Maintenance for the week of December 16:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – December 16
• NA megaservers for patch maintenance – December 17, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for patch maintenance – December 17, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – December 16
• NA megaservers for patch maintenance – December 17, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for patch maintenance – December 17, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
The issues on the North American megaservers have been resolved at this time. If you continue to experience difficulties at login, please restart your client. Thank you for your patience!
As a tank, I wish ZOS revert the change to group skill effects, or at least make it optional
-
MrBetadine✭✭✭✭Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »We warned of this in the PTS.
Another classic example of ZOS not wanting your feedback.
Probably because the overwhelming majority--tanks included--appreciate this change. It's rare for me to come across someone who actually thinks that this change is bad.
This is one of the most hotly-anticipated features of this patch. There are a few detractors, yes, but that's to be expected. So, yes, ZOS did listen to feedback. They addressed one of the key pain points of players. Would it have been nice if they made it optional, to cater to those with exceptional visual acuity? Sure. But that's an extra layer of complexity.
And I have no idea why.
Your tank is going to constantly be pulling enemies out of AOE's. This makes no sense. Just seems like your trying to really spin a negative into a positive. If the visual effects are reduced, then why not just give a toggle? Reduced visual noise is one thing, but you should try to replace it with something. Like, say, a 'yellow' circle or two on the ground to represent allied AOE.
I'd also love to know who died and made you speaker for some majority you claim to speak for. Citation bloody needed.
@Doctordarkspawn
My guess is you haven't main ranked second boss in vHoF. If you read through Codes posts I think he specifically mentioned that, and that he can still tell, visually, where dps laid their dots.
Further, why is the tank moving a boss in the first place. Unless there is a mechanic forcing the move there is no reason for the tank to move.
In that senario, the tank might move the boss for any number of reasons but not be able to see where the AOE is to keep them there.
I've since done both the dungeons and yeah, there is enough visual indication to see where it is. I still disagree with the change however. Maybe this is because I played a more support focused tank than others have. Then again, that playstyle is slowly dying as the pidgeon holes ZOS has instated have become increasingly rigid.
I still stand by a toggle. There's no arguement you can present to me besides laziness that a toggle couldn't be instated.
You do not list a valid reason because there is no reason for the tank to move a boss other than to dealing with mechanics, or the tank does not know what their doing. There is a 100% guarantee AoE is under the boss except when the boss is being moved.
Plain and simple. If you have cleared any of the last 2 trials in vet this would be very clear.
Actually I (the OP) am more concerned with mobs, not bosses. Imagine a party member drops an ult and I chain all adds out of it...1 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MrBetadine wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »We warned of this in the PTS.
Another classic example of ZOS not wanting your feedback.
Probably because the overwhelming majority--tanks included--appreciate this change. It's rare for me to come across someone who actually thinks that this change is bad.
This is one of the most hotly-anticipated features of this patch. There are a few detractors, yes, but that's to be expected. So, yes, ZOS did listen to feedback. They addressed one of the key pain points of players. Would it have been nice if they made it optional, to cater to those with exceptional visual acuity? Sure. But that's an extra layer of complexity.
And I have no idea why.
Your tank is going to constantly be pulling enemies out of AOE's. This makes no sense. Just seems like your trying to really spin a negative into a positive. If the visual effects are reduced, then why not just give a toggle? Reduced visual noise is one thing, but you should try to replace it with something. Like, say, a 'yellow' circle or two on the ground to represent allied AOE.
I'd also love to know who died and made you speaker for some majority you claim to speak for. Citation bloody needed.
@Doctordarkspawn
My guess is you haven't main ranked second boss in vHoF. If you read through Codes posts I think he specifically mentioned that, and that he can still tell, visually, where dps laid their dots.
Further, why is the tank moving a boss in the first place. Unless there is a mechanic forcing the move there is no reason for the tank to move.
In that senario, the tank might move the boss for any number of reasons but not be able to see where the AOE is to keep them there.
I've since done both the dungeons and yeah, there is enough visual indication to see where it is. I still disagree with the change however. Maybe this is because I played a more support focused tank than others have. Then again, that playstyle is slowly dying as the pidgeon holes ZOS has instated have become increasingly rigid.
I still stand by a toggle. There's no arguement you can present to me besides laziness that a toggle couldn't be instated.
You do not list a valid reason because there is no reason for the tank to move a boss other than to dealing with mechanics, or the tank does not know what their doing. There is a 100% guarantee AoE is under the boss except when the boss is being moved.
Plain and simple. If you have cleared any of the last 2 trials in vet this would be very clear.
Actually I (the OP) am more concerned with mobs, not bosses. Imagine a party member drops an ult and I chain all adds out of it...
The party needs to pay more attention to how you tank the trash. That part is very simple.1 -
Doctordarkspawn✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »We warned of this in the PTS.
Another classic example of ZOS not wanting your feedback.
Probably because the overwhelming majority--tanks included--appreciate this change. It's rare for me to come across someone who actually thinks that this change is bad.
This is one of the most hotly-anticipated features of this patch. There are a few detractors, yes, but that's to be expected. So, yes, ZOS did listen to feedback. They addressed one of the key pain points of players. Would it have been nice if they made it optional, to cater to those with exceptional visual acuity? Sure. But that's an extra layer of complexity.
And I have no idea why.
Your tank is going to constantly be pulling enemies out of AOE's. This makes no sense. Just seems like your trying to really spin a negative into a positive. If the visual effects are reduced, then why not just give a toggle? Reduced visual noise is one thing, but you should try to replace it with something. Like, say, a 'yellow' circle or two on the ground to represent allied AOE.
I'd also love to know who died and made you speaker for some majority you claim to speak for. Citation bloody needed.
@Doctordarkspawn
My guess is you haven't main ranked second boss in vHoF. If you read through Codes posts I think he specifically mentioned that, and that he can still tell, visually, where dps laid their dots.
Further, why is the tank moving a boss in the first place. Unless there is a mechanic forcing the move there is no reason for the tank to move.
In that senario, the tank might move the boss for any number of reasons but not be able to see where the AOE is to keep them there.
I've since done both the dungeons and yeah, there is enough visual indication to see where it is. I still disagree with the change however. Maybe this is because I played a more support focused tank than others have. Then again, that playstyle is slowly dying as the pidgeon holes ZOS has instated have become increasingly rigid.
I still stand by a toggle. There's no arguement you can present to me besides laziness that a toggle couldn't be instated.
You do not list a valid reason because there is no reason for the tank to move a boss other than to dealing with mechanics, or the tank does not know what their doing. There is a 100% guarantee AoE is under the boss except when the boss is being moved.
Plain and simple. If you have cleared any of the last 2 trials in vet this would be very clear.
You seem to be really fixated on this point.
Yeah, we've established that. I'd still like to know, however, what everyone is using. Sometimes individuals procs indicate gear/skill setup. Watching a dude spam strife while holding a bow is a indication that this is going to take a while.
I still advocate a toggle.0 -
MrBetadine✭✭✭✭Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »MrBetadine wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »We warned of this in the PTS.
Another classic example of ZOS not wanting your feedback.
Probably because the overwhelming majority--tanks included--appreciate this change. It's rare for me to come across someone who actually thinks that this change is bad.
This is one of the most hotly-anticipated features of this patch. There are a few detractors, yes, but that's to be expected. So, yes, ZOS did listen to feedback. They addressed one of the key pain points of players. Would it have been nice if they made it optional, to cater to those with exceptional visual acuity? Sure. But that's an extra layer of complexity.
And I have no idea why.
Your tank is going to constantly be pulling enemies out of AOE's. This makes no sense. Just seems like your trying to really spin a negative into a positive. If the visual effects are reduced, then why not just give a toggle? Reduced visual noise is one thing, but you should try to replace it with something. Like, say, a 'yellow' circle or two on the ground to represent allied AOE.
I'd also love to know who died and made you speaker for some majority you claim to speak for. Citation bloody needed.
@Doctordarkspawn
My guess is you haven't main ranked second boss in vHoF. If you read through Codes posts I think he specifically mentioned that, and that he can still tell, visually, where dps laid their dots.
Further, why is the tank moving a boss in the first place. Unless there is a mechanic forcing the move there is no reason for the tank to move.
In that senario, the tank might move the boss for any number of reasons but not be able to see where the AOE is to keep them there.
I've since done both the dungeons and yeah, there is enough visual indication to see where it is. I still disagree with the change however. Maybe this is because I played a more support focused tank than others have. Then again, that playstyle is slowly dying as the pidgeon holes ZOS has instated have become increasingly rigid.
I still stand by a toggle. There's no arguement you can present to me besides laziness that a toggle couldn't be instated.
You do not list a valid reason because there is no reason for the tank to move a boss other than to dealing with mechanics, or the tank does not know what their doing. There is a 100% guarantee AoE is under the boss except when the boss is being moved.
Plain and simple. If you have cleared any of the last 2 trials in vet this would be very clear.
Actually I (the OP) am more concerned with mobs, not bosses. Imagine a party member drops an ult and I chain all adds out of it...
The party needs to pay more attention to how you tank the trash. That part is very simple.
Not for a pug.1 -
Feanor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I'm not a fan of the change, but then I'm not tanking (yet). I can see how the change would make it easier for trial tanks though. I still don't get the aversion ZOS has against toggles though. More options are always a good thing. What I find amusing though is the verve with which some people are discussing this - the game certainly has more urgent issues than this change, especially when you don't tank high end content.Main characters: Feanor the Believer - AD Altmer mSorc - AR 50 - Flawless Conqueror (PC EU)Idril Arnanor - AD Altmer mSorc - CP 217 - Stormproof (PC NA)Other characters:Necrophilius Killgood - DC Imperial NecromancerFearscales - AD Argonian Templar - Stormproof (healer)Draco Imperialis - AD Imperial DK (tank)Cabed Naearamarth - AD Dunmer mDKValirion Willowthorne - AD Bosmer stamBladeTuruna - AD Altmer magBladeKheled Zaram - AD Redguard stamDKKibil Nala - AD Redguard stamSorc - StormproofYavanna Kémentárí - AD Breton magWardenAzog gro-Ghâsh - EP Orc stamWardenVidar Drakenblød - DC Nord mDKMarquis de Peyrac - DC Breton mSorc - StormproofRawlith Khaj'ra - AD Khajiit stamWardenTu'waccah - AD Redguard StamplarAll chars 50 @ CP 1900+. Playing and enjoying PvP with RdK mostly on PC EU.1 -
code65536✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MrBetadine wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »We warned of this in the PTS.
Another classic example of ZOS not wanting your feedback.
Probably because the overwhelming majority--tanks included--appreciate this change. It's rare for me to come across someone who actually thinks that this change is bad.
This is one of the most hotly-anticipated features of this patch. There are a few detractors, yes, but that's to be expected. So, yes, ZOS did listen to feedback. They addressed one of the key pain points of players. Would it have been nice if they made it optional, to cater to those with exceptional visual acuity? Sure. But that's an extra layer of complexity.
And I have no idea why.
Your tank is going to constantly be pulling enemies out of AOE's. This makes no sense. Just seems like your trying to really spin a negative into a positive. If the visual effects are reduced, then why not just give a toggle? Reduced visual noise is one thing, but you should try to replace it with something. Like, say, a 'yellow' circle or two on the ground to represent allied AOE.
I'd also love to know who died and made you speaker for some majority you claim to speak for. Citation bloody needed.
@Doctordarkspawn
My guess is you haven't main ranked second boss in vHoF. If you read through Codes posts I think he specifically mentioned that, and that he can still tell, visually, where dps laid their dots.
Further, why is the tank moving a boss in the first place. Unless there is a mechanic forcing the move there is no reason for the tank to move.
In that senario, the tank might move the boss for any number of reasons but not be able to see where the AOE is to keep them there.
I've since done both the dungeons and yeah, there is enough visual indication to see where it is. I still disagree with the change however. Maybe this is because I played a more support focused tank than others have. Then again, that playstyle is slowly dying as the pidgeon holes ZOS has instated have become increasingly rigid.
I still stand by a toggle. There's no arguement you can present to me besides laziness that a toggle couldn't be instated.
You do not list a valid reason because there is no reason for the tank to move a boss other than to dealing with mechanics, or the tank does not know what their doing. There is a 100% guarantee AoE is under the boss except when the boss is being moved.
Plain and simple. If you have cleared any of the last 2 trials in vet this would be very clear.
Actually I (the OP) am more concerned with mobs, not bosses. Imagine a party member drops an ult and I chain all adds out of it...
You can clearly see where the DoTs are. They are not hidden. They're just not excessive to the point of obscuring key mechanics that tanks need to react to.
I have no objection against making it optional. But that's extra UI, extra cases to test, etc., for an option that I expect only few people would actually use, and if ZOS decided that it wasn't worth the extra time and effort to make a toggle, then that's unfortunate, but it's a small downside compared the massive upside that has come from this change.More options are always a good thing.
Most software designers will disagree.Edited by code65536 on August 17, 2017 4:11PMNightfighters ― PC/NA and PC/EU
Dungeons and Trials:Personal best scores:- Dragonstar Arena: 46817 (NA)
- Maelstrom Arena: 600526 (NA)
- Blackrose Prison: 99274 (EU) (Unchained)
- Maw of Lorkhaj: 165227 (EU)
- Halls of Fabrication: 220708 (NA) (Tick-Tock Tormentor #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11, #12)
- Asylum Sanctorium: 114957 (NA) (Immortal Redeemer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10)
- Cloudrest: 131256 (NA) (Gryphon Heart #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7)
- Sunspire: 250866 (EU) (Godslayer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7)
- Kyne's Aegis: 235841 (EU) (Dawnbringer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8)
Dungeon trifectas:- Mountain God and Leave No Bone Unbroken
- Apex Predator and Pure Lunacy
- Depths Defier and Relentless Raider
- Defanged the Devourer and Nature's Wrath
- In Defiance of Death and No Rest for the Wicked
- Bane of Thorns and True Genius
- Ardent Bibliophile and Subterranean Smasher
- Battlespire's Best and Bastion Breaker
- Zero Regrets and Land, Air, and Sea Supremacy
- Fist of Tava and Invader's Bane
- Curator's Champion (Valinna) and Temporal Tempest
- Unshakeable Fervor and Lighting the Embers
Extended Journal Add-Ons: Item Set Browser ― Loot Log ― Character Knowledge ― Collectibles Tracker ― RaidificatorOther Add-Ons: Combat Alerts ― Deconstruction Junk Marker ― Purge Tracker ― Asylum Status Panel ― Smart Looter ― Improved Companion Rapport Information0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »We warned of this in the PTS.
Another classic example of ZOS not wanting your feedback.
Probably because the overwhelming majority--tanks included--appreciate this change. It's rare for me to come across someone who actually thinks that this change is bad.
This is one of the most hotly-anticipated features of this patch. There are a few detractors, yes, but that's to be expected. So, yes, ZOS did listen to feedback. They addressed one of the key pain points of players. Would it have been nice if they made it optional, to cater to those with exceptional visual acuity? Sure. But that's an extra layer of complexity.
And I have no idea why.
Your tank is going to constantly be pulling enemies out of AOE's. This makes no sense. Just seems like your trying to really spin a negative into a positive. If the visual effects are reduced, then why not just give a toggle? Reduced visual noise is one thing, but you should try to replace it with something. Like, say, a 'yellow' circle or two on the ground to represent allied AOE.
I'd also love to know who died and made you speaker for some majority you claim to speak for. Citation bloody needed.
@Doctordarkspawn
My guess is you haven't main ranked second boss in vHoF. If you read through Codes posts I think he specifically mentioned that, and that he can still tell, visually, where dps laid their dots.
Further, why is the tank moving a boss in the first place. Unless there is a mechanic forcing the move there is no reason for the tank to move.
In that senario, the tank might move the boss for any number of reasons but not be able to see where the AOE is to keep them there.
I've since done both the dungeons and yeah, there is enough visual indication to see where it is. I still disagree with the change however. Maybe this is because I played a more support focused tank than others have. Then again, that playstyle is slowly dying as the pidgeon holes ZOS has instated have become increasingly rigid.
I still stand by a toggle. There's no arguement you can present to me besides laziness that a toggle couldn't be instated.
You do not list a valid reason because there is no reason for the tank to move a boss other than to dealing with mechanics, or the tank does not know what their doing. There is a 100% guarantee AoE is under the boss except when the boss is being moved.
Plain and simple. If you have cleared any of the last 2 trials in vet this would be very clear.
You seem to be really fixated on this point.
Yeah, we've established that. I'd still like to know, however, what everyone is using. Sometimes individuals procs indicate gear/skill setup. Watching a dude spam strife while holding a bow is a indication that this is going to take a while.
I still advocate a toggle.
Irrelevant information. Especially Snipe isn't even something that's is affected, iirc.0 -
MrBetadine✭✭✭✭MrBetadine wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »We warned of this in the PTS.
Another classic example of ZOS not wanting your feedback.
Probably because the overwhelming majority--tanks included--appreciate this change. It's rare for me to come across someone who actually thinks that this change is bad.
This is one of the most hotly-anticipated features of this patch. There are a few detractors, yes, but that's to be expected. So, yes, ZOS did listen to feedback. They addressed one of the key pain points of players. Would it have been nice if they made it optional, to cater to those with exceptional visual acuity? Sure. But that's an extra layer of complexity.
And I have no idea why.
Your tank is going to constantly be pulling enemies out of AOE's. This makes no sense. Just seems like your trying to really spin a negative into a positive. If the visual effects are reduced, then why not just give a toggle? Reduced visual noise is one thing, but you should try to replace it with something. Like, say, a 'yellow' circle or two on the ground to represent allied AOE.
I'd also love to know who died and made you speaker for some majority you claim to speak for. Citation bloody needed.
@Doctordarkspawn
My guess is you haven't main ranked second boss in vHoF. If you read through Codes posts I think he specifically mentioned that, and that he can still tell, visually, where dps laid their dots.
Further, why is the tank moving a boss in the first place. Unless there is a mechanic forcing the move there is no reason for the tank to move.
In that senario, the tank might move the boss for any number of reasons but not be able to see where the AOE is to keep them there.
I've since done both the dungeons and yeah, there is enough visual indication to see where it is. I still disagree with the change however. Maybe this is because I played a more support focused tank than others have. Then again, that playstyle is slowly dying as the pidgeon holes ZOS has instated have become increasingly rigid.
I still stand by a toggle. There's no arguement you can present to me besides laziness that a toggle couldn't be instated.
You do not list a valid reason because there is no reason for the tank to move a boss other than to dealing with mechanics, or the tank does not know what their doing. There is a 100% guarantee AoE is under the boss except when the boss is being moved.
Plain and simple. If you have cleared any of the last 2 trials in vet this would be very clear.
Actually I (the OP) am more concerned with mobs, not bosses. Imagine a party member drops an ult and I chain all adds out of it...
You can clearly see where the DoTs are. They are not hidden. They're just not excessive to the point of obscuring key mechanics that tanks need to react to.
I have no objection against making it optional. But that's extra UI, extra cases to test, etc., for an option that I expect only few people would actually use, and if ZOS decided that it wasn't worth the extra time and effort to make a toggle, then that's unfortunate, but it's a small downside compared the massive upside that has come from this change.More options are always a good thing.
Most software designers will disagree.
Compared to orignal design, it's practically hidden.
Also it's illogical that you can see your own effects but not other people's.
I'm here to provide feedback, because I'm not sure if ZOS has actually considered a toggle and decided not to use the toggle, or not.
Maybe software designers should be more hardworking. The best software i've seen all have plenty of options.0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MrBetadine wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »MrBetadine wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »We warned of this in the PTS.
Another classic example of ZOS not wanting your feedback.
Probably because the overwhelming majority--tanks included--appreciate this change. It's rare for me to come across someone who actually thinks that this change is bad.
This is one of the most hotly-anticipated features of this patch. There are a few detractors, yes, but that's to be expected. So, yes, ZOS did listen to feedback. They addressed one of the key pain points of players. Would it have been nice if they made it optional, to cater to those with exceptional visual acuity? Sure. But that's an extra layer of complexity.
And I have no idea why.
Your tank is going to constantly be pulling enemies out of AOE's. This makes no sense. Just seems like your trying to really spin a negative into a positive. If the visual effects are reduced, then why not just give a toggle? Reduced visual noise is one thing, but you should try to replace it with something. Like, say, a 'yellow' circle or two on the ground to represent allied AOE.
I'd also love to know who died and made you speaker for some majority you claim to speak for. Citation bloody needed.
@Doctordarkspawn
My guess is you haven't main ranked second boss in vHoF. If you read through Codes posts I think he specifically mentioned that, and that he can still tell, visually, where dps laid their dots.
Further, why is the tank moving a boss in the first place. Unless there is a mechanic forcing the move there is no reason for the tank to move.
In that senario, the tank might move the boss for any number of reasons but not be able to see where the AOE is to keep them there.
I've since done both the dungeons and yeah, there is enough visual indication to see where it is. I still disagree with the change however. Maybe this is because I played a more support focused tank than others have. Then again, that playstyle is slowly dying as the pidgeon holes ZOS has instated have become increasingly rigid.
I still stand by a toggle. There's no arguement you can present to me besides laziness that a toggle couldn't be instated.
You do not list a valid reason because there is no reason for the tank to move a boss other than to dealing with mechanics, or the tank does not know what their doing. There is a 100% guarantee AoE is under the boss except when the boss is being moved.
Plain and simple. If you have cleared any of the last 2 trials in vet this would be very clear.
Actually I (the OP) am more concerned with mobs, not bosses. Imagine a party member drops an ult and I chain all adds out of it...
The party needs to pay more attention to how you tank the trash. That part is very simple.
Not for a pug.
Really? No. If the dps are not bright enough to pay attention to begin with then their AoEs are probably not going to matter much. Besides, one can still see where the AoE was placed.
But I love pugs. The 2H tha goes after the single ranged mob. It's the first mob I pull in. Make him chase everything.0 -
MrBetadine✭✭✭✭Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »MrBetadine wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »MrBetadine wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »We warned of this in the PTS.
Another classic example of ZOS not wanting your feedback.
Probably because the overwhelming majority--tanks included--appreciate this change. It's rare for me to come across someone who actually thinks that this change is bad.
This is one of the most hotly-anticipated features of this patch. There are a few detractors, yes, but that's to be expected. So, yes, ZOS did listen to feedback. They addressed one of the key pain points of players. Would it have been nice if they made it optional, to cater to those with exceptional visual acuity? Sure. But that's an extra layer of complexity.
And I have no idea why.
Your tank is going to constantly be pulling enemies out of AOE's. This makes no sense. Just seems like your trying to really spin a negative into a positive. If the visual effects are reduced, then why not just give a toggle? Reduced visual noise is one thing, but you should try to replace it with something. Like, say, a 'yellow' circle or two on the ground to represent allied AOE.
I'd also love to know who died and made you speaker for some majority you claim to speak for. Citation bloody needed.
@Doctordarkspawn
My guess is you haven't main ranked second boss in vHoF. If you read through Codes posts I think he specifically mentioned that, and that he can still tell, visually, where dps laid their dots.
Further, why is the tank moving a boss in the first place. Unless there is a mechanic forcing the move there is no reason for the tank to move.
In that senario, the tank might move the boss for any number of reasons but not be able to see where the AOE is to keep them there.
I've since done both the dungeons and yeah, there is enough visual indication to see where it is. I still disagree with the change however. Maybe this is because I played a more support focused tank than others have. Then again, that playstyle is slowly dying as the pidgeon holes ZOS has instated have become increasingly rigid.
I still stand by a toggle. There's no arguement you can present to me besides laziness that a toggle couldn't be instated.
You do not list a valid reason because there is no reason for the tank to move a boss other than to dealing with mechanics, or the tank does not know what their doing. There is a 100% guarantee AoE is under the boss except when the boss is being moved.
Plain and simple. If you have cleared any of the last 2 trials in vet this would be very clear.
Actually I (the OP) am more concerned with mobs, not bosses. Imagine a party member drops an ult and I chain all adds out of it...
The party needs to pay more attention to how you tank the trash. That part is very simple.
Not for a pug.
Really? No. If the dps are not bright enough to pay attention to begin with then their AoEs are probably not going to matter much. Besides, one can still see where the AoE was placed.
But I love pugs. The 2H tha goes after the single ranged mob. It's the first mob I pull in. Make him chase everything.
No, it's lack of communication with pigs, not whether someone is bright enough.
Compared to the original design; the new effects are pretty much non-existent. Can you give me any logical reason that a lightning storm does not have lightning? Why can i see my own effects but not other people's?0 -
code65536✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MrBetadine wrote: »Maybe software designers should be more hardworking. The best software i've seen all have plenty of options.
It's not a matter of being "hardworking". It's a matter of too many options being bad design.Nightfighters ― PC/NA and PC/EU
Dungeons and Trials:Personal best scores:- Dragonstar Arena: 46817 (NA)
- Maelstrom Arena: 600526 (NA)
- Blackrose Prison: 99274 (EU) (Unchained)
- Maw of Lorkhaj: 165227 (EU)
- Halls of Fabrication: 220708 (NA) (Tick-Tock Tormentor #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11, #12)
- Asylum Sanctorium: 114957 (NA) (Immortal Redeemer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10)
- Cloudrest: 131256 (NA) (Gryphon Heart #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7)
- Sunspire: 250866 (EU) (Godslayer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7)
- Kyne's Aegis: 235841 (EU) (Dawnbringer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8)
Dungeon trifectas:- Mountain God and Leave No Bone Unbroken
- Apex Predator and Pure Lunacy
- Depths Defier and Relentless Raider
- Defanged the Devourer and Nature's Wrath
- In Defiance of Death and No Rest for the Wicked
- Bane of Thorns and True Genius
- Ardent Bibliophile and Subterranean Smasher
- Battlespire's Best and Bastion Breaker
- Zero Regrets and Land, Air, and Sea Supremacy
- Fist of Tava and Invader's Bane
- Curator's Champion (Valinna) and Temporal Tempest
- Unshakeable Fervor and Lighting the Embers
Extended Journal Add-Ons: Item Set Browser ― Loot Log ― Character Knowledge ― Collectibles Tracker ― RaidificatorOther Add-Ons: Combat Alerts ― Deconstruction Junk Marker ― Purge Tracker ― Asylum Status Panel ― Smart Looter ― Improved Companion Rapport Information1 -
MrBetadine✭✭✭✭MrBetadine wrote: »Maybe software designers should be more hardworking. The best software i've seen all have plenty of options.
It's not a matter of being "hardworking". It's a matter of too many options being bad design.
Can you explain a little more? I'm interested.0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MrBetadine wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »MrBetadine wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »MrBetadine wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »We warned of this in the PTS.
Another classic example of ZOS not wanting your feedback.
Probably because the overwhelming majority--tanks included--appreciate this change. It's rare for me to come across someone who actually thinks that this change is bad.
This is one of the most hotly-anticipated features of this patch. There are a few detractors, yes, but that's to be expected. So, yes, ZOS did listen to feedback. They addressed one of the key pain points of players. Would it have been nice if they made it optional, to cater to those with exceptional visual acuity? Sure. But that's an extra layer of complexity.
And I have no idea why.
Your tank is going to constantly be pulling enemies out of AOE's. This makes no sense. Just seems like your trying to really spin a negative into a positive. If the visual effects are reduced, then why not just give a toggle? Reduced visual noise is one thing, but you should try to replace it with something. Like, say, a 'yellow' circle or two on the ground to represent allied AOE.
I'd also love to know who died and made you speaker for some majority you claim to speak for. Citation bloody needed.
@Doctordarkspawn
My guess is you haven't main ranked second boss in vHoF. If you read through Codes posts I think he specifically mentioned that, and that he can still tell, visually, where dps laid their dots.
Further, why is the tank moving a boss in the first place. Unless there is a mechanic forcing the move there is no reason for the tank to move.
In that senario, the tank might move the boss for any number of reasons but not be able to see where the AOE is to keep them there.
I've since done both the dungeons and yeah, there is enough visual indication to see where it is. I still disagree with the change however. Maybe this is because I played a more support focused tank than others have. Then again, that playstyle is slowly dying as the pidgeon holes ZOS has instated have become increasingly rigid.
I still stand by a toggle. There's no arguement you can present to me besides laziness that a toggle couldn't be instated.
You do not list a valid reason because there is no reason for the tank to move a boss other than to dealing with mechanics, or the tank does not know what their doing. There is a 100% guarantee AoE is under the boss except when the boss is being moved.
Plain and simple. If you have cleared any of the last 2 trials in vet this would be very clear.
Actually I (the OP) am more concerned with mobs, not bosses. Imagine a party member drops an ult and I chain all adds out of it...
The party needs to pay more attention to how you tank the trash. That part is very simple.
Not for a pug.
Really? No. If the dps are not bright enough to pay attention to begin with then their AoEs are probably not going to matter much. Besides, one can still see where the AoE was placed.
But I love pugs. The 2H tha goes after the single ranged mob. It's the first mob I pull in. Make him chase everything.
No, it's lack of communication with pigs, not whether someone is bright enough.
Compared to the original design; the new effects are pretty much non-existent. Can you give me any logical reason that a lightning storm does not have lightning? Why can i see my own effects but not other people's?
Communication is really irrelevant. Granted, one can get some inexperienced or oblivious dps in the group but tanking to their misplaced ultimate is highly ineffective.
Here are the two ways to tank trash in a dungeon.
1. grab melee and pull ranged in
2. Grab melee and have them follow you to the ranged.
Both methods group the trash faster permitting more effective AoE damage regardless of how good the groups dps is.
It just takes to much work and more importantly to much time to both taunt melee a and reposition the ranged and no ultimate or any other ground based AoE lasts long enough to make it worthwhile.
Besides, a tank can still see where the ultimate was placed.0 -
code65536✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MrBetadine wrote: »MrBetadine wrote: »Maybe software designers should be more hardworking. The best software i've seen all have plenty of options.
It's not a matter of being "hardworking". It's a matter of too many options being bad design.
Can you explain a little more? I'm interested.
It's a matter of design philosophy. Best illustrated by these two articles.
Apple products, for example, are bereft of choice and are shunned as a result by many advanced users. But they are popular because they are clean, simple, and accessible as a result. On the opposite extreme, Linux overwhelms uses with choice, which some people prefer, but is a large reason why it is also inaccessible to many.
Sure, you can ask, "What's one extra checkbox?" But it's when that question gets asked of 40 other different options that you quickly end up with a large list of options that are cluttery and daunting for someone browsing through. Good software is one that tries to make the choice for the user intelligently.
And the new feature does a good job of that. Your own effects? You'll see them. Allied effects that are more important because they are interactable (e.g., have a synergy)? They are prominently rendered. Allied effects that don't really have much meaning for you? They're toned down--still visible--but no longer cluttery.
Now imagine adding options for this. Are you going to add options for each of the three types of effects? Or just one option that covers everything? Is it going to be a toggle between show everything or suppressing everything? Sure, you can just add an option toggle between the new intelligent render and the old dumb show-everything render, but then inevitably some people will ask for more granular controls that lets them do something with interactable effects and something else to non-interactable ones. Etc. How far down the rabbit hole do you want to go in the name of choice? And at what point does it become folly to waste time on something like this?Nightfighters ― PC/NA and PC/EU
Dungeons and Trials:Personal best scores:- Dragonstar Arena: 46817 (NA)
- Maelstrom Arena: 600526 (NA)
- Blackrose Prison: 99274 (EU) (Unchained)
- Maw of Lorkhaj: 165227 (EU)
- Halls of Fabrication: 220708 (NA) (Tick-Tock Tormentor #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11, #12)
- Asylum Sanctorium: 114957 (NA) (Immortal Redeemer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10)
- Cloudrest: 131256 (NA) (Gryphon Heart #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7)
- Sunspire: 250866 (EU) (Godslayer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7)
- Kyne's Aegis: 235841 (EU) (Dawnbringer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8)
Dungeon trifectas:- Mountain God and Leave No Bone Unbroken
- Apex Predator and Pure Lunacy
- Depths Defier and Relentless Raider
- Defanged the Devourer and Nature's Wrath
- In Defiance of Death and No Rest for the Wicked
- Bane of Thorns and True Genius
- Ardent Bibliophile and Subterranean Smasher
- Battlespire's Best and Bastion Breaker
- Zero Regrets and Land, Air, and Sea Supremacy
- Fist of Tava and Invader's Bane
- Curator's Champion (Valinna) and Temporal Tempest
- Unshakeable Fervor and Lighting the Embers
Extended Journal Add-Ons: Item Set Browser ― Loot Log ― Character Knowledge ― Collectibles Tracker ― RaidificatorOther Add-Ons: Combat Alerts ― Deconstruction Junk Marker ― Purge Tracker ― Asylum Status Panel ― Smart Looter ― Improved Companion Rapport Information1 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MrBetadine wrote: »MrBetadine wrote: »Maybe software designers should be more hardworking. The best software i've seen all have plenty of options.
It's not a matter of being "hardworking". It's a matter of too many options being bad design.
Can you explain a little more? I'm interested.
It's a matter of design philosophy. Best illustrated by these two articles.
Apple products, for example, are bereft of choice and are shunned as a result by many advanced users. But they are popular because they are clean, simple, and accessible as a result. On the opposite extreme, Linux overwhelms uses with choice, which some people prefer, but is a large reason why it is also inaccessible to many.
Sure, you can ask, "What's one extra checkbox?" But it's when that question gets asked of 40 other different options that you quickly end up with a large list of options that are cluttery and daunting for someone browsing through. Good software is one that tries to make the choice for the user intelligently.
And the new feature does a good job of that. Your own effects? You'll see them. Allied effects that are more important because they are interactable (e.g., have a synergy)? They are prominently rendered. Allied effects that don't really have much meaning for you? They're toned down--still visible--but no longer cluttery.
Now imagine adding options for this. Are you going to add options for each of the three types of effects? Or just one option that covers everything? Is it going to be a toggle between show everything or suppressing everything? Sure, you can just add an option toggle between the new intelligent render and the old dumb show-everything render, but then inevitably some people will ask for more granular controls that lets them do something with interactable effects and something else to non-interactable ones. Etc. How far down the rabbit hole do you want to go in the name of choice? And at what point does it become folly to waste time on something like this?
This statement really says it all but it's not just how far do you want to go down the rabbit hole but also how far Zos wants to go. It can get out of hand and become much more to manage going forward.0 -
MrBetadine✭✭✭✭MrBetadine wrote: »MrBetadine wrote: »Maybe software designers should be more hardworking. The best software i've seen all have plenty of options.
It's not a matter of being "hardworking". It's a matter of too many options being bad design.
Can you explain a little more? I'm interested.
It's a matter of design philosophy. Best illustrated by these two articles.
Apple products, for example, are bereft of choice and are shunned as a result by many advanced users. But they are popular because they are clean, simple, and accessible as a result. On the opposite extreme, Linux overwhelms uses with choice, which some people prefer, but is a large reason why it is also inaccessible to many.
Sure, you can ask, "What's one extra checkbox?" But it's when that question gets asked of 40 other different options that you quickly end up with a large list of options that are cluttery and daunting for someone browsing through. Good software is one that tries to make the choice for the user intelligently.
And the new feature does a good job of that. Your own effects? You'll see them. Allied effects that are more important because they are interactable (e.g., have a synergy)? They are prominently rendered. Allied effects that don't really have much meaning for you? They're toned down--still visible--but no longer cluttery.
Now imagine adding options for this. Are you going to add options for each of the three types of effects? Or just one option that covers everything? Is it going to be a toggle between show everything or suppressing everything? Sure, you can just add an option toggle between the new intelligent render and the old dumb show-everything render, but then inevitably some people will ask for more granular controls that lets them do something with interactable effects and something else to non-interactable ones. Etc. How far down the rabbit hole do you want to go in the name of choice? And at what point does it become folly to waste time on something like this?
The two articles you linked... they are not even pilublished on academic journals. They are no different than IGN reviews...
I agree with some of your points, but if the options themselves are optional, then it wouldn't be an issue. People don't want options can still ignore the options, people who like customizations are able to do so.
By your logic there should not be options at all, because all options can fall into a rabbit hole.0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I think it's reading a much into things to suggest Code is stating there should be no option at all. Having options for everything that someone says they want an option for becomes overwhelming.
Personality I agree with Code on this and have not seen a solid reason provided to the contrary.0 -
MrBetadine✭✭✭✭Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »I think it's reading a much into things to suggest Code is stating there should be no option at all. Having options for everything that someone says they want an option for becomes overwhelming.
Personality I agree with Code on this and have not seen a solid reason provided to the contrary.
May I also ask removing all graphic options... makes no difference to me because those options only affect my machine...
0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MrBetadine wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »I think it's reading a much into things to suggest Code is stating there should be no option at all. Having options for everything that someone says they want an option for becomes overwhelming.
Personality I agree with Code on this and have not seen a solid reason provided to the contrary.
May I also ask removing all graphic options... makes no difference to me because those options only affect my machine...
I don't see the question. Seems more of a comment that this makes no difference to you.Edited by idk on August 17, 2017 5:58PM0 -
Saturn✭✭✭✭✭
✭From a tank perspective I agree, but I am glad it's off on all other characters tbh. The thing that bothers me though, is that despite this change, the performance is still bad. I get the feeling ZOS have no clue what is causing it, and just randomly make changes everywhere. The only thing this change has helped is removing the few occassions where everyone in a trial nearly crashes from eight simultanious elemental rage ultimates.0 -
Feanor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭@code65536
I presume you play without addons then because the base game UI would be excellent design according to you
Main characters: Feanor the Believer - AD Altmer mSorc - AR 50 - Flawless Conqueror (PC EU)Idril Arnanor - AD Altmer mSorc - CP 217 - Stormproof (PC NA)Other characters:Necrophilius Killgood - DC Imperial NecromancerFearscales - AD Argonian Templar - Stormproof (healer)Draco Imperialis - AD Imperial DK (tank)Cabed Naearamarth - AD Dunmer mDKValirion Willowthorne - AD Bosmer stamBladeTuruna - AD Altmer magBladeKheled Zaram - AD Redguard stamDKKibil Nala - AD Redguard stamSorc - StormproofYavanna Kémentárí - AD Breton magWardenAzog gro-Ghâsh - EP Orc stamWardenVidar Drakenblød - DC Nord mDKMarquis de Peyrac - DC Breton mSorc - StormproofRawlith Khaj'ra - AD Khajiit stamWardenTu'waccah - AD Redguard StamplarAll chars 50 @ CP 1900+. Playing and enjoying PvP with RdK mostly on PC EU.0 -
Oreyn_Bearclaw✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »We warned of this in the PTS.
Another classic example of ZOS not wanting your feedback.
Probably because the overwhelming majority--tanks included--appreciate this change. It's rare for me to come across someone who actually thinks that this change is bad.
This is one of the most hotly-anticipated features of this patch. There are a few detractors, yes, but that's to be expected. So, yes, ZOS did listen to feedback. They addressed one of the key pain points of players. Would it have been nice if they made it optional, to cater to those with exceptional visual acuity? Sure. But that's an extra layer of complexity.
And I have no idea why.
Your tank is going to constantly be pulling enemies out of AOE's. This makes no sense. Just seems like your trying to really spin a negative into a positive. If the visual effects are reduced, then why not just give a toggle? Reduced visual noise is one thing, but you should try to replace it with something. Like, say, a 'yellow' circle or two on the ground to represent allied AOE.
I'd also love to know who died and made you speaker for some majority you claim to speak for. Citation bloody needed.
@Doctordarkspawn
My guess is you haven't main ranked second boss in vHoF. If you read through Codes posts I think he specifically mentioned that, and that he can still tell, visually, where dps laid their dots.
Further, why is the tank moving a boss in the first place. Unless there is a mechanic forcing the move there is no reason for the tank to move.
In that senario, the tank might move the boss for any number of reasons but not be able to see where the AOE is to keep them there.
I've since done both the dungeons and yeah, there is enough visual indication to see where it is. I still disagree with the change however. Maybe this is because I played a more support focused tank than others have. Then again, that playstyle is slowly dying as the pidgeon holes ZOS has instated have become increasingly rigid.
I still stand by a toggle. There's no arguement you can present to me besides laziness that a toggle couldn't be instated.
This once again shows you havent tanked serious end game content. That is not a criticisim per se, as very few people in this game can say they have tanked every trial on hard mode. Support is a tanks primary role. There is a reason that most of the best raid groups have their tanks in sets like Alkosh. It gives no benefits to mitigation, but the support is excellent. If anything the recent changes, especially the sharpened nerf, reinforce the notion that tanks must put support at the top of their priority list.
As to a toggle, sure. There are a million things I would like to be able to toggle, but that diverts resources that I think could be better spent elsewhere.Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »We warned of this in the PTS.
Another classic example of ZOS not wanting your feedback.
@DoctordarkspawnDoctordarkspawn wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »Doctordarkspawn wrote: »We warned of this in the PTS.
Another classic example of ZOS not wanting your feedback.
Probably because the overwhelming majority--tanks included--appreciate this change. It's rare for me to come across someone who actually thinks that this change is bad.
This is one of the most hotly-anticipated features of this patch. There are a few detractors, yes, but that's to be expected. So, yes, ZOS did listen to feedback. They addressed one of the key pain points of players. Would it have been nice if they made it optional, to cater to those with exceptional visual acuity? Sure. But that's an extra layer of complexity.
And I have no idea why.
Your tank is going to constantly be pulling enemies out of AOE's. This makes no sense. Just seems like your trying to really spin a negative into a positive. If the visual effects are reduced, then why not just give a toggle? Reduced visual noise is one thing, but you should try to replace it with something. Like, say, a 'yellow' circle or two on the ground to represent allied AOE.
I'd also love to know who died and made you speaker for some majority you claim to speak for. Citation bloody needed.
@Doctordarkspawn Hmm, let's see here. You quit the game and don't even play it. You state proudly on the forums that you don't even do trials. You constantly complain that there is no good content for tanks, even though all of the best tank content are in the trials that you refuse to touch; e.g., in vHoF where everything hinges on the tanks, two good tanks can carry a mediocre group to a clear, but even the best DPS in the world can't clear if their two tanks aren't competent.
So what makes you--someone who is entirely disconnected from the game and have no idea what it is like "in the trenches"--more qualified than someone who is actively tanking endgame content and who knows a lot of other tanks? Every single endgame tank that I personally know looked forward to this change. Because there is still enough visual cue about where their ground effects are (it's not a complete removal) and because in general, it's our positioning that dictate the placement of their ground effects, not vice-versa.
So my question to you is, what makes you--the ZOS-can-do-nothing-right-forum-troll-who-doesn't-even-play--qualified to make judgment on the opinions of people who do actively tank?
On this issue, I have never made claims to what people in general think about this change. You have. But I have not and refuse to.
These two statements are in direct conflict. You claim "we" warned them about this on PTS. Then you say you dont want to make claims about what people think of the changes. The reality is that the vast majority of PTS players (certainly not everyone) were very excited about this.
But since you like to overgeneralize, here are some broad statements for you: Everyone here knows you didnt spend a minute on the PTS. Everyone knows you have never tanked an end game trial in your life. Everyone knows you a hate this game and no longer play it. Everyone knows what you think of ZOS. Everyone knows you are nothing more than a bitter troll. For the love of god, just leave the forums. I have never seen any meaningful contributions come from your tired rantings.
Every legitimate end-game tank I have talked to, and for that matter, every end-game player I have talked to has welcomed this change with open arms. Frame rates in trials have noticeably improved, which is an issue that you are simply not qualified to discuss as you, by your own admission, dont play them.
@code65536
Not the first time I have fallen down this particular rabbit hole, but I know its sometimes hard to refrain from feeding the trolls.
People did in fact warn them about this on the PTS. I was one of them. There was negative feedback there, I believe the thread is still up and you can go look at it. Plenty of people disagreed then, allthough it was far from the longest of the feedback chains. The fact this thread exists, shows people still disagree with it.
It is true, that I did not play on the PTS. I typically dont anymore considering ZOS's knack for outright over-riding or ignoring feedback, like they did with the last minute changes this update. However, what isn't true is that you've never seen any meaningful contributions come from my 'tired rantings'.
You can go ahed and call me a troll, along with this apparent harassment group you lot have cultivated, but I'm not going anywhere until the moderators force me out. I will continue to give people the honest truth: That if you want change, a financial impact must be made upon ZOS as a company. And I will not stop on your account.
Sorry to disappoint you.
Sorry bud, but that ones on you. When all you do is cry and criticize, you are going to be met with pushback. I promise we havent wasted our time meeting in dark rooms to bring you down. Most of us just see the absurdity of the vast majority of your forum posts and respond accordingly.1 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭@code65536
I presume you play without addons then because the base game UI would be excellent design according to you
Not even relevant to the subject.0 -
Jhalin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Having a large amount of options is a good thing so long as the default is enough for the average player.
You only have issues with option overload if you push it onto players at the very start. This isn't an issue here because there are defaults set up. Players can change things later if they like, but nothing about this game is overwhelmed with decisions, especially vanilla.
An option to Display Friendly Ground Abilities, with the default being off, would solve this problem from the get-go. There is no downside to adding this option. People with garbage PCs will keep it disabled, people with good rigs with keep it enabled.Edited by Jhalin on August 17, 2017 10:43PM1 -
Nestor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I tanked a few Group Dungeons yesterday.
I have to say it is harder to find the bosses now that move around. I used to guage it off the light show as I knew in there somewhere was the boss. Now I have to go and look for them. I may get used to it, but I do miss all the pyrotechnics.
They really need to just separate PvP and PvE skills. The only way to stop this madness.Enjoy the game, life is what you really want to be worried about.
PakKat "Everything was going well, until I died"
Gary Gravestink "I am glad you died, I needed the help"1 -
richo262✭✭✭✭✭
✭Why couldn't this have just been restricted to towns and trials?
I tank, and I use chains, I often chain adds onto a wall of elements. I'm yet to run my tank since patch, leveling a stam sorc, but did notice my mates wall of elements was not showing up on my screen, thought it was a bug at first.
I can understand towns getting it, because high population, many spam skills, could effect frames. I could understand trials getting it, they suffer from FPS loss, but your standard dungeon doesn't quite need it, it can somewhat effect gameplay negatively. I thought they were toning down the effects, not removing them.
No way to switch them back on?0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Why couldn't this have just been restricted to towns and trials?
I tank, and I use chains, I often chain adds onto a wall of elements. I'm yet to run my tank since patch, leveling a stam sorc, but did notice my mates wall of elements was not showing up on my screen, thought it was a bug at first.
I can understand towns getting it, because high population, many spam skills, could effect frames. I could understand trials getting it, they suffer from FPS loss, but your standard dungeon doesn't quite need it, it can somewhat effect gameplay negatively. I thought they were toning down the effects, not removing them.
No way to switch them back on?
More effective to talon the melee, pull the ranged to it and the dps can easily cast WoE where you have the mobs. Really seems inefficient to taunt all the melee, drag them to the location the dps chose to drop a WoE then pull the ranged. Everything is in place within a few seconds, grouped together really nice.
Lets see, a group of 8 mobs 4 melee and 4 ranged. Minimum of 4 seconds to taunt all the melee, another second or two to move them to where WoE was placed then pull the ranged. During that time the WoE is almost done.
Maybe the dps was new and did not know how to aim their skils. idk.0
