Starting it again 「Ambush」

MaxwellC

So sick and tired of easy street ambush spamming NBs. People say that ambush doesn't need a minimum cast range when it certainly does. If you get stunned locked because of two NBs spamming ambush on you then good luck. I literally cannot deal with a 1 v x when there are two Ambush spamming NBs lurking.

I thought this glitched was fixed but literally got double CC'd even though I broke through and should have had immunity but nope didn't matter because I was getting spambush'd down repeatedly. It's fun to how if you get CC'd and two spambushers are hitting you at once I wish you THE BEST of LUCK breaking free because thanks to stun locking you're not getting out. Ambush has no minimum restriction in range cast like any other gap closer. I do not care about the damage it does I believe it's fine and great but when it's providing a stun lock because it's a gap closer it needs to be on par with every other gap closer especially when it IGNORES LOS.

Ffastyl

Well, logically speaking, Ambush is a morph of the ability Teleport Strike, which is a teleport. Teleports just need a line of sight, not a navigation path like other charging attacks. Since it is a teleport, it is also logical that no minimum distance is required as a "windup" period to build momentum.

From a gameplay and balance standpoint, Teleport Strike needs a minimum distance to prevent spam and the resultant root-locking.

MaxwellC

Yeah you really can't bring logic into a games skill especially not grammatical logic as you were using.

Also to talk about your logically view of teleporting, If I were able to teleport to that person I would at-least need to see what's around person for me to be right on that person or at-least be able to see him. So if the person I'm hunting down hides behind a large rock and I can't see the other side then I would not be able to teleport because I have no view on what's on the other side (Pretty much schrödinger theory).

Gameplay wise it needs a minimum cast range so you do not get stun locked when fighting multiple combatants as this game shouldn't be about those who have more numbers win, it should be about those who can out play with big plays win.

Didgerion

MaxwellCrystal wrote: »

So stick and tired of easy street ambush spamming NBs. People say that ambush doesn't need a minimum cast range when it certainly does. If you get stunned locked because of two NBs spamming ambush on you then good luck. I literally cannot deal with a 1 v x when there are two Ambush spamming NBs lurking.

I thought this glitched was fixed but literally got double CC'd even though I broke through and should have had immunity but nope didn't matter because I was getting spambush'd down repeatedly. It's fun to how if you get CC'd and two spambushers are hitting you at once I wish you THE BEST of LUCK breaking free because thanks to stun locking you're not getting out. Ambush has no minimum restriction in range cast like any other gap closer. I do not care about the damage it does I believe it's fine and great but when it's providing a stun lock because it's a gap closer it needs to be on par with every other gap closer especially when it IGNORES LOS.

They did change that ministun mechanic. It is coming with the new DLC.
Did you test it on PTS. What is your feedback on it?

This thread is useless. You are asking for a fix that was already addressed.

Come with a new feedback of the new mechanic.

leepalmer95

Didgerion wrote: »

MaxwellCrystal wrote: »

So stick and tired of easy street ambush spamming NBs. People say that ambush doesn't need a minimum cast range when it certainly does. If you get stunned locked because of two NBs spamming ambush on you then good luck. I literally cannot deal with a 1 v x when there are two Ambush spamming NBs lurking.

I thought this glitched was fixed but literally got double CC'd even though I broke through and should have had immunity but nope didn't matter because I was getting spambush'd down repeatedly. It's fun to how if you get CC'd and two spambushers are hitting you at once I wish you THE BEST of LUCK breaking free because thanks to stun locking you're not getting out. Ambush has no minimum restriction in range cast like any other gap closer. I do not care about the damage it does I believe it's fine and great but when it's providing a stun lock because it's a gap closer it needs to be on par with every other gap closer especially when it IGNORES LOS.

They did change that ministun mechanic. It is coming with the new DLC.
Did you test it on PTS. What is your feedback on it?

This thread is useless. You are asking for a fix that was already addressed.

Come with a new feedback of the new mechanic.

Still should have a minimum range like every other gap closer has. Ambush also has mobilisation on it, next patch instead of a 100% snare it's going to be 60%.

MaxwellC

@Didgerion
Didn't test it on PTS since I haven't wasted my time fighting a NB instead I put my time into testing my DK.
Just like Leepalmer95 said there still needs a restriction to minimum cast range, it's not like it's nerfing you to the ground with a damage change.

Leandor

Still can't understand how in all hells some people think that a minimum cast range will change jack *** about spambush. One step backwards and you're out of restricted range for all gap closers (except toppling charge of course, that one requires you to travel to the other end of cyrodiil).

Stop asking for min range, start asking for 1sec immunity to gap closer stun after being hit by one.

Oh and @leepalmer95 all gap closers have the immobilize functionality. Templar charge even for oneself.

Lucky28

Well. i don't think Ambush needs a minimum range because i think that freakin' root/silence nonsense needs to be gone on all gap closers, period.

why don't we focus on that?.

Didgerion

leepalmer95 wrote: »

Didgerion wrote: »

MaxwellCrystal wrote: »

So stick and tired of easy street ambush spamming NBs. People say that ambush doesn't need a minimum cast range when it certainly does. If you get stunned locked because of two NBs spamming ambush on you then good luck. I literally cannot deal with a 1 v x when there are two Ambush spamming NBs lurking.

I thought this glitched was fixed but literally got double CC'd even though I broke through and should have had immunity but nope didn't matter because I was getting spambush'd down repeatedly. It's fun to how if you get CC'd and two spambushers are hitting you at once I wish you THE BEST of LUCK breaking free because thanks to stun locking you're not getting out. Ambush has no minimum restriction in range cast like any other gap closer. I do not care about the damage it does I believe it's fine and great but when it's providing a stun lock because it's a gap closer it needs to be on par with every other gap closer especially when it IGNORES LOS.

They did change that ministun mechanic. It is coming with the new DLC.
Did you test it on PTS. What is your feedback on it?

This thread is useless. You are asking for a fix that was already addressed.

Come with a new feedback of the new mechanic.

Still should have a minimum range like every other gap closer has. Ambush also has mobilisation on it, next patch instead of a 100% snare it's going to be 60%.

The old ambush didn't need the minimum range - it was a cool and reliable ability to gap close and to interrupt when needed. Spamming it would made you loose DPS and resources. The best fix is to bring the old mechanic back...but ZOS won't do it...they believe that every gap closer needs to connect.

GreenSoup2HoT

get AMBUSHED!

shuffle wont cut it. slot retreating manuvers or forward momentum instead of rally.....just stating the lock down can be avoided.

remember every gap closer used to mini stun. now they snare... however ambush is the only gap closer in game that still immobalizes you for 1 second. so you gotta use the counters above. just saying.

this is whats unique about ambush. to bad you cant run around and 1vX as easily. it happens to everyone.

LTP issue?

PCheuk38b14_ESO

In this day and age anyone playing video games will always want to "win" and to do so they feel the need to abuse mechanics to "win". It sucks but ZOS knows about it and said they are fixing it so let's hope they actually do that.

Tankqull

1. you can do the same with every other gapcloser all it requires is to keep your s-button (PC) while you charge your opponents.
2. ambush actually has the most rigid LOS check of all gapclosers but toppling charge.

so i´m not against it having a minimum range like the other gapclosers but doing so the casting time ambush has needs to be gone too.

MaxwellC

@GreenSoup2HoT
Nope that all doesn't work actually if you search the threads about ambush there's a video showing one person getting ambush'd by 2 people. He used retreat maneuver, mist form, and immovable pots but sorry thanks to being able to gap close right on top of said player he was unable to make it back inside the keep.

@Leandor
I've made this statement before but here we go. Picture the area around you as a grid, in order for someone to gap close you they need to be 1 and 1/2 a square away from you so if I were to dodge roll you still wouldn't be able to gap close me unless I kept moving back or you moved back. Ambush on the other hand does not need to abide by the gap close rules that any other gap closer needs, it can be executed on the same square the enemy is in.

GreenSoup2HoT

@MaxwellCrystal

This is an issue with all gap closers and not ambush specifically. Yes ambush can be spammed to abuse this issue but it cannot be avoided when mulitple people gap close you within a small length of time anyways.

Was the video your talking about made in pts? I'd personally like to see it.

Im not here to agrue. I would want this fixed as well. Just i dont think ambush is where we should be pointing our fingers at.

Ive actually fought for a gap closer immunity. This would benifit fights greatly. Imagine fighting someone and the only way for someone else to jump in is to physically run over or wait until your immunity is up.

You could actually kite your enemy or even use a Bow Primary.

PCheuk38b14_ESO

GreenSoup2HoT wrote: »

@MaxwellCrystal

This is an issue with all gal closers and not ambush specifically. Yes ambush can be spammed to abuse this issue but it cannot be avoided when mulitple people gap close you within a small length of time.

Was the video your talking about made in pts? I'd personally like to see it.

Im not here to agrue. I would want this fixed as well. Just i dont think ambush is where we should be pointing our fingers at.

If anyone points fingers it should be at ZOS and ask them to fix it. That is a bug not an ability issue.

Leandor

@MaxwellCrystal my point exactly. I can crit rush an opponent indefinitely by holding down the backwards key and spamming the crit rush button. The minimum on all other gap closers that you propose to alleviate spambush does not help. Increasing this minimum range so that it gets effective will nerf all other gap closers and the forum will explode as well.

The problem with spambush is not lack of minimum range, it's its additional stun. That, together with the universal gap closer immobilize, is what makes gap closers the number one spam abilitiy.

Hence my proposal to have all gap closers confer an immunity to stuns/immobilizes from gap closers for 1 second after one hits.

Kartalin

For those that haven't read the Thieves Guild patch notes:

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Combat & Gameplay
General

• Adjusted the snare applied to the enemy target at the beginning of all charge/teleport abilities (such as Shield Charge, Critical Charge, or Teleport Strike) to be a 60% snare for 750 milliseconds from a 100% snare for 500 milliseconds.

Source

leepalmer95

Kartalin wrote: »

For those that haven't read the Thieves Guild patch notes:

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Combat & Gameplay
General

• Adjusted the snare applied to the enemy target at the beginning of all charge/teleport abilities (such as Shield Charge, Critical Charge, or Teleport Strike) to be a 60% snare for 750 milliseconds from a 100% snare for 500 milliseconds.

Source

It's still not enough, i shouldn't be slowed or impacted at all because someone decided to gap close me. Take notice of the fact they increased how long your snared for as well.

Cody

the constant stun locking (it is pretty much that at this point) is lame, I agree. Its one of the reasons I dont play my stam blade in PvP anymore, it gives far too much of an advantage at too easy a use.

its mainly due to the recent change to gap closers though. If I am correct, gap closers now super snare/root the player on contact, ambush can use this more frequently because of the lack of a minimum distance requirement, making it very possible for even one NB to keep the player almost completely immobilized most of, if not the entire, fight.

needs changing to be sure. For now use something like Ash cloud or some other AOE snare to somewhat counter it.

MoeCoastie

Personally, I wouldnt have an issue with a minimum range to Ambush. Like someone mentioned, you can perform the same type of ability spam with almost any other gap closer by taking a second to step backwards,

Now, as far as the CC component to all gap closers, I feel it is necessary. Just to give people an idea of how it would be gap closing with no CC component. Try using a gap closer on an enemy riding a maxed out endurance horse. What will happen is that you will spam your gap closer not for LoLz, but necessity because your enemy will just keep on the direction they are going. Add in lag and your enemy is almost sure to get away. CC is needed to actually close the gap...I feel the change ZoS has made is a good compromise between how it was and what the players want.

GreenSoup2HoT

Kartalin wrote: »

For those that haven't read the Thieves Guild patch notes:

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Combat & Gameplay
General

• Adjusted the snare applied to the enemy target at the beginning of all charge/teleport abilities (such as Shield Charge, Critical Charge, or Teleport Strike) to be a 60% snare for 750 milliseconds from a 100% snare for 500 milliseconds.

Source

If you had retreating manuvers on in pts, wouldnt you be fine to run since your immune to snares and immobalizes?

Dosent Ambush still applie immobalize for 1 second like the tooltip states? It stated Teleport strick not Ambush.

Cody

GreenSoup2HoT wrote: »

Kartalin wrote: »

For those that haven't read the Thieves Guild patch notes:

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Combat & Gameplay
General

• Adjusted the snare applied to the enemy target at the beginning of all charge/teleport abilities (such as Shield Charge, Critical Charge, or Teleport Strike) to be a 60% snare for 750 milliseconds from a 100% snare for 500 milliseconds.

Source

If you had retreating manuvers on in pts, wouldnt you be fine to run since your immune to snares and immobalizes?

Dosent Ambush still applie immobalize for 1 second like the tooltip states? It stated Teleport strick not Ambush.

teleport strike is the unmorphed version of ambush, the change will likely apply to both morphs

Cody

MoeCoastie wrote: »

Personally, I wouldnt have an issue with a minimum range to Ambush. Like someone mentioned, you can perform the same type of ability spam with almost any other gap closer by taking a second to step backwards,

Now, as far as the CC component to all gap closers, I feel it is necessary. Just to give people an idea of how it would be gap closing with no CC component. Try using a gap closer on an enemy riding a maxed out endurance horse. What will happen is that you will spam your gap closer not for LoLz, but necessity because your enemy will just keep on the direction they are going. Add in lag and your enemy is almost sure to get away. CC is needed to actually close the gap...I feel the change ZoS has made is a good compromise between how it was and what the players want.

CC is not need to close the gap, then gap closers would be truly ridiculous in terms of power. Almost every gap closer in the game either snares or immobilizes as it is; a Cc on top would be unbalanced.

MoeCoastie

Cody wrote: »

MoeCoastie wrote: »

Personally, I wouldnt have an issue with a minimum range to Ambush. Like someone mentioned, you can perform the same type of ability spam with almost any other gap closer by taking a second to step backwards,

Now, as far as the CC component to all gap closers, I feel it is necessary. Just to give people an idea of how it would be gap closing with no CC component. Try using a gap closer on an enemy riding a maxed out endurance horse. What will happen is that you will spam your gap closer not for LoLz, but necessity because your enemy will just keep on the direction they are going. Add in lag and your enemy is almost sure to get away. CC is needed to actually close the gap...I feel the change ZoS has made is a good compromise between how it was and what the players want.

CC is not need to close the gap, then gap closers would be truly ridiculous in terms of power. Almost every gap closer in the game either snares or immobilizes as it is; a Cc on top would be unbalanced.

isnt snare a form of CC?

Jsmalls

Can anyone comment on how the change in this PTS feels? Does the 60% snare feel better, do you still feel like you can react to people spamming the ability?

Nothing aggravates me more than not being able to move out even fight back because someone is using an ability that isn't even suppose to be a CC.

SirDopey

Personally I completely agree with the OP. Ambush should have a minimum distance to pull it in line with all the other gap closers.

That being said, it's not going to change much for the OP as NB's will still be able to spam cloak/surprise attack which has the same net effect.....

Cody

MoeCoastie wrote: »

Cody wrote: »

MoeCoastie wrote: »

Personally, I wouldnt have an issue with a minimum range to Ambush. Like someone mentioned, you can perform the same type of ability spam with almost any other gap closer by taking a second to step backwards,

Now, as far as the CC component to all gap closers, I feel it is necessary. Just to give people an idea of how it would be gap closing with no CC component. Try using a gap closer on an enemy riding a maxed out endurance horse. What will happen is that you will spam your gap closer not for LoLz, but necessity because your enemy will just keep on the direction they are going. Add in lag and your enemy is almost sure to get away. CC is needed to actually close the gap...I feel the change ZoS has made is a good compromise between how it was and what the players want.

CC is not need to close the gap, then gap closers would be truly ridiculous in terms of power. Almost every gap closer in the game either snares or immobilizes as it is; a Cc on top would be unbalanced.

isnt snare a form of CC?

no. could be wrong though

regardless, the recent change to gap closers was not needed. Teleport strike and stampede, for example, already heavily snare/immobilize the player on hit without the recent change to gap closers. the recent change to gap closers is unnecessary in my opinion. Now we have NBs stun locking people. This lame stun lock nonsense is why I left WoW's PvP, and I hope ESO PvP does not evolve into that meta, which is why I disapprove of the recent change to gap closers.

MoeCoastie

Cody wrote: »

MoeCoastie wrote: »

Cody wrote: »

MoeCoastie wrote: »

Personally, I wouldnt have an issue with a minimum range to Ambush. Like someone mentioned, you can perform the same type of ability spam with almost any other gap closer by taking a second to step backwards,

Now, as far as the CC component to all gap closers, I feel it is necessary. Just to give people an idea of how it would be gap closing with no CC component. Try using a gap closer on an enemy riding a maxed out endurance horse. What will happen is that you will spam your gap closer not for LoLz, but necessity because your enemy will just keep on the direction they are going. Add in lag and your enemy is almost sure to get away. CC is needed to actually close the gap...I feel the change ZoS has made is a good compromise between how it was and what the players want.

CC is not need to close the gap, then gap closers would be truly ridiculous in terms of power. Almost every gap closer in the game either snares or immobilizes as it is; a Cc on top would be unbalanced.

isnt snare a form of CC?

no. could be wrong though

regardless, the recent change to gap closers was not needed. Teleport strike and stampede, for example, already heavily snare/immobilize the player on hit without the recent change to gap closers. the recent change to gap closers is unnecessary in my opinion. Now we have NBs stun locking people. This lame stun lock nonsense is why I left WoW's PvP, and I hope ESO PvP does not evolve into that meta, which is why I disapprove of the recent change to gap closers.

Correct me if Im wrong but this is how I understand the entire mechanic to work:

The ability, Ambush, has an immobilize component which is subject to cc immunity timers. The (decimal whatever) second snare is applied to all gap closers and is not effected by immunity timers. If this holds true, it is possible to spam snare a player but the immobilize component can only occur when the CC immunity timer has run out (just like any other CC).

Now, the reason for the snare for all gap closers is because if a target is moving and/or is effected by lag, where the gap closer ends up will most likely not be anywhere near the target. (see my example of a gap closer without a snare I explained in a previous post). IMO, with the current design of gap closers, this is a perfectly acceptable solution to an issue that was foreseen by the dev team. To simply request the removal of any form of CC that allows for abilities to actually close the gap between player and target is asking for the classification of gap closers to be changed to ranged dps.

That's my 2 copper on the subject.

Cody

MoeCoastie wrote: »

Cody wrote: »

MoeCoastie wrote: »

Cody wrote: »

MoeCoastie wrote: »

Personally, I wouldnt have an issue with a minimum range to Ambush. Like someone mentioned, you can perform the same type of ability spam with almost any other gap closer by taking a second to step backwards,

Now, as far as the CC component to all gap closers, I feel it is necessary. Just to give people an idea of how it would be gap closing with no CC component. Try using a gap closer on an enemy riding a maxed out endurance horse. What will happen is that you will spam your gap closer not for LoLz, but necessity because your enemy will just keep on the direction they are going. Add in lag and your enemy is almost sure to get away. CC is needed to actually close the gap...I feel the change ZoS has made is a good compromise between how it was and what the players want.

CC is not need to close the gap, then gap closers would be truly ridiculous in terms of power. Almost every gap closer in the game either snares or immobilizes as it is; a Cc on top would be unbalanced.

isnt snare a form of CC?

no. could be wrong though

regardless, the recent change to gap closers was not needed. Teleport strike and stampede, for example, already heavily snare/immobilize the player on hit without the recent change to gap closers. the recent change to gap closers is unnecessary in my opinion. Now we have NBs stun locking people. This lame stun lock nonsense is why I left WoW's PvP, and I hope ESO PvP does not evolve into that meta, which is why I disapprove of the recent change to gap closers.

Correct me if Im wrong but this is how I understand the entire mechanic to work:

The ability, Ambush, has an immobilize component which is subject to cc immunity timers. The (decimal whatever) second snare is applied to all gap closers and is not effected by immunity timers. If this holds true, it is possible to spam snare a player but the immobilize component can only occur when the CC immunity timer has run out (just like any other CC).

Now, the reason for the snare for all gap closers is because if a target is moving and/or is effected by lag, where the gap closer ends up will most likely not be anywhere near the target. (see my example of a gap closer without a snare I explained in a previous post). IMO, with the current design of gap closers, this is a perfectly acceptable solution to an issue that was foreseen by the dev team. To simply request the removal of any form of CC that allows for abilities to actually close the gap between player and target is asking for the classification of gap closers to be changed to ranged dps.

That's my 2 copper on the subject.

gap closers have been fine without the recent change for the last two years. If they dont work in lag then its due to lag, not the gap closer under performing. The Lag needs to be fixed, not worked around. and of course they dont work in lag, barely any abilities work properly in lag. Do you have any idea how infuriating snipe is to use during lag? It is like Sheograth himself is trolling me.

"if the target is moving" gap closers "lock on" to the target and "follow them" while charging. A player will not dodge the gap closer, nor will the user miss, by their target simply moving. I have even been gap closed thru and around walls because of this. the only way to dodge a gap closer like that is roll dodging, which is a perfectly acceptable counter. in fact I do not recall the last time my gap closing straight up missed due to my target walking 5 meters to the left or right. Maybe I have just been lucky enough to not have had to deal with it, which is possible.

"it is possible to spam snare a player but not immobilization" If my numbers are correct, the current gap closer wide snare is at or very close to 100%. Have you even been hit by say, a 70% snare? a 70% is pretty close to immobilizing you, anything higher is pretty much a root without forcing you to roll dodge it. at least it only lasts milliseconds, otherwise this would be WoW PvP all over again.

and again, the commonly used gap closers, critical charge and teleport strike, already have the capability of snaring their targets (lotus fan, stampede) Ambush is the only one here that does not snare.

Tankqull

GreenSoup2HoT wrote: »

Kartalin wrote: »

For those that haven't read the Thieves Guild patch notes:

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Combat & Gameplay
General

• Adjusted the snare applied to the enemy target at the beginning of all charge/teleport abilities (such as Shield Charge, Critical Charge, or Teleport Strike) to be a 60% snare for 750 milliseconds from a 100% snare for 500 milliseconds.

Source

If you had retreating manuvers on in pts, wouldnt you be fine to run since your immune to snares and immobalizes?

Dosent Ambush still applie immobalize for 1 second like the tooltip states? It stated Teleport strick not Ambush.

the quotet snare and its current root pendant attached to all gap closers are not effected by any snare(root) immunity.

davey1107

All of the classes have spammable attacks. And all spam attacks have counters. If you're running into Ambush spammers, know the counters. You will rock them...Nightblades are squishy.

Do I know the counters? Yes. Will I tell you? No. Because you had a bad attitude and started mouthing off about nerfs rather than asking how you could become a better player.

Also, try not to stand around in the open. Nord necks look royally sliceable in the right light.


Ha ha...but in all seriousness...it's a game...lighten up. If you get surprised by two players you're probably going to struggle. Respawn and laugh it off.