Swords shouldn't give more spell damage than Staves.

omfgitsbatman

Jumper45 wrote: »

omfgitsbatman wrote: »

MrGrimey wrote: »

Risk and reward

If you are saying this in response to swords vs staves, there is no risk involved in going with swords over staves.
If you are saying this in response to melee vs ranged, I have already explained why there is very little risk and almost no negative for going melee vs going ranged.

Also, I completely support melee being able do more dps when they can stand still and do nothing. I am simply saying that they can do this in almost every single fight, so they will always be doing more damage than ranged. Ranged should have a few fights where they can do more damage because the melee get interrupted. This is absolutely not the case right now.

Yeah Stacking the aoe healing etc so they can stand in red circles negates their time spent running from it aka losing dps vs a ranged etc. Trickle effect causing the dps to outdo the ranged in these situations. A fix is making the circles 1 shot. but it feels retardedly cheap to be 1shot b/c u missed a circle by an inch. What they need to do is add debuffs for these circles. Thus its not so cheap. You wont be 1shot and your dps will go down so youre being punished for failing. This would balance it out a little more. Of course adding some sort of same effect for ranged etc. As it stands now though it doesnt work.

I like your idea about the debuff if hit by the circle a lot.

chevalierknight

Op post is point less dev have said its intended and never changing plus 99% are fine with it

BrassRazoo

Shh don't upset the Nightblades, remember they have suffered for to long and require some serious buffs.

Jumper45

omfgitsbatman wrote: »

Jumper45 wrote: »

omfgitsbatman wrote: »

MrGrimey wrote: »

Risk and reward

If you are saying this in response to swords vs staves, there is no risk involved in going with swords over staves.
If you are saying this in response to melee vs ranged, I have already explained why there is very little risk and almost no negative for going melee vs going ranged.

Also, I completely support melee being able do more dps when they can stand still and do nothing. I am simply saying that they can do this in almost every single fight, so they will always be doing more damage than ranged. Ranged should have a few fights where they can do more damage because the melee get interrupted. This is absolutely not the case right now.

Yeah Stacking the aoe healing etc so they can stand in red circles negates their time spent running from it aka losing dps vs a ranged etc. Trickle effect causing the dps to outdo the ranged in these situations. A fix is making the circles 1 shot. but it feels retardedly cheap to be 1shot b/c u missed a circle by an inch. What they need to do is add debuffs for these circles. Thus its not so cheap. You wont be 1shot and your dps will go down so youre being punished for failing. This would balance it out a little more. Of course adding some sort of same effect for ranged etc. As it stands now though it doesnt work.

I like your idea about the debuff if hit by the circle a lot.

yeah its pretty much the only way to punish DPS without cramming a pineapple up the healers butt. some damage is fine but 1 shots etc are not the way to go heh.

omfgitsbatman

chevalierknight wrote: »

Op post is point less dev have said its intended and never changing plus 99% are fine with it

I know. I watched the ESO live where Eric said that he likes it this way. His arguments for it were pretty much what I outlined in the initial post. I made this post to show why I believe he was mistaken. He said that you are missing out on regen and it makes it a little more dangerous... My entire post has been to explain why this is not so.

BrassRazoo wrote: »

Shh don't upset the Nightblades, remember they have suffered for to long and require some serious buffs.

I have no idea where this came from... Nothing I have said is asking for a buff to nightblades or anything else. I simply want weapon damage and spell damage to be completely differently stats on a weapon, and I think it's silly to have swords give an incredible amount more spell damage than staves.

FriedEggSandwich

I know the op was directed more at pve, but from a pvp perspective destro staff heavy attacks hit hard on live. Anywhere from 4-8k, and upto 15k on vamps, and I don't have any cp in staff expert.. Ok so they're slow and obvious but they're also free and quick to charge. I'm not tempted to dual wield simply because I like my destro heavy attacks, I don't even use any destro skills.

omfgitsbatman

FriedEggSandwich wrote: »

I know the op was directed more at pve, but from a pvp perspective destro staff heavy attacks hit hard on live. Anywhere from 4-8k, and upto 15k on vamps, and I don't have any cp in staff expert.. Ok so they're slow and obvious but they're also free and quick to charge. I'm not tempted to dual wield simply because I like my destro heavy attacks, I don't even use any destro skills.

PVP is a different animal completely since regen and mobility are king. You do way more than just dps in PVP. You need to be able to stay alive and adapt to anything. The regen from a staff heavy is often needed in PVP. There are so many different play styles that it makes a meta impossible to pin down. However, a glass cannon caster that is Kill or bust will still mostly be better dual wielding for the extra spell damage and extra set piece. Yes, the heavy attack is nice, but 500 extra spell damage is usually nicer in those quick encounters.

Kammakazi

The deal breaker is the difficulty of generating ultimate without putting yourself at risk. (pvp)

omfgitsbatman

You can get the ultimate gen buff from roll dodging or using a skill that heals a player with the buff.
Also, I have never fought someone for more than 5 services l seconds where we didn't get on melee range for at least a couple seconds- except for giant sieges where it's plenty easy to build ultimate in the other ways.