[POLL] What should barrier be capped at?

_Chaos

If Barrier were to be capped, what do you think the cap should be? (How many players should it hit?)

Feel free to elaborate on your decision.

OdinForge

4

One person shouldn't be able to cover their entire raid with one barrier.

themdogesbite

12

12, to not make barrier useless for PvE.

Bfish22090

6

6, same as AOE caps

SturgeHammer

Barrier and Purge should be changed to have the number of targets scale One to One with the number of support abilities slotted. This way if a player truly wants to run a support role they really have to commit to it.

SturgeHammer

EDIT: Deleted Double post

Soris

12

Voted for 12 but, on a second thought, its better not having aoe caps at all

Zheg

18

Went with 18. For the ultimates cost, 12 or less makes it questionable to even warrant a slot. With the full court press on siege changes, nerfs to purge, nerfs to barrier, battles with already ridiculously low ttk are going to just come down to who can attack first, and who has more devouring bats. Healers are going to have a rough go when a single oil catapult eliminates half or a third of their stamina in one shot, so don't expect them to keep you alive.

We'll have to see if these nerfs come with reductions in cost as well, or are supplemented with increased survivability through other changes, but so far it's looking like wheeler has joined wrobel's amatuer hour.

ToRelax

6

Soris wrote: »

Voted for 12 but, on a second thought, its better not having aoe caps at all

I wouldn't want to remove caps for positive effects. There needs to be a limit to how efficient you can make a skill by stacking allies. In case of AoE caps on attack skills, no one can force targets to stack up.

gw2only1b14_ESO

Other - Please state number/conditions (e.g. 6, but not affected by Battle Spirit)

johan.danielsson1994b16_ESO wrote: »

12, to not make barrier useless for PvE.

Whole thing is this they cant change one and then hinder another but they can look to tweek the skill as to its benefits and reduce what is causing the imbalance


to those not sure of the skill

http://www.esohead.com/skills/38573-barrier

WRX

12

12, and remove the ulti regen part. The cost of the ultimate does not matter at all right now, seeing as how it will hit 24 people (there is a "cap") and you get roughly half the cost back in a good situation.

With other mechanic changes, 12 or less would be fine and require more skill (huehue) when using it.

frozywozy

18

I voted for 18, but 12 is my final decision.

Recremen

12

12 would be cool, but I'd only want that if it was "smart", in that it gives a barrier to those who don't have one/have the lowest total shield in your group. That way you can still cover the raid with barriers if you really feel like spending two ultimates for it, and need way more coordination/dedicated barrier casters to keep everyone in shields for long. Then people are forced to make tougher decisions regarding how many DPS ultimates to slot, which ones, if anyone's running War Horn or Negate, etc.

PosternHouse

24

Why does barrier need to have its cap reduced?

Ghost-Shot

18

18 seems the most reasonable to me with how smart targeting works, makes barrier viable for medium to large groups with a little bit less concern about pugs getting your barrier instead of group members. I do hope with it being capped they plan to make it prioritize group members first and make sure it will hit someone who does not already have a barrier.

vortexman11

12

I chose 12 because it seems like the most balanced between 24 and 4. But I think I should of chosen other...

To me the ideal barrier would scale based on the amount of ultimate built up, starting at 200, all the way up to 1000. At 200 ultimate it would effect 4 people, then every 40 more ultimate allows it to hit one more person, up to 24 when 1000 ultimate is built up.

lolo_01b16_ESO

12

Shouldn't be less than 12 to keep it viable for pve.

OdinForge

4

vortexman11 wrote: »

I chose 12 because it seems like the most balanced between 24 and 4. But I think I should of chosen other...

To me the ideal barrier would scale based on the amount of ultimate built up, starting at 200, all the way up to 1000. At 200 ultimate it would effect 4 people, then every 40 more ultimate allows it to hit one more person, up to 24 when 1000 ultimate is built up.

I actually like this idea a lot.

But the value of ultimate / additional player would need to be thoroughly tested.

frozywozy

18

vortexman11 wrote: »

I chose 12 because it seems like the most balanced between 24 and 4. But I think I should of chosen other...

To me the ideal barrier would scale based on the amount of ultimate built up, starting at 200, all the way up to 1000. At 200 ultimate it would effect 4 people, then every 40 more ultimate allows it to hit one more person, up to 24 when 1000 ultimate is built up.

Great idea!

WRX

12

OdinForge wrote: »

vortexman11 wrote: »

I chose 12 because it seems like the most balanced between 24 and 4. But I think I should of chosen other...

To me the ideal barrier would scale based on the amount of ultimate built up, starting at 200, all the way up to 1000. At 200 ultimate it would effect 4 people, then every 40 more ultimate allows it to hit one more person, up to 24 when 1000 ultimate is built up.

I actually like this idea a lot.

But the value of ultimate / additional player would need to be thoroughly tested.

Na, no way. Then you just have people sitting tagging PvE mobs for 5 minutes to get a full barrier? I understand the idea of being rewarded for extra ulti, but this is not how to do it.

@Ghost-Shot I think the smart targeting and group only effect is a given at this point. Just the direction the game is headed. I think its a good feel actually.

Joy_Division

12

I don't think 4 or 6 17K shields is any way worth 250 ultiamte.

Hulk_VI

12

12, having something costing 250 ult should be worth the wait. Also might split some of the 24 man raids in half or at least they consider running smaller groups.

Hulk_VI

12

vortexman11 wrote: »

I chose 12 because it seems like the most balanced between 24 and 4. But I think I should of chosen other...

To me the ideal barrier would scale based on the amount of ultimate built up, starting at 200, all the way up to 1000. At 200 ultimate it would effect 4 people, then every 40 more ultimate allows it to hit one more person, up to 24 when 1000 ultimate is built up.

Best idea ever lol

Cinnamon_Spider

6

WRX wrote: »

OdinForge wrote: »

vortexman11 wrote: »

I chose 12 because it seems like the most balanced between 24 and 4. But I think I should of chosen other...

To me the ideal barrier would scale based on the amount of ultimate built up, starting at 200, all the way up to 1000. At 200 ultimate it would effect 4 people, then every 40 more ultimate allows it to hit one more person, up to 24 when 1000 ultimate is built up.

I actually like this idea a lot.

But the value of ultimate / additional player would need to be thoroughly tested.

Na, no way. Then you just have people sitting tagging PvE mobs for 5 minutes to get a full barrier? I understand the idea of being rewarded for extra ulti, but this is not how to do it.

@Ghost-Shot I think the smart targeting and group only effect is a given at this point. Just the direction the game is headed. I think its a good feel actually.

But then we could have battles at the zombies!

CatchMeTrolling

24

Doesn't need a cap reduction.

Satiar

24

I like it at 24. Allows for sustain fights instead of favoring whoever dumps ultis first.

Huckdabuck

Hulk_VI wrote: »

12, having something costing 250 ult should be worth the wait. Also might split some of the 24 man raids in half or at least they consider running smaller groups.

Why would that occur? When this change is implemented, instead of having 6-7 barriers as such groups have they will only have 3 and a "oh lordy" one. I honestly don't see this change as being one that will help break groups up. After the change it's the same amount of barriers affecting the same amount of people with less concentrated dps/heals.

Hulk_VI

12

Huckdabuck wrote: »

Hulk_VI wrote: »

12, having something costing 250 ult should be worth the wait. Also might split some of the 24 man raids in half or at least they consider running smaller groups.

Why would that occur? When this change is implemented, instead of having 6-7 barriers as such groups have they will only have 3 and a "oh lordy" one. I honestly don't see this change as being one that will help break groups up.

Some raids will split, but barrier the way it Is now is sooo broken. I might link a vid of us (6 man) fighting 4 Templars all running barrier cycling them with BoL funniest and most broken crap ever lol

Satiar

24

Huckdabuck wrote: »

Hulk_VI wrote: »

12, having something costing 250 ult should be worth the wait. Also might split some of the 24 man raids in half or at least they consider running smaller groups.

Why would that occur? When this change is implemented, instead of having 6-7 barriers as such groups have they will only have 3 and a "oh lordy" one. I honestly don't see this change as being one that will help break groups up. After the change it's the same amount of barriers affecting the same amount of people with less concentrated dps/heals.

TBH if barrier goes anywhere below 12 it will be a crushing blow. It will mean a lot more sitting behind LoS for bombs than pushing crazy sh*t because you have *some* way of mitigating insane incoming damage.

OdinForge

4

WRX wrote: »

OdinForge wrote: »

vortexman11 wrote: »

I chose 12 because it seems like the most balanced between 24 and 4. But I think I should of chosen other...

To me the ideal barrier would scale based on the amount of ultimate built up, starting at 200, all the way up to 1000. At 200 ultimate it would effect 4 people, then every 40 more ultimate allows it to hit one more person, up to 24 when 1000 ultimate is built up.

I actually like this idea a lot.

But the value of ultimate / additional player would need to be thoroughly tested.

Na, no way. Then you just have people sitting tagging PvE mobs for 5 minutes to get a full barrier? I understand the idea of being rewarded for extra ulti, but this is not how to do it.

People do that with the current 200 / uncapped barrier system. If tagging mobs to build ultimate is such a problem, there are some creative ways to discourage this, or make it less easy to do. Removing ultimate generation from open world mobs, but leaving dungeon mobs alone would be one idea.

ZOS just has to be more creative.

FENGRUSH

I think end goal should be breaking up 24 people groups, or at least changing the fighting style from 24 people fighting within 5-7meters of each other. Barrier is the biggest F U we have numbers ult in the game.

Lets say your barrier does 30k and youre hitting 24 people:

720,000 potential shielding on top of the fact that its not crittable and 75% of the damage you do in AOE format will be halved while attempting to burn that damage off without crit?

Oh they popped another barrier... Cool, only 1.45 million AOE damage to do through AOE caps.

This comfort needs to go, along with purge, in a huge way. Yea big groups will get plowed at some point, but I think thats the point - to have a sort of *risk*. Agreed it shouldnt be big groups hiding everywhere to blow up the other one, but this is where you need better distance counters instituted through ranged AOE, as suggested by ZOS that they want to do. That is non-siege ranged AOE..