[POLL] What should barrier be capped at?

Zheg

18

MormondPayne_EP wrote: »

Zheg wrote: »

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.

Here's an idea, stop zerging...

Just saying.

The Siege buffs cannot come soon enough, the ball groups need to be broken up... just like the big banks! #FeeltheBERN

I will literally laugh when the same people saying 'ball group this' and 'ball group that' and talking up a storm about how great the siege changes are start to die to them and those QQ threads become the new trendy forum topic.

So I'm zerging when I have <5 people in group on weekend mornings/days, or when I'm running around solo? Barrier changes affect groups, everything else - siege, purge, damage tweaks and further reduction of TTK - they're going to affect me whether I'm solo, in a small group, or in a raid. Sorry, but when I'm solo, I still go to keeps and will either solo siege a wall down if need be, or help with rezzes/fighting/counter siege. I'm not going to go gank people in the middle of a field and make youtube videos, which means even as a solo player I'm going to be impacted by some of the more overtuned siege changes.

Arguments and concessions can be made for pretty much everything that's coming in the next patch - to some extent, but having it all hit at once, with overtuned initial changes rather than impactful yet reasonable changes, it's going to be a clustereff no matter what. The fact that people think an ultimate that costs well over 200 ultimate, and typically results in about an 18k-ish shield that is wiped out by 2 prox dets should only hit 4 people (or 6 for that matter) just goes to show the final result of the anti-group hysteria that's fomented on these forums over the past few months. People aren't even being reasonable/serious in what they're asking for, and to me, it doesn't even look like they're objectively asking if the changes make sense and keep the skill viable. So long as it appears to be anti group, it seems like for many people it instantly becomes a no-brainer even if it's not a sound idea to begin with.

Too many people willing to cut off their nose to spite their face in the quest to show they're more anti group than the guy next to them.

Recremen

12

FENGRUSH wrote: »

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..

@FENGRUSH

Trying to break up groups of some arbitrary size is not a good motivator in AvAvA, I think. Clumping happens quite naturally. A better approach is in terms of risk, kind of like you were hinting at in the bottom paragraph. In order to mitigate risk to themselves, larger groups will have to dedicate more people to casting barrier (say by 2, if the cap changes to 12). That means they aren't slotting as many damage/support ultimates. It still leaves the option open if the guild prefers a defensive strategy (Play How You Want! (TM)) while simultaneously making them invest a fairer number of resources to play that way. The biggest problem with Barrier has always been its absurd cost-to-benefit ratio, so decreasing that seems the best strategy and motivator.

Vaoh

12

Trials are created for twelve people. I think that this is the best way to alter Barrier to not screw up PvE. Either this, or make the cap on players within Cyrodiil different than outside of Cyrodiil.

Teargrants

LF 47 more mag Sorcs for competitive PvP guild.

We will run 2 raids blinking into the inner and flip flags with pure weight of numbers. As the master race, we will Harden our Wards and Harness our enemies Magicka while the lesser classes bemoan the fate of their flaccid Barriers. DPS optional.

13k Ward or gtfo.

dantator

Teargrants wrote: »

LF 47 more mag Sorcs for competitive PvP guild.

We will run 2 raids blinking into the inner and flip flags with pure weight of numbers. As the master race, we will Harden our Wards and Harness our enemies Magicka while the lesser classes bemoan the fate of their flaccid Barriers. DPS optional.

13k Ward or gtfo.

What you just said has been my dream since idk when. It needs to be done

Mumyo

4

lol, i see many skilled small scalers in the 4 men section... I allready know who is picking the big groups... the bad players.

Mumyo

4

SturgeHammer wrote: »

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.

purge will be changed, they mentioned it allready.

ToRelax

6

Zheg wrote: »

MormondPayne_EP wrote: »

Zheg wrote: »

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.

Here's an idea, stop zerging...

Just saying.

The Siege buffs cannot come soon enough, the ball groups need to be broken up... just like the big banks! #FeeltheBERN

I will literally laugh when the same people saying 'ball group this' and 'ball group that' and talking up a storm about how great the siege changes are start to die to them and those QQ threads become the new trendy forum topic.

So I'm zerging when I have <5 people in group on weekend mornings/days, or when I'm running around solo? Barrier changes affect groups, everything else - siege, purge, damage tweaks and further reduction of TTK - they're going to affect me whether I'm solo, in a small group, or in a raid. Sorry, but when I'm solo, I still go to keeps and will either solo siege a wall down if need be, or help with rezzes/fighting/counter siege. I'm not going to go gank people in the middle of a field and make youtube videos, which means even as a solo player I'm going to be impacted by some of the more overtuned siege changes.

Arguments and concessions can be made for pretty much everything that's coming in the next patch - to some extent, but having it all hit at once, with overtuned initial changes rather than impactful yet reasonable changes, it's going to be a clustereff no matter what. The fact that people think an ultimate that costs well over 200 ultimate, and typically results in about an 18k-ish shield that is wiped out by 2 prox dets should only hit 4 people (or 6 for that matter) just goes to show the final result of the anti-group hysteria that's fomented on these forums over the past few months. People aren't even being reasonable/serious in what they're asking for, and to me, it doesn't even look like they're objectively asking if the changes make sense and keep the skill viable. So long as it appears to be anti group, it seems like for many people it instantly becomes a no-brainer even if it's not a sound idea to begin with.

Too many people willing to cut off their nose to spite their face in the quest to show they're more anti group than the guy next to them.

Barrier is a viable ultimate in small groups and even solo play. Do you think a Leap wich is affected by the regular AoE cap has a larger impact in large groups than small ones? Probably not. I don't think Barrier's cap should be higher than the AoE cap on attack skills. The only reasonable argument for a cap as high as 12 that I saw so far, was to not affect PvE.

TTK is already artificially increased for the resource management most players have now. Maybe it's the fact that damage builds for trains have to care less about survivability and sustain, so they are killed easily when you manage to get a burst off, without having it absorbed by a Barrier. Could also lead one to believe the stats needed to break an 18k damage shield on 24 players with 2 detonations are normal.

I don't want to be an a** since it appears to me you truly believe what you are writing. But please, think your arguments through. You come up with stuff like the changes will reduce TTK, but appearantly refuse to think of strategies to take keeps with these proposed changes. Note strategies, not tactics. Large random zergs and their mentality would also be less of a problem if those who could wipe them wouldn't construct zergballs themselves to fight each other (beause it's the same mentality to bring more numbers until it works).

Satiar

24

ToRelax wrote: »

Zheg wrote: »

MormondPayne_EP wrote: »

Zheg wrote: »

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.

Here's an idea, stop zerging...

Just saying.

The Siege buffs cannot come soon enough, the ball groups need to be broken up... just like the big banks! #FeeltheBERN

I will literally laugh when the same people saying 'ball group this' and 'ball group that' and talking up a storm about how great the siege changes are start to die to them and those QQ threads become the new trendy forum topic.

So I'm zerging when I have <5 people in group on weekend mornings/days, or when I'm running around solo? Barrier changes affect groups, everything else - siege, purge, damage tweaks and further reduction of TTK - they're going to affect me whether I'm solo, in a small group, or in a raid. Sorry, but when I'm solo, I still go to keeps and will either solo siege a wall down if need be, or help with rezzes/fighting/counter siege. I'm not going to go gank people in the middle of a field and make youtube videos, which means even as a solo player I'm going to be impacted by some of the more overtuned siege changes.

Arguments and concessions can be made for pretty much everything that's coming in the next patch - to some extent, but having it all hit at once, with overtuned initial changes rather than impactful yet reasonable changes, it's going to be a clustereff no matter what. The fact that people think an ultimate that costs well over 200 ultimate, and typically results in about an 18k-ish shield that is wiped out by 2 prox dets should only hit 4 people (or 6 for that matter) just goes to show the final result of the anti-group hysteria that's fomented on these forums over the past few months. People aren't even being reasonable/serious in what they're asking for, and to me, it doesn't even look like they're objectively asking if the changes make sense and keep the skill viable. So long as it appears to be anti group, it seems like for many people it instantly becomes a no-brainer even if it's not a sound idea to begin with.

Too many people willing to cut off their nose to spite their face in the quest to show they're more anti group than the guy next to them.

Barrier is a viable ultimate in small groups and even solo play. Do you think a Leap wich is affected by the regular AoE cap has a larger impact in large groups than small ones? Probably not. I don't think Barrier's cap should be higher than the AoE cap on attack skills. The only reasonable argument for a cap as high as 12 that I saw so far, was to not affect PvE.

TTK is already artificially increased for the resource management most players have now. Maybe it's the fact that damage builds for trains have to care less about survivability and sustain, so they are killed easily when you manage to get a burst off, without having it absorbed by a Barrier. Could also lead one to believe the stats needed to break an 18k damage shield on 24 players with 2 detonations are normal.

I don't want to be an a** since it appears to me you truly believe what you are writing. But please, think your arguments through. You come up with stuff like the changes will reduce TTK, but appearantly refuse to think of strategies to take keeps with these proposed changes. Note strategies, not tactics. Large random zergs and their mentality would also be less of a problem if those who could wipe them wouldn't construct zergballs themselves to fight each other (beause it's the same mentality to bring more numbers until it works).

Im not going to get into most of that, but quickly: it's extremely easy to construct a build that hits really hard with a Prox Det but also has solid sustain. I have healers in my raid, responsible for tanking, sustaining through CCs and keeping the group alive who run prox dets that hit for 70-80% of a decent barrier. You don't have to sacrifice much to get a good prox det. Most raid groups build for sustain more than you think, and it's pretty much because more than anyone in the game they know what it feels like to get hit with 10+ Prox Dets and a bunch of Bats/Leaps all at the same time.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

24

24 but should only affect group members in range.
Imo it would be nice if barrier shielded a fixed value up to certain numbers e.g. If it hits 1-8 players they get 20k 9-16 they get 15k each 17-24 they get 10k each.

ToRelax

6

Satiar wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

Zheg wrote: »

MormondPayne_EP wrote: »

Zheg wrote: »

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.

Here's an idea, stop zerging...

Just saying.

The Siege buffs cannot come soon enough, the ball groups need to be broken up... just like the big banks! #FeeltheBERN

I will literally laugh when the same people saying 'ball group this' and 'ball group that' and talking up a storm about how great the siege changes are start to die to them and those QQ threads become the new trendy forum topic.

So I'm zerging when I have <5 people in group on weekend mornings/days, or when I'm running around solo? Barrier changes affect groups, everything else - siege, purge, damage tweaks and further reduction of TTK - they're going to affect me whether I'm solo, in a small group, or in a raid. Sorry, but when I'm solo, I still go to keeps and will either solo siege a wall down if need be, or help with rezzes/fighting/counter siege. I'm not going to go gank people in the middle of a field and make youtube videos, which means even as a solo player I'm going to be impacted by some of the more overtuned siege changes.

Arguments and concessions can be made for pretty much everything that's coming in the next patch - to some extent, but having it all hit at once, with overtuned initial changes rather than impactful yet reasonable changes, it's going to be a clustereff no matter what. The fact that people think an ultimate that costs well over 200 ultimate, and typically results in about an 18k-ish shield that is wiped out by 2 prox dets should only hit 4 people (or 6 for that matter) just goes to show the final result of the anti-group hysteria that's fomented on these forums over the past few months. People aren't even being reasonable/serious in what they're asking for, and to me, it doesn't even look like they're objectively asking if the changes make sense and keep the skill viable. So long as it appears to be anti group, it seems like for many people it instantly becomes a no-brainer even if it's not a sound idea to begin with.

Too many people willing to cut off their nose to spite their face in the quest to show they're more anti group than the guy next to them.

Barrier is a viable ultimate in small groups and even solo play. Do you think a Leap wich is affected by the regular AoE cap has a larger impact in large groups than small ones? Probably not. I don't think Barrier's cap should be higher than the AoE cap on attack skills. The only reasonable argument for a cap as high as 12 that I saw so far, was to not affect PvE.

TTK is already artificially increased for the resource management most players have now. Maybe it's the fact that damage builds for trains have to care less about survivability and sustain, so they are killed easily when you manage to get a burst off, without having it absorbed by a Barrier. Could also lead one to believe the stats needed to break an 18k damage shield on 24 players with 2 detonations are normal.

I don't want to be an a** since it appears to me you truly believe what you are writing. But please, think your arguments through. You come up with stuff like the changes will reduce TTK, but appearantly refuse to think of strategies to take keeps with these proposed changes. Note strategies, not tactics. Large random zergs and their mentality would also be less of a problem if those who could wipe them wouldn't construct zergballs themselves to fight each other (beause it's the same mentality to bring more numbers until it works).

Im not going to get into most of that, but quickly: it's extremely easy to construct a build that hits really hard with a Prox Det but also has solid sustain. I have healers in my raid, responsible for tanking, sustaining through CCs and keeping the group alive who run prox dets that hit for 70-80% of a decent barrier. You don't have to sacrifice much to get a good prox det. Most raid groups build for sustain more than you think, and it's pretty much because more than anyone in the game they know what it feels like to get hit with 10+ Prox Dets and a bunch of Bats/Leaps all at the same time.

It's not hard to deal high damage with detonations, but that is not enough with AoE caps. All enemies are protected by Barrier, but every detonation only hits 6 random targets for the full damage.
Also I don't doubt many players in a train, especially in healing and support roles, will build for high sustain, but it does not change the fact that in smaller groups, individual sustain is generally more important than in larger ones. When in a larger group the sustain of a build is more vital than the average player of a smaller group, it is because of distribution of roles, allowing other players in said larger group to neglect sustain more.
In the end it comes down to
1. The necessity to be able to take all steps necessary to survive in a precarious situation for an individual player. Usually that would be defensive actions, but especially in large groups it can for example as well mean having the damage and sustain to keep on killing the enemies fast enough. Because of allied support, this is less of an issue in larger groups, they will mostly wipe together or fall apart when to many die anyway.
2. All kinds of synergies allowing for higher sustain, including those that give more damage to allow to build for higher sustain. Obviously, you'll have more of those in larger groups.

Poxheart

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

I haven't read the entire thread, but I've got a great idea. Make barrier so that it applies full effect to 6 random people, 50% effect to 24 random people, and 25% effect to 30 random people. I mean, it works so well for AoE damage abilities, what could go wrong????

RinaldoGandolphi

6

@Fengrush on point as always.

I posted this a few months ago concerning keeps

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/231522/a-suggested-change-to-keep-and-resources/p1

For non-home keeps requiring holding 2 out of the 3 resources in order to be able to flip the flags inside ensures that stacking your whole raid inside the keep won't guarantee you win, as a 5 man group outside can flip 1 resource and prevent you from flipping the keep flags.

This gives guys like Fengrush, Sypher, etc the small skirmish type fights they are looking for while, adding far more strategy to keep taking then just siege, and flag stacking. Of course taking back your relic keeps and home keeps should be easier, but taking non-home keeps should be harder.

I also think instead of bringing back forward camps, they should allow folks to re spawn at resources their alliance controls as long as the person dies within a certain area around the resource. I like that idea better then forward camps and i think its easier to manage for ZOS and far easier for attackers and defenders to protect or deal with. just my 2 cents

Zheg

18

ToRelax wrote: »

Barrier is a viable ultimate in small groups and even solo play. Do you think a Leap wich is affected by the regular AoE cap has a larger impact in large groups than small ones? Probably not. I don't think Barrier's cap should be higher than the AoE cap on attack skills. The only reasonable argument for a cap as high as 12 that I saw so far, was to not affect PvE.

TTK is already artificially increased for the resource management most players have now. Maybe it's the fact that damage builds for trains have to care less about survivability and sustain, so they are killed easily when you manage to get a burst off, without having it absorbed by a Barrier. Could also lead one to believe the stats needed to break an 18k damage shield on 24 players with 2 detonations are normal.

I don't want to be an a** since it appears to me you truly believe what you are writing. But please, think your arguments through. You come up with stuff like the changes will reduce TTK, but appearantly refuse to think of strategies to take keeps with these proposed changes. Note strategies, not tactics. Large random zergs and their mentality would also be less of a problem if those who could wipe them wouldn't construct zergballs themselves to fight each other (beause it's the same mentality to bring more numbers until it works).

You're welcome to go listen to the TS of good pvpers, the good pvp guilds, and tell me what their reaction is when a solo player pops a barrier on him/herself. It's usually laughter, followed by ridicule, followed by concerned whispers if said player is a friend. When it comes to small groups, to each their own, but if I have less than 12 in group, I put everyone that I'd normally put on barrier on bats instead because it's just not worth it in the majority of engagements we'll be facing. You need to go super strong bomb mode as a small group trying to take on greater numbers, and almost everyone will try and position themselves for a stealth bomb in that scenario. Adding even more incentives to just bomb and then pull off so you can re-bomb, or to stealth down somewhere so your bomb is more effective will certainly tickle the fancy of some players, but that's not gameplay I enjoy. My most enjoyable engagements are when you're taking on another group and you keep re-positioning and hitting eachother over the course of minutes, not seconds, until the battle reaches its conclusion. You know what makes that possible? Barrier.

As for the leap question, uhh, yes, leap is far more effective on larger groups then it is on small groups. They're easier targets for bombs and you can take out a larger number of players at once then you can if everyone was spread/in small clusters. Should 2 players try and bomb 20? Probably not smart. Should 6? If everyone has dps ult up and you're in a good tactical position, absolutely. You may not wipe the entire group at once, but you have a good chance to wipe the majority and make it near impossible for them to recover.

As many have demonstrated thus far in this and other pvp threads, people who don't actually play in large groups think they know everything they need to when they in fact, they're just showing their lack of knowledge in that realm. If we have players in group running high damage and low sustain, it's a tiny number (maybe 2?) and they're only allowed to do so if they're experienced players and have demonstrated they are able to stay alive in sticky situations and when separated from group. The super majority of large groups SHOULD and do run decently high sustain, particularly healers. Do you need enough regen to dodgeroll from one keep to another? No. Do you need enough regen to be able to take on another group immediately after you've wiped the first one? You bet. The fact that 30k was introduced as the average barrier number just goes to show what happens when people have little experience in large group play talk about it with authority. For once, I'm actually not trying to pick on fengrush (really), but I will use it as an example of a highly knowledgeable pvper talking about realms of pvp that they just haven't spent much time in and insisting on balance changes that I think they'd take a second look at if they actually had that background knowledge to objectively consider whether or not they make sense. How can you have a productive debate over balance changes to a skill when the skill is in reality 1/2 to 2/3 as effective (most barriers are between 16k-21k) as some of the most knowledgeable voices currently think it is?

You say that the players who could wipe large zergs shouldn't become a 'ball group' to do so - but that's just another demonstration of people saying something because it sounds anti-group when it has little basis in practicality. If you want to kill larger numbers, particularly in a game where many templars can rez someone in literally one second, you need to condense your damage and not stay in one spot. How do you condense? hurr hurr, 'ball'. How do you not stay in one spot? hurr hurr, 'train'. If 12 good players all spread and tried to 1vX against 36+ players in a zerg, how do you think that plays out? Anyone that they do kill will just be rezzed up immediately. You need to be able to kill a lot of players at once so that if you do have the numbers to leave someone behind and stop rezzes, they only need to focus on a single area. If everyone is spread out the entire time, against greater numbers, no way are you keeping the dead players from being rezzed.

The fact that you imply TTK is reasonable or high right now just shows that you either aren't watching keep takes, or are talking about realms of pvp (1v1) that really don't matter much in an RvRvR game. For group v group fights, they're almost always over in 1-4 seconds. Again, all of the revealed changes so far are clear reductions in TTK (increased siege dmg and effects, unpurgable siege effects, purge nerf, barrier nerf, etc. etc.), and I haven't seen clear increases in mitigation, survivability, or base defense/hp. If there are, please do point them out to me, because I missed them.

The meta will be making major shifts with the next patch, but one thing that should be obvious to everyone - including wheeler and wrobel, is the meta will largely favor who has the bigger bomb and can get it off first. That sounds like real engaging pvp . If I wanted to play a game where most fights are over in < 3 seconds, I'd play an FPS.

Alomar

6

If there is an aoe cap, there should be no exception like this that drastically favors a form of play that is detrimental to performance, zerging. It should be 6. If ZOS wants to make it all complicated like their dumb aoe cap, then have the shield strength drop accordingly on the following allowed targets after it hits 6 at full strength.

Lucky28

24

Don't really know why it needs a cap. doesn't take very long to DPS though wards considering they have zero armor.

oh, and get rid of AOE caps.

frozywozy

18

Zheg wrote: »

My most enjoyable engagements are when you're taking on another group and you keep re-positioning and hitting eachother over the course of minutes, not seconds, until the battle reaches its conclusion. You know what makes that possible? Barrier.

See, here you conclude saying that Barrier is and should remain the only way to have long battles during a Group VS group encounter, which is totally false. There are multiple ways to mitigate damage but as people pointed out in this thread already, most dps running in 20+ men ballgroups focus on very high weapon/spell damage and manage their ressources with not more than 2k recovery, depending on healers 100% to keep them alive.

Again, there are so many different ways to mitigate damage, as a player. It is time to stop running 5k weapon damage builds, depending on barriers and healers and start focusing on self survivability.

As many have demonstrated thus far in this and other pvp threads, people who don't actually play in large groups think they know everything they need to when they in fact, they're just showing their lack of knowledge in that realm.

What we also have to keep in mind is that anytime Zenimax comes with a change that will penalize 24men ball groups and make their life harder, guilds running such a group will be the first to come here and complain about it. It doesn't mean what they have to say is the ultimate thruth though and it doesn't mean people who don't run in 24men ballgroups atm have never done it before and are totally clueless of the actual meta and mechanics related to that playstyle.

The fact that 30k was introduced as the average barrier number just goes to show what happens when people have little experience in large group play talk about it with authority.

Even with a 20k barrier, it is still an enormous and generous amount of damage absorbed on top of aoe caps, no crits and the fact that you can just pop another one and another one over and over again on players without them being affected by any kind of debuff preventing them to receive a new barrier in a certain time. Ridiculous. No matter if he brought the wrong number or not (30k instead of 20k), the points he brought supporting it were entirely in context and accurate.

You say that the players who could wipe large zergs shouldn't become a 'ball group' to do so - but that's just another demonstration of people saying something because it sounds anti-group when it has little basis in practicality. If you want to kill larger numbers, particularly in a game where many templars can rez someone in literally one second, you need to condense your damage and not stay in one spot. How do you condense? hurr hurr, 'ball'. How do you not stay in one spot? hurr hurr, 'train'. If 12 good players all spread and tried to 1vX against 36+ players in a zerg, how do you think that plays out? Anyone that they do kill will just be rezzed up immediately. You need to be able to kill a lot of players at once so that if you do have the numbers to leave someone behind and stop rezzes, they only need to focus on a single area. If everyone is spread out the entire time, against greater numbers, no way are you keeping the dead players from being rezzed.

Always make me laugh when players part of a 24men ball group express their disappointment when they get out numbered and would like ways to deal with that. Dude, I get trained down by your group on a daily basis 20v1 and I don't come here to complain about it and find ways to survive against that. lol

The fact that you imply TTK is reasonable or high right now just shows that you either aren't watching keep takes, or are talking about realms of pvp (1v1) that really don't matter much in an RvRvR game. For group v group fights, they're almost always over in 1-4 seconds.

The reasons why you think the TTK is very low and that fights are so quick is because 24men ballgroups create so much lag as they spam aoes, the server goes above 1200ms and no one can cc break, dodge roll out of bombard, weapon swap, and die immediately as the steel tornadoes surprisingly all register correctly and kill everybody in their path.

With proper server performances, it would be a whole different story.

MountainHound

I think it should be increase to cover the whole map.

WRX

12

See there is already more posts suggesting barrier is what keeps them alive, and that I feel is the major flaw with barrier.

It will be great to see the players in groups timing their skills, knowing they won't have an additional 20k HP. It will show the good and the bads, in every group.

Forgot to prime your rally, and need that burst heal? RIP. Didn't hit that swallow soul, or forgot to disengage spamming healing ward? RIP. Ward ally will also be an awesome skill IMO.

Groups used to wipe if someone forgot their barrier, now it will much more complex for the sustain fights that are always so fun.

_Chaos

WRX wrote: »

See there is already more posts suggesting barrier is what keeps them alive, and that I feel is the major flaw with barrier.

What the f%&* are shields supposed to do other than keep you alive?

WRX wrote: »

Forgot to prime your rally, and need that burst heal? RIP. Didn't hit that swallow soul, or forgot to disengage spamming healing ward? RIP.

Like those would keep you alive in GvG anyways. How do you even believe the crap coming out of your mouth? This would only be applicable to small scale group fights, if anything.

WRX wrote: »

Groups used to wipe if someone forgot their barrier, now it will much more complex for the sustain fights that are always so fun.

Have you not realized that with all these changes happening in the same time-frame, that there will be no sustained fights.

Lexxypwns

4

I'm saying 4, while I think its too low for pve purposes, this is an alliance war skill and for pvp purposes, a 20k shield is huge, and only becomes exponentially stronger when it hits multiple people

KenaPKK

Lexxypwns wrote: »

I'm saying 4, while I think its too low for pve purposes, this is an alliance war skill and for pvp purposes, a 20k shield is huge, and only becomes exponentially stronger when it hits multiple people

Barrier is entirely unnecessary in PvE anyway. Veil and Nova rotations mitigate tons more damage.

Satiar

24

Yeah, WRX, what are you even on? I expect this sort of stuff from Frozn because he doesn't seem to understand group play and has made "the 24-man ball group" into some sort of PvP boogeyman, but you know better. If you think removing primary group mitigation from the game is going to do anything but make TTK more of an issue, you're crazy. Most fights already last only a few seconds, and you think removing barrier is going to *help* that?

Wat is this i dont even

If anything they should be adding HP back, and toning down damage. I'm not even talking about 24 people, a 12-man bomb is already ridiculously strong if you do it right. TTK is already dangerously low, I cant believe people want it lower.

Manoekin

6

spenc_cathb16_ESO wrote: »

WRX wrote: »

See there is already more posts suggesting barrier is what keeps them alive, and that I feel is the major flaw with barrier.

What the f%&* are shields supposed to do other than keep you alive?

WRX wrote: »

Forgot to prime your rally, and need that burst heal? RIP. Didn't hit that swallow soul, or forgot to disengage spamming healing ward? RIP.

Like those would keep you alive in GvG anyways. How do you even believe the crap coming out of your mouth? This would only be applicable to small scale group fights, if anything.

WRX wrote: »

Groups used to wipe if someone forgot their barrier, now it will much more complex for the sustain fights that are always so fun.

Have you not realized that with all these changes happening in the same time-frame, that there will be no sustained fights.

We've had many sustained fights where basically no one uses barrier. There was even one against you guys at Fare a day or two ago. I don't know if my group even used a barrier that entire fight. We survived by disengaging when we knew we were at our limit, and trying to reengage. WRX isn't trying to say anything negative other than he doesn't like that people have come to rely on skills like that instead of taking personal responsibility for staying alive. It works well and no one is trying to blame other people I feel. People will always use the best skills available to them.

Zheg

18

frozywozy wrote: »

Zheg wrote: »

My most enjoyable engagements are when you're taking on another group and you keep re-positioning and hitting eachother over the course of minutes, not seconds, until the battle reaches its conclusion. You know what makes that possible? Barrier.

See, here you conclude saying that Barrier is and should remain the only way to have long battles during a Group VS group encounter, which is totally false. There are multiple ways to mitigate damage but as people pointed out in this thread already, most dps running in 20+ men ballgroups focus on very high weapon/spell damage and manage their ressources with not more than 2k recovery, depending on healers 100% to keep them alive.

Again, there are so many different ways to mitigate damage, as a player. It is time to stop running 5k weapon damage builds, depending on barriers and healers and start focusing on self survivability.

As many have demonstrated thus far in this and other pvp threads, people who don't actually play in large groups think they know everything they need to when they in fact, they're just showing their lack of knowledge in that realm.

What we also have to keep in mind is that anytime Zenimax comes with a change that will penalize 24men ball groups and make their life harder, guilds running such a group will be the first to come here and complain about it. It doesn't mean what they have to say is the ultimate thruth though and it doesn't mean people who don't run in 24men ballgroups atm have never done it before and are totally clueless of the actual meta and mechanics related to that playstyle.

The fact that 30k was introduced as the average barrier number just goes to show what happens when people have little experience in large group play talk about it with authority.

Even with a 20k barrier, it is still an enormous and generous amount of damage absorbed on top of aoe caps, no crits and the fact that you can just pop another one and another one over and over again on players without them being affected by any kind of debuff preventing them to receive a new barrier in a certain time. Ridiculous. No matter if he brought the wrong number or not (30k instead of 20k), the points he brought supporting it were entirely in context and accurate.

You say that the players who could wipe large zergs shouldn't become a 'ball group' to do so - but that's just another demonstration of people saying something because it sounds anti-group when it has little basis in practicality. If you want to kill larger numbers, particularly in a game where many templars can rez someone in literally one second, you need to condense your damage and not stay in one spot. How do you condense? hurr hurr, 'ball'. How do you not stay in one spot? hurr hurr, 'train'. If 12 good players all spread and tried to 1vX against 36+ players in a zerg, how do you think that plays out? Anyone that they do kill will just be rezzed up immediately. You need to be able to kill a lot of players at once so that if you do have the numbers to leave someone behind and stop rezzes, they only need to focus on a single area. If everyone is spread out the entire time, against greater numbers, no way are you keeping the dead players from being rezzed.

Always make me laugh when players part of a 24men ball group express their disappointment when they get out numbered and would like ways to deal with that. Dude, I get trained down by your group on a daily basis 20v1 and I don't come here to complain about it and find ways to survive against that. lol

The fact that you imply TTK is reasonable or high right now just shows that you either aren't watching keep takes, or are talking about realms of pvp (1v1) that really don't matter much in an RvRvR game. For group v group fights, they're almost always over in 1-4 seconds.

The reasons why you think the TTK is very low and that fights are so quick is because 24men ballgroups create so much lag as they spam aoes, the server goes above 1200ms and no one can cc break, dodge roll out of bombard, weapon swap, and die immediately as the steel tornadoes surprisingly all register correctly and kill everybody in their path.

With proper server performances, it would be a whole different story.

I spend between 1/4 to 1/3 of my pvp time solo or in small groups (which ends up being significant given the amount of time I clock in Cyrodiil), but go ahead and keep your 24 man blinders on for anything I say.

If talking about a 1/3 loss in effectiveness (20k vs 30k) for barrier is so inconsequential, the same could be said for reducing the cap by 1/3 - and clearly people don't think that's inconsequential - yourself included. Just because you don't like counter arguments being pointed out, it doesn't make then negligible or meritless.

I won't speak for other groups, but ours tends to LIKE being outnumbered because it gives us a chance to shine and a hard fight. I very much dislike when we're so outnumbered the ping is snail paced because 3+ raids deemed us that large of a threat, but I've always found fights where we're slightly outnumbered to our opponents having ~ double numbers to be some of the best fights.

TTK isn't low because of lag, if anything, when it's that laggy, people are MORE survivable because attacks can't be coordinated, ults can't be dropped, etc. Go watch any of the tons and tons of videos pvp guilds have put up over the past few months, almost all of their engagements are over in mere seconds, with or without lag. Not sure how you're going to try and refute that, but you're welcome to try.

You're also putting words in my mouth. I never said barrier SHOULD be the way to have prolonged fights, I said it currently IS the way to have them. If these changes were to come down the pipe with equitable improvements in mitigation and defense/hp to ensure the already fast fights don't result in even shorter fights, that would be an entirely different story, but again, I haven't seen anything along those lines from wrobel/wheeler - just increases to damage, debuffs, and reductions in the current tools used to mitigate damage and prolong fights. If we were to be given new tools to use as a counter, or improvements were made to existing tools, then we'd be talking. I don't know how one CAN'T look at the incoming changes and not see TTK go down. You can amp up your sustain as much as you like - when 15+ prox dets go off at once in an inner keep, best of luck, there's only so much maneuvering you'll be able to do on an inner keep where a single meteor wipes 4+ people because of fall damage, and pinning yourself down in one area will get you pelted with OP siege. The current alternatives to barrier - nova, negate, veils, etc. are going to be reduced in effectiveness because relying on ground based skills will lock you in place in a soon-to-be siege meta where you can't purge the effects, and/or are losing 5k stam per pop from the moronic oil catapult change.

Barrier very much so favors larger groups over smaller groups - it's why I said I don't even have people running them if my group is below ~12 and I'm leading. The gripe isn't so much that large groups don't want to lose that advantage, the gripe is that from everything we've been told, the remaining mitigation tools won't be enough to counter the insanely high damage that's currently in the game, nor will it counter the increased damage and unpurgable siege effects coming down the pipe. Some of us just have the foresight to see that these kinds of changes are going to result in MASSIVE numbers being the new 'thang to go assault a keep, and I should think very few people (including the 24 man ball groups you despise) want that to happen. I'll be happy if my concerns don't end up playing out the way I expect them to, but no one has been able to provide sound logic to convince me otherwise.

You've seen firsthand the increased red horde that seem to be congregating when pushing objectives over the past week, and said so yourself that you're going to try and dissuade them from stacking up in one spot. What do you think will happen when a raid or two worth of those red come try to take ales and VE is sitting there with massive counter siege? They're going to wipe, horribly. Then they will come back with more, and more, and the ping will go up at the same rate. I see objective-play falling into two paths with the info currently released, either people will sit inside their keeps and pvp gets a little more boring, or people looking to assault a valuable keep are going to need to bring such obscene numbers that the servers groan.

Ghost-Shot

18

KenaPKK wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

I'm saying 4, while I think its too low for pve purposes, this is an alliance war skill and for pvp purposes, a 20k shield is huge, and only becomes exponentially stronger when it hits multiple people

Barrier is entirely unnecessary in PvE anyway. Veil and Nova rotations mitigate tons more damage.

These days war horn is actually what most competent pve groups rotate, but back in the day barrier was OP for the wisp mother fight in AA, ignore adds burn boss and barrier before she blows up. Its still kind of nice at the start of the star-fall phase in HRC hard mode.

Kalebron

24

If a bunch of people walk under a tiny tent and it starts raining, then the tents tends keep those people dry unless they travel outside of the tented area. My point is, why should there be a cap at all. If people get in the bubble, then it should protect them. The bubble is for a space, so if you are not in the space then you are not covered. Period.

WRX

12

Look guys, I get you don't like the changes, but they are coming. Insult if you want but its reality.

@Chaos, shields are meant to keep you alive, never said they weren't. But Barrier has been a crutch for EVERY competitive guild for along time. My biggest gripe with this (and I think I even brought it up with Steve and Bulb when we first met) is the combination of the AoE caps, Barrier shields, and ulti return. That combination is way to much for me. Once CP system came in with bastion, it was all out the window.

And having those thing should and will keep you alive in a GvG along with healers, and every member helping every other member. Granted, moving as a stack will be a lot more detrimental, because a big reason people do that is to make sure the barrier hits everyone. Mano said it earlier, RAGE hardly uses barriers, and rarely has a sufficient amount of heals anymore too. Self-sustain has been a focus for a while now for us. It does work it large scale situations.

@Satiar I have been all about adding the HP back to 1.5:1.0, wouldnt need this 50% nerf to everything, and class shields would be better. But its far to early for me to start drinking lol (not really), so I am a sober Sally. I am not a fan of let it go man, and I honestly haven't even read his posts in the thread. However, you are right, and I do know better. And better me says barrier is far to strong right now. 12 people would be a happy amount, 6 is to low, 24 is to high.

I don't doubt TTK is pretty low right now, and I can understand you saying this will make it lower because it will. However, at the same time, the part I am excited about is having more complex playstyles in groups. If they made barrier not effected by the AoE caps, I would be happy with that change too, but its still a lower TTK. We will instead see reactionary barriers, and more veils, novas, negates, warhorns, etc..

VE seems to have all doom and gloom about this, but I think we both know you guys will adapt completely fine. Somethings will change, and fights will feel very different. They need to change how proxy scales as well, which will happen. You have been a really fun and nice guy anytime I have talked to you, and the whole TS was welcoming. Its clear we don't agree here, and you may be right about everything. However, this isn't a new development for me when it comes to barrier. Hope to talk to you guys soon.

WRX

12

Would also add, the siege changes add a new quark for sure. However, I am "confident" ZoS won't continue with the idea of the effects being unable to be purged. The resource drain will be an issue, but in every situation you get sieged, you can siege back and probably more effectively.

Remember BwB!!

_Chaos

Sorry for the rudeness, I do understand your POV. I just have a hard time wrapping my head around how some of the aforementioned would play out when dealing with top guilds and their insane burst DPS as well as expand/condense disciplines.

I'm sure we'll adapt along with all other top tier groups, but some of the upcoming changes are batsnip crazy imo, and need to be tested extensively on PTS, which will prove to be difficult due to how often GvG/Large scale occurs in PTS PVP.