State of the Game -- A Former PVP Guild Lead's Commentary

Poxheart

I provided valid feedback of your video, but you don't want to accept it. Conduct the tests where you initiate the gap closer attacks on an opponent that cloaks & lets see if your attacks makes him visible (they didn't when I tested it).

You have no way of knowing whether your opponents used detection pots. They are a common tool for any serious PvPer.

Here is what you said when I asked for clarification on what you consider 'rogue like' playstyle:

DDuke wrote: »

It is about playing in a certain way, as a DPS focused on CC, stealth & burst damage.

Which is exactly what I showed in my video: DPS focused on CC, stealth and burst damage. I can guarantee that "any build" can't kill two opponents as quickly as I did.

Now you're saying that the 'rogue like' style requires you to wear medium armor and not use heals. Your problem is that you have constructed very limited criteria for what you consider 'rogue like' play and anybody who doesn't check all the boxes that meet your expectations isn't doing it right.

If you want to gimp yourself and not use all the tools available to you in game then more power to you, but don't go around crying when you aren't successful. This isn't Zenimax's issue, it's yours.

DDuke

Poxheart wrote: »

I provided valid feedback of your video, but you don't want to accept it. Conduct the tests where you initiate the gap closer attacks on an opponent that cloaks & lets see if your attacks makes him visible (they didn't when I tested it).

You have no way of knowing whether your opponents used detection pots. They are a common tool for any serious PvPer.

Here is what you said when I asked for clarification on what you consider 'rogue like' playstyle:

DDuke wrote: »

It is about playing in a certain way, as a DPS focused on CC, stealth & burst damage.

Which is exactly what I showed in my video: DPS focused on CC, stealth and burst damage. I can guarantee that "any build" can't kill two opponents as quickly as I did.

Now you're saying that the 'rogue like' style requires you to wear medium armor and not use heals. Your problem is that you have constructed very limited criteria for what you consider 'rogue like' play and anybody who doesn't check all the boxes that meet your expectations isn't doing it right.

If you want to gimp yourself and not use all the tools available to you in game then more power to you, but don't go around crying when you aren't successful. This isn't Zenimax's issue, it's yours.

For the 107th time, my conception of rogue playstyle is formed from past experiences in other games.
This is the rogue archetype: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thief_(character_class)
It is not a very "limited criteria", when almost all elements present in pretty much every other (MMO)RPG game are missing. I'd settle for now with even one of them working (stealth).

Sigh... you know why I can't argue with you? Because you have already decided that I'm wrong, no matter what I say.
I could say the earth is round, and you'd be certain it's flat as a pancake.

I guess I'll just leave this out here:

TheBull

Poxheart wrote: »

I provided valid feedback of your video, but you don't want to accept it. Conduct the tests where you initiate the gap closer attacks on an opponent that cloaks & lets see if your attacks makes him visible (they didn't when I tested it).

You have no way of knowing whether your opponents used detection pots. They are a common tool for any serious PvPer.

Didn't you see in the 3rd test where he cloaked the charge, did the dodge animation but still took 21 damage and the cloak broke? Why are you still arguing this? That is precisely what happens over and over every day to NBs in Cyrodiil.

As a long time forum poster, one with strong opinions, I know when the time comes to tip my cap and admit when I'm wrong. I've done it many times before. As far as cloak not working as intended, you have reached this point. No shame. Nod and move on.

Roechacca

TheBull speaks the truth . Cloak has been busted for some time now . The arguing is not resulting in anything constructive at this point . An as much as I dislike the OP , he made a positive thread to discuss the state of the game . Give him and the Devs a break so they don't have to read through 12 pages of "no it's not / yes it is" .

Sharee

Poxheart wrote: »

Regarding your second video: 1) the 21 weapon damage is likely from your opponent's weapon enchant. Status effects/weapon enchants seem to proc even though the main attack misses.

I wonder if this is the root of the problem with the unreliability of cloak.

If the procs still deal damage even if the main attack misses, then virtually all attacks break cloak in this manner, because the majority of them has some sort of damaging proc attached to them. Either from weapon enchant, or from DK ingeous weapons, crushing shock elemental procs, venom arrow procs, evil hunter procs, set bonus procs, etc.etc.

Manoekin

Trayyacakes wrote: »

risen1981 wrote: »

Manoekin wrote: »

DDuke wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

I like how we still have people saying that a magicka nb isn't a true rogue class even though it has virtually the same gameplay as a stamina one. Like really the only difference is the ranged weapon setup

Anyway, who cares if a magicka nb isn't a true rogue. lmfao

They made the game so we could get any character doing any role. If you wanna play a rogue, go back to Wow and shut up already.

Sure, that must be good for the game. Less subscribers

What exactly is the problem people have with the prospect of having more build diversity than "hold block & spam heals/shields while DPSing"?
Yes, that's essentially what combat becomes, when you can't one shot someone.
That, or trying to escape.

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/144002/do-you-have-a-heal-or-a-dmg-shield-slotted-on-your-hotbar/p1

Does it somehow take away from your gameplay experience, if other people are allowed to enjoy the game? One would think it's the other way around.

Uploading Part 2 of my Stealth/Cloak tests as we speak.

Maybe you and all the people who wanna be rogues in this thread should go talk to Asian Mayhem or something

risen1981 wrote: »

Manoekin wrote: »

risen1981 wrote: »

Manoekin wrote: »

faernaa wrote: »

kelly.medleyb14_ESO wrote: »

Blocking is a very unique part of ESO combat and part of what makes it so great. Block casting is just a gives the combat depth and removing that would make the game more shallow.

LOL what? How come block casting gives such deep combat depth? You just hold block and spam 1-1-1.

I don't think taking it away adds anything, so what's your point? A shield will block the same whether you're wearing any kind of armor TBH. Problem isn't that 1h/s is adding too much mitigation, it's that heavy armor doesn't add enough. I leveled to VR10 with heavy armor because that's how I wanted to play, but had to discard it after realizing the survivability was the same in light armor. Everyone's hate is really misplaced here.

Also people use more than one spell. Not one player in this game uses only one spell, and if a player does it's a healer like me in pvp where 75% or more of my casts are breath of life.

Geez dude, step back and think for a sec, block casting is really a gamebreaking mechanic, as it is now you might as well have permablock on... like a toggle.. so i dont hurt my finger while holding down mousebutton (depth to combat? please.. )

How about adding a blockbreak... like the bash, now that would add actual skill to combat and penalizing those permablockers!

I have thought about it. Block casting will be a thing unless they rework how pve content works, or make shield mitigation passive and not activated. People think it's only a pvp issue. What if your trial tank needs to cast taunt, and the boss hits him with a crit attack and one shots him while his shield is down to cast the taunt? Should the tank let the boss kill someone else to avoid being hit by the attack while taunting?

Even so, in pvp it's going to be impossible to permablock in 1.6. You all will just have to wait and see the patch notes or hope it gets mentioned in this thread... The direction they're going in is the right direction imo.

Well then you havn't give it a thought.
That would force the tanks to actual time their taunts more or less instead of spamming it once every few second? you figure it out, i bet the good tanks would have no issue with it.
Also the removal of caps would make a tank in HA to be able to actuallly take more dmg without getting insta-killed
Think again but a bit harder... You're probably smart, think of a smart way instead of a lazy way

Please shut up already. I already told you your issue with block in pvp has several indirect fixes in pvp, not even including stuff I don't know about.

The problem with taunts is the taunt mechanic in this game requires you to cast it every so often and punishes you for casting it too much. It's not something where you can just do it at convenient times. Also there is no AOE taunt, so basically your solution is to make one those trash pulls of 10 mobs become 5minute fights where you need 3-4 of your 12 people to be tanks, or your DPS just don't do DPS because they will get one shot.

If they're going to disallow block casting they literally have to change how the pve game works, so please, YOU give it more thought other than "herp derp I don't like dis zos this isn't how my mind interprets this game to work zos".

Wow you turned agressive.. how long does it take to "cast" the taunt?... 0.5 seconds?... that would mean a window of 0.5 seconds where you are vulnerble...
If you can't adapt to that..

He isn't just talking about the impact it has on tanks. Good PVE Tanks would have minimal problems adapting to tanking bosses without block casting. The problem would come on the trash pulls. In Trials and most 4 mans a tank can't Taunt the whole pack of mobs. It is not the way this game works. There is no AOE taunt. The tanks job is cc and taunt the biggest threats and try to interrupt everything he can, but guess what *** happens the DPS and heals are going to take damage on these trash pulls. If the glass cannon DPS/heals aren't block casting, they die.

I also think in a pvp aspect removing block casting won't be a good thing unless you lower the damage dealt by a decent portion in pvp.

Have you ever been ganked on a horse in cyrodiil? TTK off of a horse is pretty low. remove block casting and that would be close to what TTK is everywhere, not quite as extreme because you can stun break when you aren't on your horse but still.

In short if they get rid of block casting a game wide rebalance of sorts would need to take place.

Good players will always adapt, so it will only matter to casuals. Whiners will whine regardless, so In the end if it will make a minimal difference what's it matter.

OMG someone that understands me.

TheBull

Sharee wrote: »

Poxheart wrote: »

Regarding your second video: 1) the 21 weapon damage is likely from your opponent's weapon enchant. Status effects/weapon enchants seem to proc even though the main attack misses.

I wonder if this is the root of the problem with the unreliability of cloak.

If the procs still deal damage even if the main attack misses, then virtually all attacks break cloak in this manner, because the majority of them has some sort of damaging proc attached to them. Either from weapon enchant, or from DK ingeous weapons, crushing shock elemental procs, venom arrow procs, evil hunter procs, set bonus procs, etc.etc.

Wow good work guys
@ZOS_GaryA‌ we are trying hard to help here.

frozywozy

Urai wrote: »

Only have one question,

About the heavy armor vs light armor; people want this changed because it would make more sense that a HA wearer is a lot more tanky then LA but if it means that Cyrodiil will be full of...for those who remember unkillable Blood Dk's with a gazillion HP...then what's the point ?

Most people want Heavy armor to be viable because it looks better then light armor but if the outcome is just a switch...

This is why I always disagreed that an armor tree should be better than another. Like I mentionned in another of my posts, all armor trees should be equal regarding survivability.

Here's the posts I made a couple weeks ago :

My opinion is the following :

- Every class should be able to tank, dps or heal.
- Every armor tree should give the same survivability and damage output.
- Every weapon tree should define your survivability and damage output.

I don't think that Immovable and Evasion are even close to Annulement in term of survivability at the moment. They should redesign or add new active skills in those armor trees to make them equal.

It's really unfair for medium armor at the moment that it is a MUST to roll to survive. What is the use of steel tornado if you have to roll out of the damage delt by a blob all the time? You should be able to tank a or dodge more than Evasion actually let you to match the tankiness of light armor. Rolling is not an option in aoe battles because you can't deal damage while rolling like you can do with Annulement up.

I won't even talk about heavy armor because there is so much work to do to make it equal in term of damage and survivability that I don't know where to start.

Also a question remain here. Does Zenimax wants to give the freedom to every armor tree to use all weapon trees or should they be restricted to certain types?

If Zenimax really wants to let the player does what he wants, that means you could pick a templar, use light armor, with dual wield and be as efficient as a sorcerer using medium armor and two-handed weapon. That would bring alot of redundancy in the passives for ressource management, survivability and damage done.

To be honest, I would rather associate :
- HA/MA to stamina builds (one hand shield, two-handed, dual wield and bows)
- LA to magicka builds (resto staff and destruction staff)

Other options should penalize you alot.

When I said every weapon tree should define your survivability, the way I see it is that one hand shield + resto should give the max survivability but poor damage output, two-handed should give an average survivability/damage output and dual wield + bow + destruction staff should give minimum survivability but highest damage output.

Also, maybe make it so the only damage multipliers would be in the weapon skills, ressource management in the class skills and survivability in the armor skills.

And of course you could still customize your character a lil bit more with enchants, traits and the champion system coming up.

Just think about it, if they make it so heavy armor is much stronger than light armor, then everyone is going to switch to heavy armor and it will be the same thing all over again.

Do we want the damage to be defined by the armor you wear or by the weapon you use? I think the answer is pretty clear. If you use a resto or a one handed shield, you should deal less damage.

Now if you want to buff heavy armor and make it more tanky than light and medium armor, you will also need to add a passive that reduce damage done while wearing heavy armor.

Personally, as far as Zenimax want people to do everything they want no matter their class, their role and if they are magicka or stamina focus, I think that we must fix some limits to make it fair and logical.

I think stamina builds should be restricted to heavy and medium armor. magicka builds should be light armor. Staves users should be forced to go magicka builds while all the others should be forced to go stamina builds.

A magicka build character should deal much more damage to a stamina build character and vice versa. Why ? because stamina build characters should have passives to increase armor, dodge and health.

A magicka build character should deal limited damage to another magicka build character. Why ? because magicka build characters should have more spell resistances.

A magicka build character should also have high magicka regeneration while a stamina build character should have high stamina regeneration (from passives).

Now it stills gives the freedom for any class to either heal, dps or tank. The weapon or the armor tree he picks would determine that role.

Poxheart

Sharee wrote: »

Poxheart wrote: »

Regarding your second video: 1) the 21 weapon damage is likely from your opponent's weapon enchant. Status effects/weapon enchants seem to proc even though the main attack misses.

I wonder if this is the root of the problem with the unreliability of cloak.

If the procs still deal damage even if the main attack misses, then virtually all attacks break cloak in this manner, because the majority of them has some sort of damaging proc attached to them. Either from weapon enchant, or from DK ingeous weapons, crushing shock elemental procs, venom arrow procs, evil hunter procs, set bonus procs, etc.etc.

Thank you for taking the time to read & acknowledge what I wrote. Based on my testing I'm not convinced that stealth actually breaks for the attacking player (though it may appear to break for the NB). More testing is needed.

@Agrippa_Invisus‌, sorry for being party to the crapfest that derailed your awesome thread.

Grim13

TheBull wrote: »

Poxheart wrote: »

I provided valid feedback of your video, but you don't want to accept it. Conduct the tests where you initiate the gap closer attacks on an opponent that cloaks & lets see if your attacks makes him visible (they didn't when I tested it).

You have no way of knowing whether your opponents used detection pots. They are a common tool for any serious PvPer.

Didn't you see in the 3rd test where he cloaked the charge, did the dodge animation but still took 21 damage and the cloak broke? Why are you still arguing this? That is precisely what happens over and over every day to NBs in Cyrodiil.

QFT.

---

I'd also like to point out that the thread wasn't derailed by DDuke.

The Cloak and stealth related questions were initially raised when ZOS had made their intentions to try and respond to the PvP related questions raised in this thread apparent.

These questions were completely valid and in keeping with the original intent of this thread.

However, since then, naysayers have been putting down the questions, the people who've posted the questions, and rather than just remaining silent and allowing ZOS to respond..., have forced the debate and driven the thread off course.

Davadin

I just want to toss my 2c in here... (other than I agree with everythin in OP),

is that 360-degree blockcasting is *** up.

it's stupid, silly, illogical, and ridicolously inbalance. whoever dev(s) came up with the idea that you can freely cast (magical *** hand) while blocking which blocks everything around you (magical *** shield) is just *** up.

fix this and leave everything else out, i'll be happy to renew my sub next time around.

we'll see with 1.6.

Joy_Division

DDuke wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

I am unsure of the relationship between invisibility and damaging opponents. Most RPGs do not like this combination and I am curious as to what the developers have said about it.

RPGs such as... ?

I've been playing RPGs & MMOs for 13 years now, and never have I felt so punished for trying to play a rogue character as in ESO.

The Godfather of RPGs, Dungeon and Dragons has historically made maintaining invisibility/stealth while attacking very difficult and Gary Gygaxx specifically pointed to the balance and verisimilitude problems therein.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Here are a couple questions and answers. We're working on more that we'll share early next week, and during Friday's ESO Live show.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Please give more clarification if you can on this? It sounds like you want to make it quicker for players to repair walls? It’s already too quick for keeps to go out of attack / repairable and if players can repair for higher values walls will go up within 30s of the breach being made as the group is gathering for the assault.

Our goal is for an undefended keep to take approximately 3-5 minutes to capture, and an undefended keep capture to take a bit longer. The latter can vary quite a bit, of course. Currently, the threshold for being able to repair a wall while it’s under attack is very high (meaning, you can repair a wall that is being damaged if its health is still above 95%.) We are looking at the wall and door health values because it’s a very thin line between feeling like you’re doing actual damage versus beating your head against a wall for too long (no pun intended.) We are, of course, interested in hearing your thoughts.

Thanks for the clarification, I was specifically referring to the heal value you mentioned. For example, If I hit a wall that is on 0% with a ballista the time before the other faction can then repair that wall without receiving a 'Wall has been attacked recently' type message. Should be increased. Its currently (at a guess) 20 -30 seconds? should be at least 1m if not longer. Alternativly walls should be repaired slower the lower their %

So for example: (for an outer wall) between 0-25% you heal for 1000 per repair, between 25-55% you heal for 2000 per repair and from 55-100 you heal for 4000 per repair. This means that at the stages the wall changes form e.g. initial build up, out of 'under attack' range, fully repaired the speed is varied. stops ninja repairing so much. Additionally repairing a wall should give you a fixed AP amount back not based on how much you heal it for.

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Did you see the post about reducing the number of campaigns? Remove Haderus, will instantly cause more competition between alliances wanting a buff server, remove a 2nd and you will have 2 full campaigns – perfect

Yes, we have seen the threads about reducing the current number of campaigns. With the present restrictions that prevent you from having characters from multiple alliances on one account assigned to the same campaign, we’re at our minimum for Veteran characters at three campaigns (+1 non vet). There have been discussions about changing that rule, however. If we do change it, reducing the number of campaigns to help increase player density in Cyrodiil would be possible.

Thanks, its interesting I don't think I saw a post considering this as a reason for why we have the number of campaigns we do. In terms of the rule change its a hard one to decide over I agree. Players can already enter their own campaign by travelling to another player in that campaign regardless of their settings. Perhaps just swapping it so that you can travel to any campaign but cannot 'home' there on more than 1 faction would be acceptable? Players then have a choice on which faction to set their priority but can play on the others too.

Additionally the reward tiers for cyro should be changed (just adding this as you are compiling questions from this thread).
This current thorn campaign I completed Rank 3 requirements within the first couple of hours of playing. So technically now I don't ever need to play in the next 29 days but will still receive full rewards that my faction gets. Its nice that there are some rewards for top % players but would also be good if theres some sort of daily incremental reward so playing for more than 1 day in the campaign is rewarded more than just 1 day in the campaign. e.g. the more you play the more you are rewarded. perhaps just increasing the amount of time / points you need for top rank of rewards is enough.

StihlReign

frozywozy wrote: »

Urai wrote: »

Only have one question,

About the heavy armor vs light armor; people want this changed because it would make more sense that a HA wearer is a lot more tanky then LA but if it means that Cyrodiil will be full of...for those who remember unkillable Blood Dk's with a gazillion HP...then what's the point ?

Most people want Heavy armor to be viable because it looks better then light armor but if the outcome is just a switch...

This is why I always disagreed that an armor tree should be better than another. Like I mentionned in another of my posts, all armor trees should be equal regarding survivability.

Here's the posts I made a couple weeks ago :

My opinion is the following :

- Every class should be able to tank, dps or heal.
- Every armor tree should give the same survivability and damage output.
- Every weapon tree should define your survivability and damage output.

I don't think that Immovable and Evasion are even close to Annulement in term of survivability at the moment. They should redesign or add new active skills in those armor trees to make them equal.

It's really unfair for medium armor at the moment that it is a MUST to roll to survive. What is the use of steel tornado if you have to roll out of the damage delt by a blob all the time? You should be able to tank a or dodge more than Evasion actually let you to match the tankiness of light armor. Rolling is not an option in aoe battles because you can't deal damage while rolling like you can do with Annulement up.

I won't even talk about heavy armor because there is so much work to do to make it equal in term of damage and survivability that I don't know where to start.

Also a question remain here. Does Zenimax wants to give the freedom to every armor tree to use all weapon trees or should they be restricted to certain types?

If Zenimax really wants to let the player does what he wants, that means you could pick a templar, use light armor, with dual wield and be as efficient as a sorcerer using medium armor and two-handed weapon. That would bring alot of redundancy in the passives for ressource management, survivability and damage done.

To be honest, I would rather associate :
- HA/MA to stamina builds (one hand shield, two-handed, dual wield and bows)
- LA to magicka builds (resto staff and destruction staff)

Other options should penalize you alot.

When I said every weapon tree should define your survivability, the way I see it is that one hand shield + resto should give the max survivability but poor damage output, two-handed should give an average survivability/damage output and dual wield + bow + destruction staff should give minimum survivability but highest damage output.

Also, maybe make it so the only damage multipliers would be in the weapon skills, ressource management in the class skills and survivability in the armor skills.

And of course you could still customize your character a lil bit more with enchants, traits and the champion system coming up.

Just think about it, if they make it so heavy armor is much stronger than light armor, then everyone is going to switch to heavy armor and it will be the same thing all over again.

Do we want the damage to be defined by the armor you wear or by the weapon you use? I think the answer is pretty clear. If you use a resto or a one handed shield, you should deal less damage.

Now if you want to buff heavy armor and make it more tanky than light and medium armor, you will also need to add a passive that reduce damage done while wearing heavy armor.

Personally, as far as Zenimax want people to do everything they want no matter their class, their role and if they are magicka or stamina focus, I think that we must fix some limits to make it fair and logical.

I think stamina builds should be restricted to heavy and medium armor. magicka builds should be light armor. Staves users should be forced to go magicka builds while all the others should be forced to go stamina builds.

A magicka build character should deal much more damage to a stamina build character and vice versa. Why ? because stamina build characters should have passives to increase armor, dodge and health.

A magicka build character should deal limited damage to another magicka build character. Why ? because magicka build characters should have more spell resistances.

A magicka build character should also have high magicka regeneration while a stamina build character should have high stamina regeneration (from passives).

Now it stills gives the freedom for any class to either heal, dps or tank. The weapon or the armor tree he picks would determine that role.

Nice post. Very well thought out. I highly doubt Zenimax will do anything to fix the class/armor/resource imbalance in the game.

After thousands of posts full of excellent ideas addressing it — I just don't think they're interested.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

@ZOS_JessicaFolsom‌
Any news on those extra replies or saving them for ESO Live?

Huntler

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Here are a couple questions and answers. We're working on more that we'll share early next week, and during Friday's ESO Live show.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Please give more clarification if you can on this? It sounds like you want to make it quicker for players to repair walls? It’s already too quick for keeps to go out of attack / repairable and if players can repair for higher values walls will go up within 30s of the breach being made as the group is gathering for the assault.

Our goal is for an undefended keep to take approximately 3-5 minutes to capture, and an undefended keep capture to take a bit longer. The latter can vary quite a bit, of course. Currently, the threshold for being able to repair a wall while it’s under attack is very high (meaning, you can repair a wall that is being damaged if its health is still above 95%.) We are looking at the wall and door health values because it’s a very thin line between feeling like you’re doing actual damage versus beating your head against a wall for too long (no pun intended.) We are, of course, interested in hearing your thoughts.

Thanks for the clarification, I was specifically referring to the heal value you mentioned. For example, If I hit a wall that is on 0% with a ballista the time before the other faction can then repair that wall without receiving a 'Wall has been attacked recently' type message. Should be increased. Its currently (at a guess) 20 -30 seconds? should be at least 1m if not longer. Alternativly walls should be repaired slower the lower their %

So for example: (for an outer wall) between 0-25% you heal for 1000 per repair, between 25-55% you heal for 2000 per repair and from 55-100 you heal for 4000 per repair. This means that at the stages the wall changes form e.g. initial build up, out of 'under attack' range, fully repaired the speed is varied. stops ninja repairing so much. Additionally repairing a wall should give you a fixed AP amount back not based on how much you heal it for.

Extremely disagree with either of these points and you give no reasons why you want these changes other than, I dunno, able to zerg keeps down? Why should the repair time be to wait 1 minute? So the next massive group that got wiped can respawn and run across as 1 stealther ballista's the outer every minute? Thats silly, the timing right now is fine. Same with the repair rate. I can only see the motivation behind slowing down a side's ability to siege the wall as a way to allow teams that fail at their first push to get other tries.... no, just no.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

Huntler wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Here are a couple questions and answers. We're working on more that we'll share early next week, and during Friday's ESO Live show.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Please give more clarification if you can on this? It sounds like you want to make it quicker for players to repair walls? It’s already too quick for keeps to go out of attack / repairable and if players can repair for higher values walls will go up within 30s of the breach being made as the group is gathering for the assault.

Our goal is for an undefended keep to take approximately 3-5 minutes to capture, and an undefended keep capture to take a bit longer. The latter can vary quite a bit, of course. Currently, the threshold for being able to repair a wall while it’s under attack is very high (meaning, you can repair a wall that is being damaged if its health is still above 95%.) We are looking at the wall and door health values because it’s a very thin line between feeling like you’re doing actual damage versus beating your head against a wall for too long (no pun intended.) We are, of course, interested in hearing your thoughts.

Thanks for the clarification, I was specifically referring to the heal value you mentioned. For example, If I hit a wall that is on 0% with a ballista the time before the other faction can then repair that wall without receiving a 'Wall has been attacked recently' type message. Should be increased. Its currently (at a guess) 20 -30 seconds? should be at least 1m if not longer. Alternativly walls should be repaired slower the lower their %

So for example: (for an outer wall) between 0-25% you heal for 1000 per repair, between 25-55% you heal for 2000 per repair and from 55-100 you heal for 4000 per repair. This means that at the stages the wall changes form e.g. initial build up, out of 'under attack' range, fully repaired the speed is varied. stops ninja repairing so much. Additionally repairing a wall should give you a fixed AP amount back not based on how much you heal it for.

Extremely disagree with either of these points and you give no reasons why you want these changes other than, I dunno, able to zerg keeps down? Why should the repair time be to wait 1 minute? So the next massive group that got wiped can respawn and run across as 1 stealther ballista's the outer every minute? Thats silly, the timing right now is fine. Same with the repair rate. I can only see the motivation behind slowing down a side's ability to siege the wall as a way to allow teams that fail at their first push to get other tries.... no, just no.

The mechanic of repairing a keep wall is fundamentally flawed, the fact that as you run into a keep the enemy spread out and all try stealth to then repair the wall when you are cleaning out the keep is proof that this mechanic is wrong. Repairing a wall should be a group effort not the actions of 1 or 2 solo stealthers. As a group if the other side doesn't continually siege I will be able to repair the wall to 50% whilst they stack and try and run in (and have done so). This will be especially true with the increased siege damage (anti siege damage) and healing values mentioned which is why I brought it up. Yes you can leave 1 or 2 people sieging but why should you have to demolish a wall only for 1 guy to repair it up from a corner where they are practically continually in sneak.

Same with the 'Keep under attack' flag. this drops in strange situations like when you have run inside the inner keep go upstairs and the lag hits. you can never win because defenders can respawn and you can't - nor can you siege the wall (Which is being repaired in the lag) to re-flag the keep. See my point?

frozywozy

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Huntler wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Here are a couple questions and answers. We're working on more that we'll share early next week, and during Friday's ESO Live show.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Please give more clarification if you can on this? It sounds like you want to make it quicker for players to repair walls? It’s already too quick for keeps to go out of attack / repairable and if players can repair for higher values walls will go up within 30s of the breach being made as the group is gathering for the assault.

Our goal is for an undefended keep to take approximately 3-5 minutes to capture, and an undefended keep capture to take a bit longer. The latter can vary quite a bit, of course. Currently, the threshold for being able to repair a wall while it’s under attack is very high (meaning, you can repair a wall that is being damaged if its health is still above 95%.) We are looking at the wall and door health values because it’s a very thin line between feeling like you’re doing actual damage versus beating your head against a wall for too long (no pun intended.) We are, of course, interested in hearing your thoughts.

Thanks for the clarification, I was specifically referring to the heal value you mentioned. For example, If I hit a wall that is on 0% with a ballista the time before the other faction can then repair that wall without receiving a 'Wall has been attacked recently' type message. Should be increased. Its currently (at a guess) 20 -30 seconds? should be at least 1m if not longer. Alternativly walls should be repaired slower the lower their %

So for example: (for an outer wall) between 0-25% you heal for 1000 per repair, between 25-55% you heal for 2000 per repair and from 55-100 you heal for 4000 per repair. This means that at the stages the wall changes form e.g. initial build up, out of 'under attack' range, fully repaired the speed is varied. stops ninja repairing so much. Additionally repairing a wall should give you a fixed AP amount back not based on how much you heal it for.

Extremely disagree with either of these points and you give no reasons why you want these changes other than, I dunno, able to zerg keeps down? Why should the repair time be to wait 1 minute? So the next massive group that got wiped can respawn and run across as 1 stealther ballista's the outer every minute? Thats silly, the timing right now is fine. Same with the repair rate. I can only see the motivation behind slowing down a side's ability to siege the wall as a way to allow teams that fail at their first push to get other tries.... no, just no.

The mechanic of repairing a keep wall is fundamentally flawed, the fact that as you run into a keep the enemy spread out and all try stealth to then repair the wall when you are cleaning out the keep is proof that this mechanic is wrong. Repairing a wall should be a group effort not the actions of 1 or 2 solo stealthers. As a group if the other side doesn't continually siege I will be able to repair the wall to 50% whilst they stack and try and run in (and have done so). This will be especially true with the increased siege damage (anti siege damage) and healing values mentioned which is why I brought it up. Yes you can leave 1 or 2 people sieging but why should you have to demolish a wall only for 1 guy to repair it up from a corner where they are practically continually in sneak.

Same with the 'Keep under attack' flag. this drops in strange situations like when you have run inside the inner keep go upstairs and the lag hits. you can never win because defenders can respawn and you can't - nor can you siege the wall (Which is being repaired in the lag) to re-flag the keep. See my point?

Just to clarify, the keep will unflag after a certain time if no siege damage was delt to walls. Something like 2 minutes. You don't have to necessary hit the damaged wall, just any works.

I do agree that the repair system is broken at the moment. Doors are even worse than walls because with 2 stealthers, it takes 8seconds to get it back up, I did test it out. This should not happen! haha

Huntler

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Huntler wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Here are a couple questions and answers. We're working on more that we'll share early next week, and during Friday's ESO Live show.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Please give more clarification if you can on this? It sounds like you want to make it quicker for players to repair walls? It’s already too quick for keeps to go out of attack / repairable and if players can repair for higher values walls will go up within 30s of the breach being made as the group is gathering for the assault.

Our goal is for an undefended keep to take approximately 3-5 minutes to capture, and an undefended keep capture to take a bit longer. The latter can vary quite a bit, of course. Currently, the threshold for being able to repair a wall while it’s under attack is very high (meaning, you can repair a wall that is being damaged if its health is still above 95%.) We are looking at the wall and door health values because it’s a very thin line between feeling like you’re doing actual damage versus beating your head against a wall for too long (no pun intended.) We are, of course, interested in hearing your thoughts.

Thanks for the clarification, I was specifically referring to the heal value you mentioned. For example, If I hit a wall that is on 0% with a ballista the time before the other faction can then repair that wall without receiving a 'Wall has been attacked recently' type message. Should be increased. Its currently (at a guess) 20 -30 seconds? should be at least 1m if not longer. Alternativly walls should be repaired slower the lower their %

So for example: (for an outer wall) between 0-25% you heal for 1000 per repair, between 25-55% you heal for 2000 per repair and from 55-100 you heal for 4000 per repair. This means that at the stages the wall changes form e.g. initial build up, out of 'under attack' range, fully repaired the speed is varied. stops ninja repairing so much. Additionally repairing a wall should give you a fixed AP amount back not based on how much you heal it for.

Extremely disagree with either of these points and you give no reasons why you want these changes other than, I dunno, able to zerg keeps down? Why should the repair time be to wait 1 minute? So the next massive group that got wiped can respawn and run across as 1 stealther ballista's the outer every minute? Thats silly, the timing right now is fine. Same with the repair rate. I can only see the motivation behind slowing down a side's ability to siege the wall as a way to allow teams that fail at their first push to get other tries.... no, just no.

The mechanic of repairing a keep wall is fundamentally flawed, the fact that as you run into a keep the enemy spread out and all try stealth to then repair the wall when you are cleaning out the keep is proof that this mechanic is wrong. Repairing a wall should be a group effort not the actions of 1 or 2 solo stealthers. As a group if the other side doesn't continually siege I will be able to repair the wall to 50% whilst they stack and try and run in (and have done so). This will be especially true with the increased siege damage (anti siege damage) and healing values mentioned which is why I brought it up. Yes you can leave 1 or 2 people sieging but why should you have to demolish a wall only for 1 guy to repair it up from a corner where they are practically continually in sneak.

Same with the 'Keep under attack' flag. this drops in strange situations like when you have run inside the inner keep go upstairs and the lag hits. you can never win because defenders can respawn and you can't - nor can you siege the wall (Which is being repaired in the lag) to re-flag the keep. See my point?

you realize how long it takes to repair a wall up as 1 guy?

Korah_Eaglecry

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

8. Keep Wall / Door HP and Siege Times -- It is way, way too fast to slam down an empty keep. Even at rank 5, with 245K walls and 195K doors, I've dropped an empty keep in 2:30 (two minutes, 30 seconds) from first siege dropped to flags flipped to Ebonheart. There's very little time to react to this, especially if it's an outlying keep like Drakelowe, Brindle, or Dragonclaw. I think it's time to up the HPs of keeps or reduce the damage siege does to them -- whichever is easier to code. More fights, more sieges, less ninja flipping.

So you want a longer time for you to react to an empty forgotten keep. Sorry but the last thing I want is for Keeps to take forever to drop. If theres no one in the Keep but a Token Defense. They shouldnt be able to hold out against a Siege with Siege Machines.

Grim13

For the love of all that is holy, fix the stun-lock caused by Biting Jabs already!

Bouvin

TheBull wrote: »

Poxheart wrote: »

I provided valid feedback of your video, but you don't want to accept it. Conduct the tests where you initiate the gap closer attacks on an opponent that cloaks & lets see if your attacks makes him visible (they didn't when I tested it).

You have no way of knowing whether your opponents used detection pots. They are a common tool for any serious PvPer.

Didn't you see in the 3rd test where he cloaked the charge, did the dodge animation but still took 21 damage and the cloak broke? Why are you still arguing this? That is precisely what happens over and over every day to NBs in Cyrodiil.

As a long time forum poster, one with strong opinions, I know when the time comes to tip my cap and admit when I'm wrong. I've done it many times before. As far as cloak not working as intended, you have reached this point. No shame. Nod and move on.

Unslot Cloak. Replace with Mist Form.

Problem solved

Soris

Grim13 wrote: »

For the love of all that is holy, fix the stun-lock caused by Biting Jabs already!

YES! Make it instant cast, one hit only an no stun just like whip. Im sure every single templar dreaming this

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

Huntler wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Huntler wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Here are a couple questions and answers. We're working on more that we'll share early next week, and during Friday's ESO Live show.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Please give more clarification if you can on this? It sounds like you want to make it quicker for players to repair walls? It’s already too quick for keeps to go out of attack / repairable and if players can repair for higher values walls will go up within 30s of the breach being made as the group is gathering for the assault.

Our goal is for an undefended keep to take approximately 3-5 minutes to capture, and an undefended keep capture to take a bit longer. The latter can vary quite a bit, of course. Currently, the threshold for being able to repair a wall while it’s under attack is very high (meaning, you can repair a wall that is being damaged if its health is still above 95%.) We are looking at the wall and door health values because it’s a very thin line between feeling like you’re doing actual damage versus beating your head against a wall for too long (no pun intended.) We are, of course, interested in hearing your thoughts.

Thanks for the clarification, I was specifically referring to the heal value you mentioned. For example, If I hit a wall that is on 0% with a ballista the time before the other faction can then repair that wall without receiving a 'Wall has been attacked recently' type message. Should be increased. Its currently (at a guess) 20 -30 seconds? should be at least 1m if not longer. Alternativly walls should be repaired slower the lower their %

So for example: (for an outer wall) between 0-25% you heal for 1000 per repair, between 25-55% you heal for 2000 per repair and from 55-100 you heal for 4000 per repair. This means that at the stages the wall changes form e.g. initial build up, out of 'under attack' range, fully repaired the speed is varied. stops ninja repairing so much. Additionally repairing a wall should give you a fixed AP amount back not based on how much you heal it for.

Extremely disagree with either of these points and you give no reasons why you want these changes other than, I dunno, able to zerg keeps down? Why should the repair time be to wait 1 minute? So the next massive group that got wiped can respawn and run across as 1 stealther ballista's the outer every minute? Thats silly, the timing right now is fine. Same with the repair rate. I can only see the motivation behind slowing down a side's ability to siege the wall as a way to allow teams that fail at their first push to get other tries.... no, just no.

The mechanic of repairing a keep wall is fundamentally flawed, the fact that as you run into a keep the enemy spread out and all try stealth to then repair the wall when you are cleaning out the keep is proof that this mechanic is wrong. Repairing a wall should be a group effort not the actions of 1 or 2 solo stealthers. As a group if the other side doesn't continually siege I will be able to repair the wall to 50% whilst they stack and try and run in (and have done so). This will be especially true with the increased siege damage (anti siege damage) and healing values mentioned which is why I brought it up. Yes you can leave 1 or 2 people sieging but why should you have to demolish a wall only for 1 guy to repair it up from a corner where they are practically continually in sneak.

Same with the 'Keep under attack' flag. this drops in strange situations like when you have run inside the inner keep go upstairs and the lag hits. you can never win because defenders can respawn and you can't - nor can you siege the wall (Which is being repaired in the lag) to re-flag the keep. See my point?

you realize how long it takes to repair a wall up as 1 guy?

Why should it be fast solo?

same_old_roger

balanced game is balanced guys, relax.

Bullet_Bob

Don't every one understand the last thing the Devs are worried about is PvP. They care about getting the game to console and for the PC users it is all about TRIALS.
That is why the classes are not balanced. You can't have a TRAILS player underpowered. As long as the classes come to PvP with the same skills and stats as they have in PvE it will never change. You think 1.6 is going to fix it your crazy. Now 90% of the people will run DKs.

I play a stam built Night Blade. I will bet you that not the first Dev has ever played a duel dagger stam NB. The other think I don't understand about a NB. They are a lone wolf class. Why in the heck are there heals group heals? If you are not a mag using Sap essence and surprise attack to bad.

This game has turned out to be a DK with a sword and shield. Sit there and Block 360. Of course the Devs don't have time to fix this like they said because it would hurt there TRIALS build. Like they also said the DK build is perfect. That is the problem they are and every one ealse are 2nd class and some of us are 4th class.

I will give this game until 1.6 but sadly I don't think it will change.

So if you want your classes to balance out you will have to go to PvE land to make it happen.

Trayyacakes

Bullet_Bob wrote: »

Don't every one understand the last thing the Devs are worried about is PvP. They care about getting the game to console and for the PC users it is all about TRIALS.
That is why the classes are not balanced. You can't have a TRAILS player underpowered. As long as the classes come to PvP with the same skills and stats as they have in PvE it will never change. You think 1.6 is going to fix it your crazy. Now 90% of the people will run DKs.

I play a stam built Night Blade. I will bet you that not the first Dev has ever played a duel dagger stam NB. The other think I don't understand about a NB. They are a lone wolf class. Why in the heck are there heals group heals? If you are not a mag using Sap essence and surprise attack to bad.

This game has turned out to be a DK with a sword and shield. Sit there and Block 360. Of course the Devs don't have time to fix this like they said because it would hurt there TRIALS build. Like they also said the DK build is perfect. That is the problem they are and every one ealse are 2nd class and some of us are 4th class.

I will give this game until 1.6 but sadly I don't think it will change.

So if you want your classes to balance out you will have to go to PvE land to make it happen.

Everyone will play DK after 1.6? RS nerf incoming and an indirect battle roar nerf incoming from ult generation changes. There is also the LA nerf that will mean picking either sustain and damage, or survivability. AOE's are now blockable which means less damage from AOE, but more stam drain...

Do you know something I don't?

Darlgon

Huntler wrote: »

you realize how long it takes to repair a wall up as 1 guy?

Not to mention the 30K AP to get 3k back.

Manoekin

Bullet_Bob wrote: »

I will bet you that not the first Dev has ever played a duel dagger stam NB.

I'll take that bet because I've talked to one. I don't get your point either because DW was already buffed considerably. Also, no class is a lone wolf, that is what you as a player are. It's your choice. This is a PvP patch. What is PvP? It's combat and skills, which is what this patch is mostly focused around, and a lot of the changes have PvP in mind (including new pvp skills for crying out loud).

BugCollector

Great post. However you forgot one major issue.... DUELING!