedents, that is close to a year in nice ideas turned into broken implementations, bugs, flawed designs.

Since they are taking their time to release 1.6 PTS and I only have 20 days left before my sub expires again, I may as well make myself heard.

Shunravi

Vahrokh wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

Vahrokh wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

I'm simply sharing something I found interesting on the subforum. If you have issues with the ideas, take it up with the origonal posters.

I do trials too, you know, I do agree with what you are saying.

I have issues with the "ideas" and I take it with you because you - and not somebody else - chose to re-post it here.

Fine then. Sorry for trying to bring some faint hope of light into the gloom I created on this thread, no matter how false that light may be.

There are hard facts and there are precedents.

ZoS has not blessed us with facts yet, so we go by precedents, that is close to a year in nice ideas turned into broken implementations, bugs, flawed designs.

Since they are taking their time to release 1.6 PTS and I only have 20 days left before my sub expires again, I may as well make myself heard.

Well, hell, I can drink to that!