AoE Caps Discussion

Rune_Relic

Etaniel wrote: »

Rune_Relic wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Rune_Relic wrote: »

Jhunn wrote: »

Rune_Relic wrote: »

[
So you have 100 people all within the same healing circle (your targeted area) and you think 4 players are going to kill anyone with smart heals going off ?
Especially if your 4 strikes land over 4 ticks instead of 1 tick with the lag affecting different players latency in different ways.

I really cant believe anything anyone says if they think more players hit does not equal more server calculations and client updates to make.
Clearly they have never coded anything in their life.
Its really such a no brainer its not even worthy of discussion.

Probably why wrobel hasn't even merited the discussion with a response TBH.

Stop using 100 people as an example. You'll never have 100 enemies in an AOE area in this game. You'll never have more than 60 people, which is the current cap. You understand this, yes? Removal of AOE caps won't make you hit 'more people', because there will simply not be more than 60 people to hit at once, that will never happen. You understand if you hit 60 people right now, yes, where 6/24/30 people has to take calculated damage? For every AOE? Yes? With no AOE cap you'll hit all 60 people without any need for extra calculations? Yes?

[snip]

You'll never have more than 60 people.

Gross assumption on your part. [snip]
You haven't been in the campaigns I have and seen the people standing on keep flags.
And what happens if PVP gets really silly and does have 100 people all balling up like some games ?
What happens if ball groups keep getting more and more popular and bigger and bigger to WIN ?
There is absolutely NOTHING stopping ball groups being any size they want other than the Campaign POP CAP.

Removal of AoE caps wont make you hit more people.

Your 4 man group could only hit 24 people at one time.....now you can potentially hit 240 at once.
1.6 increased the potential calcs 10 fold.... and everyone paid the price when 1.6 dropped.
This needs reversing and the cap reduced until its suitable for the number of players on screen.

Answer the question instead of swerving it every single time.....WHY DID ZOS REPEATEDLY REDUCE CAMPAIGN SIZE AND TELL EVERYONE TO SPREAD OUT AFTER 1.6 DROPPED ?
I assume you know the answer but just refuse to accept it....aka denial.

With no AOE cap you'll hit all 60 people without any need for extra calculations?

You'll hit any one and everyone that's crammed in the AoE radius (how big they get is an assumption).
And how many are in the AoE radius is defined by the ball group size and not the label on the skill info (carpet bombing).
A 24 man coordinated group can carpet bomb a massive area and hit everyone in a keep in one tick
How much those selection circles overlap determine the damage multiplyer.
There is NO LIMIT on how many players can stand in this area ...except Population Caps (if you remove AoE caps).

[snip]

[snip]

[snip]

So lets do this from the start then.

1. ZOS says spread out. ZOS reduces campaign size. After ZOS increased caps from 6 players to 60 players.

You know this is because player density was too high and too many people were being hit by damage (aka AoE) at once.
IF THE AOE CAPS WAS >>>>>>1<<<<<< THERE WOULD BE 0 ~ NONE ~ NADA ~ NIL....LAG
The result was server performance was absolutely crippled by the amount of people being hit.
The performance went from diabolical to unplayable due to lag when raised from a 6 man cap to a 60 man cap.
[at the behest of people wanting AoE caps removed]
Hence spread out. Hence reduce campaign size.

One of you then says....
I am talking crap because you would never hit more than 60 people anyway.
Apparently oblivious to the fact if you are not going to hit more than 60 people YOU DONT NEED AN AOE CAP HIGHER THAN 60 PEOPLE !

Some of you then come out with the code would run much faster argument.
Out of the 100s of lines of code in 1 client update....you think replacing a 4 line selection with one line somehow bypasses the remaining 100s of lines of code that still have to proceed after the choice (damage multiplyer) is made.....FOR EVERY CLIENT HIT.

You then make out that going against bigger numbers GUARANTEES you will wipe them every time without fail instantly.
After all..they have to be dead to reduce incoming client updates and targets hit (aka LAG).
AND THIS IS NOT A GUARANTEE YOU CAN MAKE.
Does it improve your chances of taking down a ball group. YES !
Does it guarantee you will wipe every ball group you come across. NO !
The only way to GUARANTEE lag ends is 1vX 1-shot ability....which is what you really want (because motives).

2. Remove AoE cap Poll.

I wonder if that poll was ....
a. How many of you people want to hit unlimited players (AoE cap removal)
b. How many of you want the damage reduction removed (AoE Falloff removal)
...you would actually get an unbiased vote...rather than lump two camps into one.
Because all I see in most conversations on AoE CAP removal and streams is AoE falloff sucks and has to go.
AoE falloff removal is NOT AoE cap removal !
Most of you people cant even tell the difference.
I myself am in the AoE falloff removal camp....and have said so many times in this thread.

NOW...
You call it incompetence on ZOS part.
If you had even the slightest inkling about validation tests, you would know that limiters are put in place to protect the system from running outside of its capabilities.
One such limiter is AOE CAPS.
You have to ask WHY AoE caps exists because you have no idea at all about the ramifications of a system that has none.
They exist to ensure server and network performance does not get exceeded when you have too many players on screen that are within hittable range.....(aka LAG limiter)
They are absolutely critical when there is no collision detection and an infinite amount of players can stand in exactly the same place.
That is why an AoE Cap of >>>>>1<<<< means 0 LAG.....even with infinite players on the same spot.

To be fair though.
What ZOS should have been doing is reducing the AoE caps until LAG was eliminated and newtork/server performance was bought back within the limitations of the systems capabilities.
Instead of reducing the AoE caps that they increased ....they tried to reduce player density instead & improve netcode.
Like some of the players on here....they would rather argue black is blue than admit they made a mistake and are wrong.

I will be signing out of this thread from now on.
Too much posturing. Too much willywaving. Too many friends being lost.

[edited to remove quote]

Lava_Croft

/thread

Etaniel

Rune_Relic wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Rune_Relic wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Rune_Relic wrote: »

Jhunn wrote: »

Rune_Relic wrote: »

[
So you have 100 people all within the same healing circle (your targeted area) and you think 4 players are going to kill anyone with smart heals going off ?
Especially if your 4 strikes land over 4 ticks instead of 1 tick with the lag affecting different players latency in different ways.

I really cant believe anything anyone says if they think more players hit does not equal more server calculations and client updates to make.
Clearly they have never coded anything in their life.
Its really such a no brainer its not even worthy of discussion.

Probably why wrobel hasn't even merited the discussion with a response TBH.

Stop using 100 people as an example. You'll never have 100 enemies in an AOE area in this game. You'll never have more than 60 people, which is the current cap. You understand this, yes? Removal of AOE caps won't make you hit 'more people', because there will simply not be more than 60 people to hit at once, that will never happen. You understand if you hit 60 people right now, yes, where 6/24/30 people has to take calculated damage? For every AOE? Yes? With no AOE cap you'll hit all 60 people without any need for extra calculations? Yes?

[snip]

You'll never have more than 60 people.

Gross assumption on your part. [snip]
You haven't been in the campaigns I have and seen the people standing on keep flags.
And what happens if PVP gets really silly and does have 100 people all balling up like some games ?
What happens if ball groups keep getting more and more popular and bigger and bigger to WIN ?
There is absolutely NOTHING stopping ball groups being any size they want other than the Campaign POP CAP.

Removal of AoE caps wont make you hit more people.

Your 4 man group could only hit 24 people at one time.....now you can potentially hit 240 at once.
1.6 increased the potential calcs 10 fold.... and everyone paid the price when 1.6 dropped.
This needs reversing and the cap reduced until its suitable for the number of players on screen.

Answer the question instead of swerving it every single time.....WHY DID ZOS REPEATEDLY REDUCE CAMPAIGN SIZE AND TELL EVERYONE TO SPREAD OUT AFTER 1.6 DROPPED ?
I assume you know the answer but just refuse to accept it....aka denial.

With no AOE cap you'll hit all 60 people without any need for extra calculations?

You'll hit any one and everyone that's crammed in the AoE radius (how big they get is an assumption).
And how many are in the AoE radius is defined by the ball group size and not the label on the skill info (carpet bombing).
A 24 man coordinated group can carpet bomb a massive area and hit everyone in a keep in one tick
How much those selection circles overlap determine the damage multiplyer.
There is NO LIMIT on how many players can stand in this area ...except Population Caps (if you remove AoE caps).

[snip]

[snip]

The answer is obvious and does not suit your argument though.... Stacked people create lag, the more people, the more lag > pop caps reduced. Removing aoe caps makes it harder for those stacked groups to survive = lag less longer.
They asked us to spread out because after 1 year of trying and failing, they had to admit that they are too incompetent to make this game playable for anyone and any gameplay.
Your logic is mindblowingly null

So lets do this from the start then.

1. ZOS says spread out. ZOS reduces campaign size. After ZOS increased caps from 6 players to 60 players.

You know this is because player density was too high and too many people were being hit by damage (aka AoE) at once.
IF THE AOE CAPS WAS >>>>>>1<<<<<< THERE WOULD BE 0 ~ NONE ~ NADA ~ NIL....LAG
The result was server performance was absolutely crippled by the amount of people being hit.
The performance went from diabolical to unplayable due to lag when raised from a 6 man cap to a 60 man cap.
[at the behest of people wanting AoE caps removed]
Hence spread out. Hence reduce campaign size.

One of you then says....
I am talking crap because you would never hit more than 60 people anyway.
Apparently oblivious to the fact if you are not going to hit more than 60 people YOU DONT NEED AN AOE CAP HIGHER THAN 60 PEOPLE !

Some of you then come out with the code would run much faster argument.
Out of the 100s of lines of code in 1 client update....you think replacing a 4 line selection with one line somehow bypasses the remaining 100s of lines of code that still have to proceed after the choice (damage multiplyer) is made.....FOR EVERY CLIENT HIT.

You then make out that going against bigger numbers GUARANTEES you will wipe them every time without fail instantly.
After all..they have to be dead to reduce incoming client updates and targets hit (aka LAG).
AND THIS IS NOT A GUARANTEE YOU CAN MAKE.
Does it improve your chances of taking down a ball group. YES !
Does it guarantee you will wipe every ball group you come across. NO !
The only way to GUARANTEE lag ends is 1vX 1-shot ability....which is what you really want (because motives).

2. Remove AoE cap Poll.

I wonder if that poll was ....
a. How many of you people want to hit unlimited players (AoE cap removal)
b. How many of you want the damage reduction removed (AoE Falloff removal)
...you would actually get an unbiased vote...rather than lump two camps into one.
Because all I see in most conversations on AoE CAP removal and streams is AoE falloff sucks and has to go.
AoE falloff removal is NOT AoE cap removal !
Most of you people cant even tell the difference.
I myself am in the AoE falloff removal camp....and have said so many times in this thread.

NOW...
You call it incompetence on ZOS part.
If you had even the slightest inkling about validation tests, you would know that limiters are put in place to protect the system from running outside of its capabilities.
One such limiter is AOE CAPS.
You have to ask WHY AoE caps exists because you have no idea at all about the ramifications of a system that has none.
They exist to ensure server and network performance does not get exceeded when you have too many players on screen that are within hittable range.....(aka LAG limiter)
They are absolutely critical when there is no collision detection and an infinite amount of players can stand in exactly the same place.
That is why an AoE Cap of >>>>>1<<<< means 0 LAG.....even with infinite players on the same spot.

To be fair though.
What ZOS should have been doing is reducing the AoE caps until LAG was eliminated and newtork/server performance was bought back within the limitations of the systems capabilities.
Instead of reducing the AoE caps that they increased ....they tried to reduce player density instead & improve netcode.
Like some of the players on here....they would rather argue black is blue than admit they made a mistake and are wrong.

I will be signing out of this thread from now on.
Too much posturing. Too much willywaving. Too many friends being lost.

I always meant falloff when I talked about removing the aoe cap, because as we have today, the aoe pretty much capped at 6. The rest of the damage you do is insignificant enough to consider it capped.
About caps vs falloff, I'm pretty sure everyone agrees falloff needs to go, and it's what most people mean by removing the aoe caps. You are arguing about language details here, and I don't think the community would split up between these two.

An AOE cap of one does not mean zero lag, it definitely doesn't. AOEs are a major contributor to the Cyro lag we endure today, but it's not the only factor.

You said "You know this is because player density was too high and too many people were being hit by damage (aka AoE) at once"
You don't need actual damage to get a server to lag. Actually you just need to get close to a group spamming purge/healing springs and other group buffs to feel the ping surge.

I never said going out against bigger numbers means a guaranteed win, I said trains colliding with each other will wipe each other much faster. It's OBVIOUS that these fights will go faster, it doesn't matter if it's true 100% of the time, it's still an improvement over what we have now.

I don't give a crap about a 1vX skill that oneshots everyone, I never asked for that, stop putting that argument into small scaler mouthes.

Caps are a gameplay decision. If it was truly a performance decision, they would have come out since the first day and said "our game engine isn't capable of handling more than 6 targets per aoe". Instead they increased the cap to 60.
Performance wise I don't know the impact (and don't pretend to tell me you know it, no one knows the game's code architecture), but there is no denying that 60 targets without falloff is less costly than 60 targets with falloff.
So if they had performance issues specifically tied to aoe caps, they still decided to put gameplay ahead of performance for that particular topic.

[edited to remove quote]

Tomato

Joy_Division wrote: »

Tomato wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VG9kq2I6mPE

I appreciate you linking the video I created in response to Zenimax's handling of this topic. I don't mean to sound snarky and egotistical and I'd say this even if it was not my video, but you ought to acknowledge the creators of stuff that you link or cite ... because it did take time and effort

I apologize for that. I figured people would be smart enough to figure that out based on the YouTube account it's under.

Merlight

Rune_Relic wrote: »

I wonder if that poll was ....
a. How many of you people want to hit unlimited players (AoE cap removal)
b. How many of you want the damage reduction removed (AoE Falloff removal)
...you would actually get an unbiased vote...rather than lump two camps into one.
Because all I see in most conversations on AoE CAP removal and streams is AoE falloff sucks and has to go.
AoE falloff removal is NOT AoE cap removal !
Most of you people cant even tell the difference.
I myself am in the AoE falloff removal camp....and have said so many times in this thread.

That poll was created long before the falloff mechanic was devised. And you forgot one which also was not on the table back then: c) increase AoE cap from 6 to 60. Months after ZOS implemented b+c, which is undoubtedly the most slow or limited in intellectual or emotional development or academic progress and crippling change they could've done. It's essentially a cap of 6 for the performance cost of 60.

As for the bolded sentence, I agree. Removing falloff would be so frigging easy and effective that their repulse of that idea is mind-boggling.

Rune_Relic wrote: »

That is why an AoE Cap of >>>>>1<<<< means 0 LAG.....even with infinite players on the same spot.

No matter how many times you repeat that, it won't stop being utter nonsense. In this wording you even convinced me you know nothing about complexity, or even what infinite means.

FENGRUSH

Essiaga wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Jura23 wrote: »

Personally I think vast majority of so called casuals dont even know AoE caps exist. Sticking to other ppl for more safety is just natural reflex, I dont think it has much to do with AoE caps. And if they were removed, these ppl wouldnt change the way they play.

Organized raids of course, thats something completely different. Those are taking advantage of caps on purpose, no doubt about that.

I agree - I dont think many casual players know that AOE caps exist. But they join a group and thats how the group is run and they do what they know/told to do in the group. They wouldnt change their playstyle at first, they would complain - and then change their style, or conform to something new that develops.

Either way it will be better.

Brian Wheeler demonstrated why AOE caps are in and are not going to be removed on his white board. The more targets you hit the more calculation the servers has to process and the more lag there is.

Look at some of the skills that have gone since then or effectively disable. AOE effects. Destro staff gets weaker and weaker. Wasn't Wall of Elements really good at one point? Blinding flashes and other skills with miss chance where removed or nerfed as well and the reign of the DK ended and along with them went the Templars.

The skills being unlocked were Allianec skills. Riase of the Zerg. What other skills would people be getting into around the time of the lighting update? Most people were already Vet and working their way through Silver and gold if not already done.
Its either Alliance skills or its the Guild skills cause no one uses Undaunted skills. BWB didn't have the lag issues and still isn't anywhere near as bad as Vet campaigns.

He also pointed out due to siege they have to account for the radius of siege meaning more calculations for each player due to the larger radius. They're going to make siege more powerful in hopes that it breaks up the Ball group but are these groups going to scatter out side the radius of Siege? It would make more sense for them to make it so siege only effected walls and not players. Then the could lower the radius to that of player skills which is like 45m(?).

This actually isnt what he explained at all - and if this is your takeaway I think youve missed the point entirely.

prootch wrote: »

some stick to that idea... then will have to acknowledge that it will not change lag... just make it easier for full aoespam lag warbands to wipe others full aozspam lag warbands... and the game would end up in endless lag clashes of full aoespam lag warband.

I think the fact that youre the only person on the forums who calls them warbands leads me to believe you probably dont even play the game without 20 people in group.

Xeven

Essiaga wrote: »

Brian Wheeler demonstrated why AOE caps are in and are not going to be removed on his white board. The more targets you hit the more calculation the servers has to process and the more lag there is.

You're not understanding the white board, and his example was passive buffs, which cause extra calculations for everyone in your alliance.

The box on the grid simply represents what the server will allow you to interact with. It will send you updates about whats in the box, whats going on in the box etc. It will also do a range check on the box if you toss out a radial AoE for example.

You're already doing a range check on the box. You're already comparing distances to see who's closest to the center of the radius to determine who will get hit with full damage, half damage etc. Hitting more people will cause more damage calculations yes, but youre already hammering the sever anyway, and those players simply being there uncontested spamming abilities is far worse.

Jura23

Why dont we remove all AoE skills and replace them with single target skills.

Problem solved?

Joy_Division

Tomato wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Tomato wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VG9kq2I6mPE

I appreciate you linking the video I created in response to Zenimax's handling of this topic. I don't mean to sound snarky and egotistical and I'd say this even if it was not my video, but you ought to acknowledge the creators of stuff that you link or cite ... because it did take time and effort

I apologize for that. I figured people would be smart enough to figure that out based on the YouTube account it's under.

No need to apologize, it's a common practice and common courtesy that actually is for the benefit of the audience more so than the creator in case they want to further research/find out more about it..

WalkingLegacy

Why are they so bent on having massive AoE? Why can't the combat be focused around actually picking targets and fighting skillfully/counter based instead of just spamming an AoE damage or heal button? AoE skills should be few and far between and limited to how many can go on our bars or how effective they are.

Only siege should he putting out massive AoE numbers and no, healers shouldn't be standing around pressing an 'I heal everyone button' - even if the effectiveness tapers off after the first so many healed.

Trying to add more calculations to the server is only going to make lag worse.

FENGRUSH

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Trying to add more calculations to the server is only going to make lag worse.

Whos asking to add more calculations? Nobody!

How is this misconception kept alive?!

Yolokin_Swagonborn

FENGRUSH wrote: »

There is a reason caps are in place, and ZOS doesnt want to communicate it. The reason they dont want to communicate it is because the reason is not something they want shared. Its my strong opinion that AOE caps are largely in place for the casual player base to do ball group mentality and have a place in the world. If you remember at release, people were slaughtered in mass by players that understood the ult gen system and ripped through fields of inexperienced players that didnt know what was going on.

We should all put that first sentence in our signatures. I want ZOS to know that we find their practice of intentionally obfuscating how this game operates under the hood to be amateur, distasteful and completely insulting to the PvP community.

Go to Blizzards website and read a two page long Starcraft 2 balance patch rationale posted by the developers. They explain the inner workings of the game, and their reasoning in very fine detail. Say what you will about Blizzard, at least their developers are honest, professional, and know how to communicate with the community.

CP5

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Why are they so bent on having massive AoE? Why can't the combat be focused around actually picking targets and fighting skillfully/counter based instead of just spamming an AoE damage or heal button? AoE skills should be few and far between and limited to how many can go on our bars or how effective they are.

Only siege should he putting out massive AoE numbers and no, healers shouldn't be standing around pressing an 'I heal everyone button' - even if the effectiveness tapers off after the first so many healed.

Trying to add more calculations to the server is only going to make lag worse.

Go to one of the large ball groups and try to kill a single target in it. Try to use the new tab targeting aura if you are on pc even, but good luck. AOE's are needed to make people spread out then single target skills can be used, but if the group doesn't spread out you won't kill much of anything.

Xeven

FENGRUSH wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Trying to add more calculations to the server is only going to make lag worse.

Whos asking to add more calculations? Nobody!

How is this misconception kept alive?!

It will add more calculations. The ball group members currently not being hit due to AoE caps do not need to have their resistances compared to attacker's penetration for example.

That said they are already being distance checked to determine how much of that damage if any they will take, and the calculations required to do damage in this game are insignificant compared to these groups roaming uncontested.

FENGRUSH

Xeven wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Trying to add more calculations to the server is only going to make lag worse.

Whos asking to add more calculations? Nobody!

How is this misconception kept alive?!

It will add more calculations. The ball group members currently not being hit due to AoE caps do not need to have their resistances compared to attacker's penetration for example.

That said they are already being distance checked to determine how much if any damage they will take, and the calculations required to do damage in this game are insignificant compared to these groups roaming uncontested.

Whos not getting hit by something now that would get hit by something after AOE caps are removed? The 61st and beyond people in range? Not sure how often that happens..

Xeven

That is also true. "Calculations" are not really a valid argument.

WalkingLegacy

CP5 wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Why are they so bent on having massive AoE? Why can't the combat be focused around actually picking targets and fighting skillfully/counter based instead of just spamming an AoE damage or heal button? AoE skills should be few and far between and limited to how many can go on our bars or how effective they are.

Only siege should he putting out massive AoE numbers and no, healers shouldn't be standing around pressing an 'I heal everyone button' - even if the effectiveness tapers off after the first so many healed.

Trying to add more calculations to the server is only going to make lag worse.

Go to one of the large ball groups and try to kill a single target in it. Try to use the new tab targeting aura if you are on pc even, but good luck. AOE's are needed to make people spread out then single target skills can be used, but if the group doesn't spread out you won't kill much of anything.

It's essential right now because the core combat is centered around it (AoE). AoE needs to be reworked to be situational. The large ball groups use it because that's what is built for us right now to be effective.

It isn't the only solution and shouldn't be the core way ground battles are fought. Combat needs to be more intimate.

jrkhan

Xeven wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Trying to add more calculations to the server is only going to make lag worse.

Whos asking to add more calculations? Nobody!

How is this misconception kept alive?!

It will add more calculations. The ball group members currently not being hit due to AoE caps do not need to have their resistances compared to attacker's penetration for example.

That said they are already being distance checked to determine how much of that damage if any they will take, and the calculations required to do damage in this game are insignificant compared to these groups roaming uncontested.

Forget about targets 61+.
This is about 7-60.

If we find full damage for the first 60 isn't enough, we can have another discussion

CP5

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Why are they so bent on having massive AoE? Why can't the combat be focused around actually picking targets and fighting skillfully/counter based instead of just spamming an AoE damage or heal button? AoE skills should be few and far between and limited to how many can go on our bars or how effective they are.

Only siege should he putting out massive AoE numbers and no, healers shouldn't be standing around pressing an 'I heal everyone button' - even if the effectiveness tapers off after the first so many healed.

Trying to add more calculations to the server is only going to make lag worse.

Go to one of the large ball groups and try to kill a single target in it. Try to use the new tab targeting aura if you are on pc even, but good luck. AOE's are needed to make people spread out then single target skills can be used, but if the group doesn't spread out you won't kill much of anything.

It's essential right now because the core combat is centered around it (AoE). AoE needs to be reworked to be situational. The large ball groups use it because that's what is built for us right now to be effective.

It isn't the only solution and shouldn't be the core way ground battles are fought. Combat needs to be more intimate.

The large ball group is powerful since the very thing designed to combat them is what grouping up gives a resistance to. It would be like being weak to fire unless you are standing in it, in which case you would then somehow become immune.

Joy_Division

Xeven wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Trying to add more calculations to the server is only going to make lag worse.

Whos asking to add more calculations? Nobody!

How is this misconception kept alive?!

It will add more calculations. The ball group members currently not being hit due to AoE caps do not need to have their resistances compared to attacker's penetration for example.

Umm...you do realize there would have to be 61 enemies in that ball group for this statement to be valid.

prootch

Jura23 wrote: »

Why dont we remove all AoE skills and replace them with single target skills.
Problem solved?

Precisely my point !

Sublime

Regarding the "Replace all AOE skills with simgle target abilities", here's what would happen within the first week this change gets implemented:

Bombsquads now stack even tighter, since the current tab-target tool considers LOS, meaning it will effectively be impossible to kill a single player.

Bombsquads now use single-target spells instead of PBAoE's, oneshotting whoever gets called out by the leader. (rolldodge/block doesn't work while feared)

This is obviously without taking the changes to siege weapons/AvA skills into account. But as the exact changes aren't announced yet, it's rather hard to estimate their effect.

I still consider statements made by any community member about how a certain change might/could/should affect the game performence useless. (Hence no such statemet in this post)

Celas_Dranacea

I feel the recent proposals by wheeler and wrobel are logical, sound ideas to combat the Zerg ball meta.

Though I'm still undecided, more and more I think aoe cap removal might actually benefit zerg balls tearing through masses of less organized players.

Also, I enjoy the longer TTK since IC. We've all been on both sides of aoe bombs insta-wiping full raids of people and I personally think longer fights are more interesting.

What we are all upset about is lag, and when u think about aoe caps as the main culprit, it's easy to understand why people are so enraged. Totally fair!

However, think about what Spock would say. It is highly illogical that ZOS staff would not immediately remove aoe caps if it would eliminate lag and the zergball meta. They know more about the combat systems and functioning of their server than any of us. They're jobs depend on addressing these problems.

So I choose to believe that Eric, Brian, Rich etc are sincerely considering the constructive feedback that is being offered here, and trust in them to do the best job possible.

On a side note, those of you who resort to personal attacks and name calling don't know how discussion and negotiation work. I generally ignore people who are rude to me, finding them unreasonable.

Lastly, I really appreciate all of you who are taking a hard, thoughtful look at this and presenting your arguments.

Deep thoughts from a bosmer nightblade werewolf.

jrkhan

Celas_Dranacea wrote: »

Though I'm still undecided, more and more I think aoe cap removal might actually benefit zerg balls tearing through masses of less organized players.

This depends entirely on what you mean by 'less organized players'

How often have you seen a group of 'less organized players' actually stack tightly on crown?

If your answer is 'all the time', then sure, that group is vulnerable to the aoe cap removal.
Remember, aoe caps ONLY benefit tightly stacked groups (you have to hit 7+ players with a single AOE for it to take effect). So, if your answer is, "less organized players almost never stack" - then friend, you can't be undecided about this - aoe cap removal can't possibly hurt those less organized players - they almost never benefit from them in the first place

WalkingLegacy

Sublime wrote: »

Regarding the "Replace all AOE skills with simgle target abilities", here's what would happen within the first week this change gets implemented:

Bombsquads now stack even tighter, since the current tab-target tool considers LOS, meaning it will effectively be impossible to kill a single player.

Bombsquads now use single-target spells instead of PBAoE's, oneshotting whoever gets called out by the leader. (rolldodge/block doesn't work while feared)

This is obviously without taking the changes to siege weapons/AvA skills into account. But as the exact changes aren't announced yet, it's rather hard to estimate their effect.

I still consider statements made by any community member about how a certain change might/could/should affect the game performence useless. (Hence no such statemet in this post)

I wasn't suggesting to remove all AoE. I suggested it needs to be limited.

Skills need to be reworked to make combat more engaging. One person shouldn't be able to just press a button and damage 60 people (even with damage drop off) and the same goes for healing. Siege should be the only true AoE.

To the person who says if everything was single target tab fest (which is opposite of what I'm suggesting) then there should be counter abilities to a whole team popping all cooldowns on one person such as bubble. Even if they burst down one or two targets, the other team should have strategically taken out targets as well and with burst abilities on cooldowns, some intimate combat can begin. Attacks, controls, and counters.


Speaking of bubbles, they need to be reworked to be more situational with the rest of abilities. More useful and cast less.

Right now combat is an absolute zergfest because of everything being centered around AoE - limit it and combat becomes more engaging.

Darnathian

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Why are they so bent on having massive AoE? Why can't the combat be focused around actually picking targets and fighting skillfully/counter based instead of just spamming an AoE damage or heal button? AoE skills should be few and far between and limited to how many can go on our bars or how effective they are.

Only siege should he putting out massive AoE numbers and no, healers shouldn't be standing around pressing an 'I heal everyone button' - even if the effectiveness tapers off after the first so many healed.

Trying to add more calculations to the server is only going to make lag worse.

because that makes poor videos. 1 v x needs buff! jk. caps are dumb. remove them. just careful what you wish for.

Sublime

@WalkingLegacy What is bubble?

You are suggesting to implement cooldowns, and while they certainly do help balance abilities, I highly doubt ZOS will implement them because it would turn the whole game upside down.

You say siege should be the only AOE, and that you aren't suggesting a tab-target fest. Yet, siege being the only AOE will force people to focus (i.e. tab-target) single players in order to have enough damage to kill somebody. The problem won't be too high burst, but damage being too low to actually kill somebody.
I either didn't get your post, or you have a thinking error.

Celas_Dranacea

jrkhan wrote: »

Celas_Dranacea wrote: »

Though I'm still undecided, more and more I think aoe cap removal might actually benefit zerg balls tearing through masses of less organized players.

This depends entirely on what you mean by 'less organized players'

How often have you seen a group of 'less organized players' actually stack tightly on crown?

If your answer is 'all the time', then sure, that group is vulnerable to the aoe cap removal.
Remember, aoe caps ONLY benefit tightly stacked groups (you have to hit 7+ players with a single AOE for it to take effect). So, if your answer is, "less organized players almost never stack" - then friend, you can't be undecided about this - aoe cap removal can't possibly hurt those less organized players - they almost never benefit from them in the first place

I guess I mean in the case of an equal number of less organized players trying to hold a flag in a keep or a resource, or at a breach, basically any point of action that folks will gravitate to. Those more organized ball groups will get their bombs off first generally, and wipe large groups of disorganized players. This to me is fine (reward skilled play) but it does kinda make it boring/annoying if pugs start getting instawiped constantly in situations like this.

I really don't know though, I see what you mean.

WalkingLegacy

Sublime wrote: »

@WalkingLegacy What is bubble?

You are suggesting to implement cooldowns, and while they certainly do help balance abilities, I highly doubt ZOS will implement them because it would turn the whole game upside down.

You say siege should be the only AOE, and that you aren't suggesting a tab-target fest. Yet, siege being the only AOE will force people to focus (i.e. tab-target) single players in order to have enough damage to kill somebody. The problem won't be too high burst, but damage being too low to actually kill somebody.
I either didn't get your post, or you have a thinking error.

Siege should be the only mass AoE. I like having AoE skills on my class but it shouldn't be saturated.

Obviously your assumption on too little or too much damage would have to be balanced. You don't redesign without having to, you know, redesign.

Sublime

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Sublime wrote: »

@WalkingLegacy What is bubble?

You are suggesting to implement cooldowns, and while they certainly do help balance abilities, I highly doubt ZOS will implement them because it would turn the whole game upside down.

You say siege should be the only AOE, and that you aren't suggesting a tab-target fest. Yet, siege being the only AOE will force people to focus (i.e. tab-target) single players in order to have enough damage to kill somebody. The problem won't be too high burst, but damage being too low to actually kill somebody.
I either didn't get your post, or you have a thinking error.

Siege should be the only mass AoE. I like having AoE skills on my class but it shouldn't be saturated.

Obviously your assumption on too little or too much damage would have to be balanced. You don't redesign without having to, you know, redesign.

What do you think of the rest of my post?