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

yodased

@ZOS_JessicaFolsom isn't that a DvP test?

words!

Gorthax

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

roechacca wrote: »

Will the Devs test the new changes against players on the test server ?

Actually, yes! We're planning a PVP test event for Update 6, where we will have as many developers as we can get to participate, on all three sides. We'll be posting our PTS event schedule as soon as we have a better idea of what will work best for everyone here.

awesome! I think you should currently do it for live right now. So they can see the outcome of their previous choices lol that way if anything is close to being the same way on 1.6 they can fix it.

ZOS_JessicaFolsom

yodased wrote: »

@ZOS_JessicaFolsom isn't that a DvP test?

words!

Touche! (But we're players, too!)

Roechacca

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

roechacca wrote: »

Will the Devs test the new changes against players on the test server ?

Actually, yes! We're planning a PVP test event for Update 6, where we will have as many developers as we can get to participate, on all three sides. We'll be posting our PTS event schedule as soon as we have a better idea of what will work best for everyone here.

Awesome

pmn100b16_ESO

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

In Update 6, we're making magicka-based area-of-effect abilities blockable.

bye bye fear going through block

jopeymonster

@ZOS_JessicaFolsom‌

Keep up the good work!

@Agrippa_Invisus‌ for prez 2016!

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

Thanks so much for the detailed reply, please give us more posts like these

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

2. Blockcasting -- This, combined with the LA sustainability/durability balance issues, is what leads to the 'Ubertank DK' that is so universally loathed. ZOS, you're smart, figure out a way around this mechanic.

We agree that block casting is an issue, but our main focus has been on balancing and polishing other features for 1.6. We did spend some time on this problem, but in the end we decided to take a little more time to get the right solution for this instead of rushing out a “fix” that could potentially introduce more problems.

I understand this, could you perhaps try your initial fix on us and see what we think on PTS? Let us help

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

4. AE Damage Scaling -- AE abilities should never substitute for single target abilities for damage. There's zero reason that Impulse should even approach skills like Crushing Shock or Lava Whip for single target damage. AEs make their DPS back by hitting multiple targets (and then some) for their cost. I don't care one whit if this requires PvE re-balancing, it's an imbalance in the current system.

If you are using the version of Impulse that deals damage over time, it can be effective to weave into a single target rotation every 10 seconds. Just spamming Impulse is going to do less single-target damage than spamming Lava Whip or Crushing Shock.

Not sure if this is what @Agrippa_Invisus meant here, althought I might be wrong, I think hes saying that AOE's deal too much damage currently compared to single target attacks. I guess this might mean that if you face 2 enemies instead of using single target 1 by 1 in some situations its better to just go for straight AOE, AOE should generally be viable on the top end of its number cap not less so on the bottom end (unless for that debuff/dot) (especially with the non blocking part - which will be fixed by 1.6 you say).

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

6. Stacking Ground Effects -- They're invisible half the time due to spell effect culling, they contribute hugely to the lag, and frankly are being used in silly ways (blockade of fire through the grate of an inner ring keep over front door anyone?). Make it so, universally, any ground effect erases the previous cast and replaces it -- much akin to how Cinder Storm or Caltrops work. It's time for things like this to start behaving in the same manner.

In Update 6, you'll only be able to have one Wall of Fire active at a time. We also reduced the number of particle effects associated with some abilities, focusing on those that had the largest impact on performance.

Could you try an option where by all ground partical effects are replaced with a red or green 'filled' circle (players could have the option to vary the opacity and colour of each).

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

7. Siege Damage -- Siege Weapons need to hit players way, way harder than they do. It needs to be very dangerous to be within range of a siege line's artillery. As it currently is, it's easier than ever to mitigate and heal through siege damage, even when storming a breach. As long as you don't linger, you'll make it through fine, and it is players who are far more dangerous.

We're actually adjusting damage in Update 6 so that siege damage can't be mitigated by armor. This adjustment comes in conjunction with damage scaling due to player character and monster rebalancing throughout the game in Update 6.

Along with rebalancing can you consider changing the shapes of the siege hits? for example everything is just a big circle, would be interesting for example to have very strong but narrower hits from siege and different shapes, e.g. treb could be a narrow 'line' shape but deal massive damage. Would make sieging and avoiding siege more interesting.

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

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.

We're increasing the heal value of the wall upgrade in Update 6, but we’ll also look into adding more HP to the doors. We'll see how player survivability vs. other siege weapons feels with the removal of armor mitigation in conjunction with door/wall destruction timing. Regardless, we can work on changing the timing to give your allies a better opportunity to respond.

Please give more clarification if you can on this? It sounds like you want to make it quicker for players to repair walls? Its 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. I would highly reccommend looking at these values and the time to 'be able to repair' if you are adjusting this value.
Sieging times are good right now I feel, the only change I would make is for the inner walls and doors to take 50% less damage whilst the keep is not flagged. (not outposts). This will reduce the amount of 50/50ing done by players with trebs and allow players to respond better to siege. IMO I want it to be a risk to pushing one faction too hard and committing too many players to one part of the map.

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

9. The Nikel Corridor -- Make this a more interesting place to fight. Add some cottages, huts, a village or two (easily destroyed and forgotten by Oblivion's time period), anything to make it so that area is as lively as other areas of the map.

Sure, we can look into that!

More of this please changing environment makes it fun to find new choke points and areas to fight. would be interesting if you for example put in some sort of large-ish dueling area where players could watch on raised platforms for better support of all playstyles in cyro.

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

10. Buff Servers -- Kill buffs outside of the PVP zone. It's time for Buff servers to die the death they deserve.

This is something we've discussed at length and continue to have conversations about. We initially made the buffs as an incentive for PVP, but in the long run, using campaigns as a “buff server” has been more of a crutch than the intended bonus. We've seen your feedback and concerns about this—we'll continue to discuss it internally and see what we can do.

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 (Raise the campaign cap back up please!! didn't work for the lag just revert the change ^^)

Xsorus

pmn100b16_ESO wrote: »

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

In Update 6, we're making magicka-based area-of-effect abilities blockable.

bye bye fear going through block

That's not necessarily true

Rylana

The moment 1.6 hits I am going to my closet, getting out the roll of duct tape, cutting off a small square, and taping my right mouse button down permanently.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

roechacca wrote: »

Will the Devs test the new changes against players on the test server ?

Actually, yes! We're planning a PVP test event for Update 6, where we will have as many developers as we can get to participate, on all three sides. We'll be posting our PTS event schedule as soon as we have a better idea of what will work best for everyone here.

@ZOS_JessicaFolsom Would be interesting to split you guys across the factions maybe this time?

Also any news on camps?

Grim13

pmn100b16_ESO wrote: »

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

In Update 6, we're making magicka-based area-of-effect abilities blockable.

bye bye fear going through block

This is a very good point. What about Fear, @ZOS_JessicaFolsom‌?

Joy_Division

Rylana wrote: »

The moment 1.6 hits I am going to my closet, getting out the roll of duct tape, cutting off a small square, and taping my right mouse button down permanently.

You mean you don't already do this?

Tripwyr

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

@Agrippa_Invisus - Thank you for the detailed post. We genuinely appreciate you sharing your concerns with us. We've answered each question in line, below.

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

1. Armor types and their effectiveness -- LA needs a durability nerf the size of Tamriel, HA needs love in a severe way.

Don't worry; Update 6 is on its way! When it arrives, items will provide spell resistance and armor, making heavy armor more useful. In addition, soft caps are going away, so heavy armor won't have its effectiveness reduced.

I addressed this at the summit, but I will repeat it again here as neither Maria nor Paul Sage seemed to understand my concerns. Will armor scale linearly or logarithmicly? The reason I ask is because linear armor scaling results in exponential damage reduction growth as armor is added. The best way to explain this I found on a WoW fansite:

Armor / (Armor - 22167.5 + 467.5 * MobLevel)

If a level 70 character were fighting a level 73 raid boss, and they had 12000 armor, then the damage they take would be reduced by 12000 / (12000 - 22167.5 + 467.5 * 73) = 12000 / 23960 = approximately 50%.

If that character were to have 24000 armor, then the damage would be reduced by 24000 / (24000 - 22167.5 + 467.5 * 73) = 24000 / 35960 = approximately 67%.


There are two important things to understand about this formula.

1) If a character adds some amount of armor, and it prevents X% of the damage-before-armor, adding that amount again will not prevent an additional X%. The amount will be smaller than this. (In the example above, a tank with 12000 armor takes half of the original damage, however, adding another 12000 armor does not eliminate the other half.)

2) Although the damage reduction does not scale with each hit, it allows the character to take more hits, which are also reduced in damage. The formula works out so the damage reduction is an amount that increases the character longevity equally at all levels. Let's imagine three characters, a mage, a shaman, and a warrior all have 10,000 health and nobody is available to heal them.

The mage has essentially no armor at all, so the enemy needs to just deal 10,000 damage to kill them.
The shaman has about 12k armor, so half of the damage to them is prevented. The enemy needs to deal what would have been 20,000 damage in order to actually get 10,000 through. As a result the shaman lives twice as long as the mage.
The warrior has 24k armor, and two-thirds of the damage is prevented. The enemy needs to deal what would have been 30,000 damage to get 10,000 through. As a result the warrior lives three times as long.
If there were a bear-form druid with 36k armor there as well, (another 12k,) they would live four times as long as the mage did.
So even though the damage-per-hit does not seem to scale correctly, the character will take the correct amount of additional punishment before falling over.

I would love a clear response on this from somebody who understands the math behind it, such as Eric or Joe.

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

3. Stamina vs Magicka AEs -- There is no good reason that Steel Tornado is blockable while Impulse/Blockade aren't. This alone prevents Stamina from standing in the same place damage-wise in group situations. The same with Brawler and other 2H area abilities. Either both stamina and magicka AEs should be blockable or neither should be. I lean towards both should be.

In Update 6, we're making magicka-based area-of-effect abilities blockable.

On Tuesday Joe Blackburn told us that Wall of Elements will not be blockable, has this changed? Similarly, will Caltrops remain blockable or will this stamina draining issue be fixed?

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

7. Siege Damage -- Siege Weapons need to hit players way, way harder than they do. It needs to be very dangerous to be within range of a siege line's artillery. As it currently is, it's easier than ever to mitigate and heal through siege damage, even when storming a breach. As long as you don't linger, you'll make it through fine, and it is players who are far more dangerous.

We're actually adjusting damage in Update 6 so that siege damage can't be mitigated by armor. This adjustment comes in conjunction with damage scaling due to player character and monster rebalancing throughout the game in Update 6.

This is already the case, siege is not mitigated by armor. Are you planning to increase damage to compensate or will things go unchanged?

For the record, I would like to state that I feel increasing siege damage to players is the wrong way to go unless you seriously limit the placement options. A single siege placed facing a flag is already devastating, I don't want to see single players wiping huge groups because they put down a siege.

Thank you for your response Jess!

Dreyloch

wafcatb14_ESO wrote: »

all of the changes are moot if they can`t fix the lag server stabilty issues we have had since 1.3 .

As far as changes to pvp that effect pve and vice verse etc. Everquest wayyy back in 2000 15 years ago had balances between pve and pvp.

spells, damage, worked different in pvp than they did in pve. like fear stunned instead of making them flee, so you couldn`t fear people off cliffs,and make them take a exp loss death. . couldn`t charm players as people would charm players make them fight npc and lose exp on death. but they remained unchanged in pve .

Spells that did high damage like 1500+ nukes were unchanged for pve they still hit as hard as they were able to. but in pvp you couldn`t do more than 75 % of a person hp in damage with 1 spell so you couldn`t 1 shot people .

Same as melee damage melee damage ablities were unchanged for pve , as just like spell damage high dps etc was needed to do pve/raid combat .
However in pvp the capped the amount of damage you could do in 1 hit to 75 % of a players hp.

If EQ 15 years ago was able to balance ablities for pvp without nerfing them for pve . it`s silly that game companies today can`t .

instead of changing how ablities work in pvp but leaving them unchanged in pve. they just make blanket nerfs and changes that effect the ablity in both pve and pvp pissing everyone off .

/Agree with everything above^^^ EQ2 is the game I was thinking of for this type of system. I've screamed this from day one with this game. I just can not fathom how ANY MMO made in the last decade has not learned this is how you balance with less bitching from your playerbase. I have not played a game since then that has had this kind of duel-ruleset for PvE and PvP.

Darlgon

Tripwyr wrote: »

For the record, I would like to state that I feel increasing siege damage to players is the wrong way to go unless you seriously limit the placement options. A single siege placed facing a flag is already devastating, I don't want to see single players wiping huge groups because they put down a siege.

Thank you for your response Jess!

After spending an hour raining meatbags down on players who heal thru it defending keeps..


Ha... Ha Ha.. HHHHHHAAAAHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAA....

sniff..




How do I know I didnt kill them? I had the kill 20 players quest and still had 20 to kill.

Huntler

Darlgon wrote: »

Tripwyr wrote: »

For the record, I would like to state that I feel increasing siege damage to players is the wrong way to go unless you seriously limit the placement options. A single siege placed facing a flag is already devastating, I don't want to see single players wiping huge groups because they put down a siege.

Thank you for your response Jess!

After spending an hour raining meatbags down on players who heal thru it defending a keep..


Ha... Ha Ha.. HHHHHHAAAAHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAA....

sniff..




How do I know I didnt kill them? I had the kill 20 players quest and still had 20 to kill.

Meatbag isn't meant to do damage, this is clearly a situation where you used a siege weapon in the wrong context. Meatbags should be used in conjunction with a push on the players in question. If you want to kill people with siege, use a siege that does real damage, not a siege weapon designed to debuff. Meatbag siege can be incredibly devastating in the right hands, it is arguably borderline broken by how ridiculously strong it is (once again, in the right hands along with coordination).

Can't believe I just read someone complaining meatbags are weak...

Oughash

Rylana wrote: »

The moment 1.6 hits I am going to my closet, getting out the roll of duct tape, cutting off a small square, and taping my right mouse button down permanently.

This is pretty much my first reaction.

AoE is uncapped, blockable, and WoE doesn't stack. Sw/Sh will be even more mandatory.

Poxheart

Huntler wrote: »

Darlgon wrote: »

Tripwyr wrote: »

For the record, I would like to state that I feel increasing siege damage to players is the wrong way to go unless you seriously limit the placement options. A single siege placed facing a flag is already devastating, I don't want to see single players wiping huge groups because they put down a siege.

Thank you for your response Jess!

After spending an hour raining meatbags down on players who heal thru it defending a keep..


Ha... Ha Ha.. HHHHHHAAAAHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAA....

sniff..




How do I know I didnt kill them? I had the kill 20 players quest and still had 20 to kill.

Meatbag isn't meant to do damage, this is clearly a situation where you used a siege weapon in the wrong context. Meatbags should be used in conjunction with a push on the players in question. If you want to kill people with siege, use a siege that does real damage, not a siege weapon designed to debuff. Meatbag siege can be incredibly devastating in the right hands, it is arguably borderline broken by how ridiculously strong it is (once again, in the right hands along with coordination).

Can't believe I just read someone complaining meatbags are weak...

First, the OP didn't specify whether other siege was also hitting the defenders, but I suspect it was.

I've had the same exeprience with fire ballista shot through a breach onto defenders. I'd hit 10+ players (based on combat cloud) yet would get few (if any) kills.

I've also been on siege positined to fire on a flag/breach while defending a keep and have watched the enemy run through all the siege damage while losing hardly any health.

Of course, after about 5 shots the siege gets desynced & the game doesn't register any damage, but that's a separate issue entirely.

Huntler

Poxheart wrote: »

Huntler wrote: »

Darlgon wrote: »

Tripwyr wrote: »

For the record, I would like to state that I feel increasing siege damage to players is the wrong way to go unless you seriously limit the placement options. A single siege placed facing a flag is already devastating, I don't want to see single players wiping huge groups because they put down a siege.

Thank you for your response Jess!

After spending an hour raining meatbags down on players who heal thru it defending a keep..


Ha... Ha Ha.. HHHHHHAAAAHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAA....

sniff..




How do I know I didnt kill them? I had the kill 20 players quest and still had 20 to kill.

Meatbag isn't meant to do damage, this is clearly a situation where you used a siege weapon in the wrong context. Meatbags should be used in conjunction with a push on the players in question. If you want to kill people with siege, use a siege that does real damage, not a siege weapon designed to debuff. Meatbag siege can be incredibly devastating in the right hands, it is arguably borderline broken by how ridiculously strong it is (once again, in the right hands along with coordination).

Can't believe I just read someone complaining meatbags are weak...

First, the OP didn't specify whether other siege was also hitting the defenders, but I suspect it was.

I've had the same exeprience with fire ballista shot through a breach onto defenders. I'd hit 10+ players (based on combat cloud) yet would get few (if any) kills.

I've also been on siege positined to fire on a flag/breach while defending a keep and have watched the enemy run through all the siege damage while losing hardly any health.

Of course, after about 5 shots the siege gets desynced & the game doesn't register any damage, but that's a separate issue entirely.

Do you believe 1 man on a siege weapon should be killing a group of organized players running specific counters to protect themselves from such? Because I sure as hell don't. You don't kill people with 1 siege weapon. You kill people with coordinated siege fire, coordinated groups timing pushes with meatbag/oil catapult hits. This kind of play is extremely devastating and turns what could be a long fight into literally over in 2 seconds (its more timing and coordination than raw damage). Upping the damage so that 1 siege weapon starts wrecking people just doesn't make sense. Should we all just set up siege and shoot at each other? The only purpose for siege beyond breaking down keeps should be as a support mechanic that provides beneficial, but not broken benefits to a battle. Currently they do that in spades, if anyone is not terrified of meatbags then you are extremely misguided (along with other types of siege by meatbags definitely take the cake). There is a reason the organized groups B line for meatbag users within a fight and will kill that 1 person before even worrying about other threats.

Domander

Rylana wrote: »

The moment 1.6 hits I am going to my closet, getting out the roll of duct tape, cutting off a small square, and taping my right mouse button down permanently.

You're gonna have a hard time generating ultimate if you do that...

Rylana

Domander wrote: »

Rylana wrote: »

The moment 1.6 hits I am going to my closet, getting out the roll of duct tape, cutting off a small square, and taping my right mouse button down permanently.

You're gonna have a hard time generating ultimate if you do that...

Ill just bash everything to death, old school. Im literally at the point of just building a supertank and calling it good. Screw trying to do damage to anyone anymore.

Oughash

Rylana wrote: »

Domander wrote: »

Rylana wrote: »

The moment 1.6 hits I am going to my closet, getting out the roll of duct tape, cutting off a small square, and taping my right mouse button down permanently.

You're gonna have a hard time generating ultimate if you do that...

Ill just bash everything to death, old school. Im literally at the point of just building a supertank and calling it good. Screw trying to do damage to anyone anymore.

Footman + Twin Sisters.

RinaldoGandolphi

Huntler wrote: »

Poxheart wrote: »

Huntler wrote: »

Darlgon wrote: »

Tripwyr wrote: »

For the record, I would like to state that I feel increasing siege damage to players is the wrong way to go unless you seriously limit the placement options. A single siege placed facing a flag is already devastating, I don't want to see single players wiping huge groups because they put down a siege.

Thank you for your response Jess!

After spending an hour raining meatbags down on players who heal thru it defending a keep..


Ha... Ha Ha.. HHHHHHAAAAHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAA....

sniff..




How do I know I didnt kill them? I had the kill 20 players quest and still had 20 to kill.

Meatbag isn't meant to do damage, this is clearly a situation where you used a siege weapon in the wrong context. Meatbags should be used in conjunction with a push on the players in question. If you want to kill people with siege, use a siege that does real damage, not a siege weapon designed to debuff. Meatbag siege can be incredibly devastating in the right hands, it is arguably borderline broken by how ridiculously strong it is (once again, in the right hands along with coordination).

Can't believe I just read someone complaining meatbags are weak...

First, the OP didn't specify whether other siege was also hitting the defenders, but I suspect it was.

I've had the same exeprience with fire ballista shot through a breach onto defenders. I'd hit 10+ players (based on combat cloud) yet would get few (if any) kills.

I've also been on siege positined to fire on a flag/breach while defending a keep and have watched the enemy run through all the siege damage while losing hardly any health.

Of course, after about 5 shots the siege gets desynced & the game doesn't register any damage, but that's a separate issue entirely.

Do you believe 1 man on a siege weapon should be killing a group of organized players running specific counters to protect themselves from such? Because I sure as hell don't. You don't kill people with 1 siege weapon. You kill people with coordinated siege fire, coordinated groups timing pushes with meatbag/oil catapult hits. This kind of play is extremely devastating and turns what could be a long fight into literally over in 2 seconds (its more timing and coordination than raw damage). Upping the damage so that 1 siege weapon starts wrecking people just doesn't make sense. Should we all just set up siege and shoot at each other? The only purpose for siege beyond breaking down keeps should be as a support mechanic that provides beneficial, but not broken benefits to a battle. Currently they do that in spades, if anyone is not terrified of meatbags then you are extremely misguided (along with other types of siege by meatbags definitely take the cake). There is a reason the organized groups B line for meatbag users within a fight and will kill that 1 person before even worrying about other threats.

Siege as it stands now doesn't do enough damage. I shot a DK in the face head on with a fire ballista 4 meters from me and it barely moved his health bar.

To answer your question, yes if I fire artillery into your organized group on the flag and your standing in the danger close zone you should die period. Your being shot with artillery for petes sake. The equivalent of a tank.

Are you aware the Romans slaughtered folks with ballistia? Its was nothing to kill 5-6 guys at a time per shot...in eso its little more then a scratch.

The flaming oil is the real funny one though..peiple walk through it like nothing she it would literally melt the flesh from your bones and leave you as a burning corpse.

Taking keeps is too easy because siege isn't strong enough. If you know anything about war fare of the time period up until post ww2, and especially the middle ages, those attacking castles always lost more men then those defending. The defenders always have the defensive advantage and hugh ground which was the reason most castle sieges back then the attackers out numbered the defenders 5 or 6 to one, and even the victory wasn't assured as 1 buring pot could kill or maim 20 men, you were any where with 5 meters of a Greek fire ballista, if you didn't die you were so horribly injured and disfigured you couldn't fight if you want to.

If 5 organized guys ate standing on a flag and someone fires an artliery round at you and you stand there in the danger close zone it should be instant death recap screen for you and anyone else standing there with Fire Ballista 6.5k damage as what killed you because its stupid anyone would survive that even in a video game.

As much as I hate COD and its arcade nonsense, at least when you get blasted with a grenade head in your dead.. They at least got that part right.

Getting shot with artillery should be death.. You shouldn't be able to survive it, siege in its current state is only good for shooting die walls, nothing more, myself shoiting someone head on in the face at near point blank range with a ballusta and it barely hurting him is proof enough for me that siege in its current state is largely useless against players.

Just stand inside it and heal don't bother to move. Next thing we know folks will be waving first aid kits in video games while standing in tank fire unscathed.;)

Fruitdog

but the siege should also take 3 seconds to setup and fit in your pocket when packed

Huntler

woodsro wrote: »

Huntler wrote: »

Poxheart wrote: »

Huntler wrote: »

Darlgon wrote: »

Tripwyr wrote: »

For the record, I would like to state that I feel increasing siege damage to players is the wrong way to go unless you seriously limit the placement options. A single siege placed facing a flag is already devastating, I don't want to see single players wiping huge groups because they put down a siege.

Thank you for your response Jess!

After spending an hour raining meatbags down on players who heal thru it defending a keep..


Ha... Ha Ha.. HHHHHHAAAAHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAA....

sniff..




How do I know I didnt kill them? I had the kill 20 players quest and still had 20 to kill.

Meatbag isn't meant to do damage, this is clearly a situation where you used a siege weapon in the wrong context. Meatbags should be used in conjunction with a push on the players in question. If you want to kill people with siege, use a siege that does real damage, not a siege weapon designed to debuff. Meatbag siege can be incredibly devastating in the right hands, it is arguably borderline broken by how ridiculously strong it is (once again, in the right hands along with coordination).

Can't believe I just read someone complaining meatbags are weak...

First, the OP didn't specify whether other siege was also hitting the defenders, but I suspect it was.

I've had the same exeprience with fire ballista shot through a breach onto defenders. I'd hit 10+ players (based on combat cloud) yet would get few (if any) kills.

I've also been on siege positined to fire on a flag/breach while defending a keep and have watched the enemy run through all the siege damage while losing hardly any health.

Of course, after about 5 shots the siege gets desynced & the game doesn't register any damage, but that's a separate issue entirely.

Do you believe 1 man on a siege weapon should be killing a group of organized players running specific counters to protect themselves from such? Because I sure as hell don't. You don't kill people with 1 siege weapon. You kill people with coordinated siege fire, coordinated groups timing pushes with meatbag/oil catapult hits. This kind of play is extremely devastating and turns what could be a long fight into literally over in 2 seconds (its more timing and coordination than raw damage). Upping the damage so that 1 siege weapon starts wrecking people just doesn't make sense. Should we all just set up siege and shoot at each other? The only purpose for siege beyond breaking down keeps should be as a support mechanic that provides beneficial, but not broken benefits to a battle. Currently they do that in spades, if anyone is not terrified of meatbags then you are extremely misguided (along with other types of siege by meatbags definitely take the cake). There is a reason the organized groups B line for meatbag users within a fight and will kill that 1 person before even worrying about other threats.

Siege as it stands now doesn't do enough damage. I shot a DK in the face head on with a fire ballista 4 meters from me and it barely moved his health bar.

To answer your question, yes if I fire artillery into your organized group on the flag and your standing in the danger close zone you should die period. Your being shot with artillery for petes sake. The equivalent of a tank.

Are you aware the Romans slaughtered folks with ballistia? Its was nothing to kill 5-6 guys at a time per shot...in eso its little more then a scratch.

The flaming oil is the real funny one though..peiple walk through it like nothing she it would literally melt the flesh from your bones and leave you as a burning corpse.

Taking keeps is too easy because siege isn't strong enough. If you know anything about war fare of the time period up until post ww2, and especially the middle ages, those attacking castles always lost more men then those defending. The defenders always have the defensive advantage and hugh ground which was the reason most castle sieges back then the attackers out numbered the defenders 5 or 6 to one, and even the victory wasn't assured as 1 buring pot could kill or maim 20 men, you were any where with 5 meters of a Greek fire ballista, if you didn't die you were so horribly injured and disfigured you couldn't fight if you want to.

If 5 organized guys ate standing on a flag and someone fires an artliery round at you and you stand there in the danger close zone it should be instant death recap screen for you and anyone else standing there with Fire Ballista 6.5k damage as what killed you because its stupid anyone would survive that even in a video game.

As much as I hate COD and its arcade nonsense, at least when you get blasted with a grenade head in your dead.. They at least got that part right.

Getting shot with artillery should be death.. You shouldn't be able to survive it, siege in its current state is only good for shooting die walls, nothing more, myself shooting someone head on in the face at near point blank range with a ballista and it barely hurting him is proof enough for me that siege in its current state is largely useless against players.

Just stand inside it and heal don't bother to move. Next thing we know folks will be waving first aid kits in video games while standing in tank fire unscathed.;)

Did you just RP me you clown? In WW2 they also didn't have magic, daedra, and rez stones. How insane do you have to be to think because something works a certain way in real life that this should be applicable to game balance? Like... please tell me this is the longest, most elaborate troll post I've ever read otherwise my last hope in this community might have just died.... I just...

I don't even...


In case you are at all serious, the Romans couldn't carry around 80+ piece of siege in their backpack and set them up within seconds highhandedly. This is about game balance not reality and making siege 1 shot people is *** *** and horrible game balance. I'll tell you what, you can get your siege 1 hitting people if you can only carry 1 siege at a time, it slows your walk to a crawl, and it takes 10 minutes to set up. Deal?

Holy *** the RP is real. I try my best to give someone's idea when it comes to balance a chance, but this is just ridiculous.


edit: oh and on top of that, in an attempt to sound cool or like you know some ***... talking about enemies standing in a "danger close zone" as you said it makes no *** sense whatsoever. I'm sure you heard it in COD or something, but don't... just don't... you make yourself look like .. well... a wannabe clown. Look up what danger close means and you'll understand in your context it just makes you look like a fool.

Sanct16

I think a Ballista shot should be like an AoE snipe. Just hit a bit harder. It should deal around 5000 damage instantly so I dont have to actually pvp but can get my AP just by sitting on some wall and kill everyone.

GorraShatan

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

yodased wrote: »

@ZOS_JessicaFolsom isn't that a DvP test?

words!

Touche! (But we're players, too!)

Any idea on what format this will take? From a stress test perspective, its only in a few circumstances that I've seen lag spikes lately - like big scroll fights at a keep with one or two hundred people involve are where things hit the fan the most, and those aren't that common.

On the nerf to magicka AOE - I just wanted to point out that AOE is what is supposed to be used to punish zergs. Unfortunately those zergs are themselves a problem because of how good AOE is. Your example of just weaving an impulse in every 10 seconds assumes you're fighting just one target. In a fight between two full groups of 24, that's rarely the case.

I hope siege does get buffed in the end, as suggested here, as that seems like a more suitable way to fight AOE zergs than with our own AOE zerg.

Poxheart

Huntler wrote: »

Do you believe 1 man on a siege weapon should be killing a group of organized players running specific counters to protect themselves from such? Because I sure as hell don't.

Perhaps you should go back & re-read @Tripwyr's comment where he said, "a single siege placed facing a flag is already devastating." That is what @Darlgon responded to.

Roechacca

Reality < Video Games

Darlgon

Poxheart wrote: »

Huntler wrote: »

Do you believe 1 man on a siege weapon should be killing a group of organized players running specific counters to protect themselves from such? Because I sure as hell don't.

Perhaps you should go back & re-read @Tripwyr's comment where he said, "a single siege placed facing a flag is already devastating." That is what @Darlgon responded to.

Somewhere.. a LONG time ago, AvA was sold as.. our guards and ONE PLAYER can hold out an army for quite some time, until reinforcements arrive from across the map..Now, the only way that can happen is siege. Right now, one person is pretty much on their own, as the guards get mowed under in seconds.