Why IC is a dead Zone

Thunderknuckles

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

Thunderknuckles wrote: »

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

Talcyndl wrote: »

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

There is no excuse for rewarding bad players and cowardice. Nightblade ability ''cloak'' does exactly that. It gives you not only a clear opening advantage, it also gives you the ability to easily escape when things go bad. Not enough risk involved, for a class which is supposed to be ''risk/reward'' based.

Really a separate discussion, but I agree that cloak is inherently broken.

ESO is the only game I'm aware of that allows an in-combat stealth ability to be cast repeatedly, with no cooldown or other significant limit. While there are some counters of varying effect, the basic ability should not exist in its present form.

And on top of that they are as strong as any other class even without cloak, have access to the best stamina spammable, best ST ultimate at the lowest cost, amazing passives and so on. It is not really a separate discussion. IC is heaven for nightblades due to the nature of that zone. You won't see a templar or dragonknight ganking/taxing people as efficiently. %90 of the time it is a pesky nightblade.

90% of the time what I see in IC, and I'm in there every single night for 2 hours, is Stamplars, Stamdens, and DK's. For a stamblade Cloak can really only be spammed about 3 times before the NB is out of magicka. If they pop a pot then a couple more Cloaks, sure. So to say, "You won't see a templar or dragonknight ganking/taxing people as efficiently" is utter garbage. I mean it is truly patently false. Again, what I see most of the time are those 3 classes riding around the districts openly and totally unconcerned about being jumped. I commonly see those classes taking on district bosses single handedly and often whilst fighting off 2 to 4 enemy players. I have never once seen a Stamblade do that. Not a Magblade , either.

1.Stamdens are extremeley weak against stamblade in 1v1. Cloak hard counters them.
2.Cloaking once drops the boss aggro from you and forces your enemies to tank it.
3.you can only spam it 3 times argument is purely garbage. I can only spam igneous shields 3 times before I'm out of magicka too, so what?
4. At this point in the game, if you're telling me that Dk/templar can tax as efficiently as a nightblade. you are a lying nightblade main. Simple as that.

Whatever you want to believe, man. LOL

Ragnarock41

Thunderknuckles wrote: »

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

Thunderknuckles wrote: »

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

Talcyndl wrote: »

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

There is no excuse for rewarding bad players and cowardice. Nightblade ability ''cloak'' does exactly that. It gives you not only a clear opening advantage, it also gives you the ability to easily escape when things go bad. Not enough risk involved, for a class which is supposed to be ''risk/reward'' based.

Really a separate discussion, but I agree that cloak is inherently broken.

ESO is the only game I'm aware of that allows an in-combat stealth ability to be cast repeatedly, with no cooldown or other significant limit. While there are some counters of varying effect, the basic ability should not exist in its present form.

And on top of that they are as strong as any other class even without cloak, have access to the best stamina spammable, best ST ultimate at the lowest cost, amazing passives and so on. It is not really a separate discussion. IC is heaven for nightblades due to the nature of that zone. You won't see a templar or dragonknight ganking/taxing people as efficiently. %90 of the time it is a pesky nightblade.

90% of the time what I see in IC, and I'm in there every single night for 2 hours, is Stamplars, Stamdens, and DK's. For a stamblade Cloak can really only be spammed about 3 times before the NB is out of magicka. If they pop a pot then a couple more Cloaks, sure. So to say, "You won't see a templar or dragonknight ganking/taxing people as efficiently" is utter garbage. I mean it is truly patently false. Again, what I see most of the time are those 3 classes riding around the districts openly and totally unconcerned about being jumped. I commonly see those classes taking on district bosses single handedly and often whilst fighting off 2 to 4 enemy players. I have never once seen a Stamblade do that. Not a Magblade , either.

1.Stamdens are extremeley weak against stamblade in 1v1. Cloak hard counters them.
2.Cloaking once drops the boss aggro from you and forces your enemies to tank it.
3.you can only spam it 3 times argument is purely garbage. I can only spam igneous shields 3 times before I'm out of magicka too, so what?
4. At this point in the game, if you're telling me that Dk/templar can tax as efficiently as a nightblade. you are a lying nightblade main. Simple as that.

Whatever you want to believe, man. LOL

I think we both realize that I'm %100 accurate here.

Thunderknuckles

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

Thunderknuckles wrote: »

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

Thunderknuckles wrote: »

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

Talcyndl wrote: »

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

There is no excuse for rewarding bad players and cowardice. Nightblade ability ''cloak'' does exactly that. It gives you not only a clear opening advantage, it also gives you the ability to easily escape when things go bad. Not enough risk involved, for a class which is supposed to be ''risk/reward'' based.

Really a separate discussion, but I agree that cloak is inherently broken.

ESO is the only game I'm aware of that allows an in-combat stealth ability to be cast repeatedly, with no cooldown or other significant limit. While there are some counters of varying effect, the basic ability should not exist in its present form.

And on top of that they are as strong as any other class even without cloak, have access to the best stamina spammable, best ST ultimate at the lowest cost, amazing passives and so on. It is not really a separate discussion. IC is heaven for nightblades due to the nature of that zone. You won't see a templar or dragonknight ganking/taxing people as efficiently. %90 of the time it is a pesky nightblade.

90% of the time what I see in IC, and I'm in there every single night for 2 hours, is Stamplars, Stamdens, and DK's. For a stamblade Cloak can really only be spammed about 3 times before the NB is out of magicka. If they pop a pot then a couple more Cloaks, sure. So to say, "You won't see a templar or dragonknight ganking/taxing people as efficiently" is utter garbage. I mean it is truly patently false. Again, what I see most of the time are those 3 classes riding around the districts openly and totally unconcerned about being jumped. I commonly see those classes taking on district bosses single handedly and often whilst fighting off 2 to 4 enemy players. I have never once seen a Stamblade do that. Not a Magblade , either.

1.Stamdens are extremeley weak against stamblade in 1v1. Cloak hard counters them.
2.Cloaking once drops the boss aggro from you and forces your enemies to tank it.
3.you can only spam it 3 times argument is purely garbage. I can only spam igneous shields 3 times before I'm out of magicka too, so what?
4. At this point in the game, if you're telling me that Dk/templar can tax as efficiently as a nightblade. you are a lying nightblade main. Simple as that.

Whatever you want to believe, man. LOL

I think we both realize that I'm %100 accurate here.

I think we don't. I'm telling you what I see with my flesh and blood human eyeballs every single night and you're telling me I'm wrong. LOL I do see some Night Blades on occasion, but what I said in my earlier post is what I see the vast majority of the time. Maybe it's the time of night I play, which is late in NA.

Edited to get back to the point of this thread. I personally think that IC simply does not appeal to the average player because they don't like to lose anything when they get sent back to spawn. They don't want to build up a nice pile ot Tel Var only to lose it to a group of enemy players. It's the very nature of the zone that turns off many players, so ....since they can't be forced to do it and are free to go where they will....that's how it's going to be in Imperial City. It's why games like EVE Online will ever and always be niche player games.

Katahdin

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

Thunderknuckles wrote: »

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

Thunderknuckles wrote: »

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

Talcyndl wrote: »

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

There is no excuse for rewarding bad players and cowardice. Nightblade ability ''cloak'' does exactly that. It gives you not only a clear opening advantage, it also gives you the ability to easily escape when things go bad. Not enough risk involved, for a class which is supposed to be ''risk/reward'' based.

Really a separate discussion, but I agree that cloak is inherently broken.

ESO is the only game I'm aware of that allows an in-combat stealth ability to be cast repeatedly, with no cooldown or other significant limit. While there are some counters of varying effect, the basic ability should not exist in its present form.

And on top of that they are as strong as any other class even without cloak, have access to the best stamina spammable, best ST ultimate at the lowest cost, amazing passives and so on. It is not really a separate discussion. IC is heaven for nightblades due to the nature of that zone. You won't see a templar or dragonknight ganking/taxing people as efficiently. %90 of the time it is a pesky nightblade.

90% of the time what I see in IC, and I'm in there every single night for 2 hours, is Stamplars, Stamdens, and DK's. For a stamblade Cloak can really only be spammed about 3 times before the NB is out of magicka. If they pop a pot then a couple more Cloaks, sure. So to say, "You won't see a templar or dragonknight ganking/taxing people as efficiently" is utter garbage. I mean it is truly patently false. Again, what I see most of the time are those 3 classes riding around the districts openly and totally unconcerned about being jumped. I commonly see those classes taking on district bosses single handedly and often whilst fighting off 2 to 4 enemy players. I have never once seen a Stamblade do that. Not a Magblade , either.

1.Stamdens are extremeley weak against stamblade in 1v1. Cloak hard counters them.
2.Cloaking once drops the boss aggro from you and forces your enemies to tank it.
3.you can only spam it 3 times argument is purely garbage. I can only spam igneous shields 3 times before I'm out of magicka too, so what?
4. At this point in the game, if you're telling me that Dk/templar can tax as efficiently as a nightblade. you are a lying nightblade main. Simple as that.

Whatever you want to believe, man. LOL

I think we both realize that I'm %100 accurate here.

No, we realize you're 100% biased and class blind

Talcyndl

Thunderknuckles wrote: »

90% of the time what I see in IC

Well, yeah.

fred4

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

1.Stamdens are extremeley weak against stamblade in 1v1. Cloak hard counters them.

Funny that. Stamden burst is deadly and easy to access. The last stamblade, who seemed reasonably good and eluded me for a while, I killed within 2 seconds when I landed my burst combo on them. I was not running any detection, it was simply the speed and streength of the stamden burst that wrong-footed and killed the NB. On the other hand he couldn't touch my health when I blocked. He was quick to get me down after he managed an Incap, but then Stamden is like magplar. No Rally needed. Burst heal is always available. I don't play stamden much. Was running a "standard" heavy armor 2H / 1H+S / 7th Legion / Blood Spawn / Agility / Asylum build. I was impressed with how stamden performed against stamblade.

2.Cloaking once drops the boss aggro from you and forces your enemies to tank it.

Not true. You have to cloak a couple of times before that happens, maybe about 3. That's if you are soloing a boss. If you are in a larger fight it is frequently hard to disengage. Especially if you are grouped, that works against you as NB. You cannot disengage, because the group engages or disengages as a whole. Then, some of the AOEs, such as the poison pools from the arena boss, spawn directly underneath you, even if you are in cloak, and knock you out of cloak.

It seems evident that you have not played NB. I recommend you do that, so you can judge for yourself how "easy" it is to play that class (Hint: It is not). If you play a tanky build, you have an advantage against NBs in IC boss fights. They tend to be exposed, and they tend to take much more damage from bosses than a DK. I'm sorry, if you haven't been able to capitalise on that. Tankier stamblades do exist, but those players are far less aggravating than the typical glass cannon ganker. The latter typically relies on dodge roll as much as Cloak for defense.

NBs use a kill quickly or be killed playstyle. What makes them aggravating is when you can't slow down the fight and are forced to play them on their terms. If you die frequently to them, that may be partly because you are in the bracket that NBs like to attack, e.g. the medium armor low-ish health build, or the light armor build who forgot to shield.

I agree that, for soloing, NB is the class to use (or maybe sorc). As long as you are in cloak, and at a reasonable distance, you are very safe. You get to pick your fights. However, once you are committed, weaving in and out of cloak is only easy, if the opposition in inexperienced and lets you do that. If NBs frequently elude you, then you have to consider that they are not actually using Cloak, but the Shade.

There are so many countermeasures to Cloak, I'm sure I don't need to list them all. The easiest is simply being a sorc, preferably a stamsorc, and running Hurricane / Lightning Form. Overwhelming Surge is a bane, as is ZOS combat text system, which exposes a cloaking NBs location, if they have a DOT on them. Magelight / Expert Hunter are probably some of the most misunderstood skills. They are crap at locating NBs. Their real use is keeping them exposed, when they are on you. Melee NBs can only escape from people who rigorously use those skills via the Shade or gap closing elsewhere.

I would be against a cost increase for Cloak. If that was done, it may be the point where I quit. The longer I play (almost 3 years now), the more I value quality of life. The increased running speed and safety of Cloak + Concealed Weapon is a big draw for all those times where I am iout of combat. Perma-cloaking as a magblade also permits you to survey resources without being detected by NPC guards. It's one of those things that gives a unique feel to the class.

Thunderknuckles

fred4 wrote: »

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

1.Stamdens are extremeley weak against stamblade in 1v1. Cloak hard counters them.

Funny that. Stamden burst is deadly and easy to access. The last stamblade, who seemed reasonably good and eluded me for a while, I killed within 2 seconds when I landed my burst combo on them. I was not running any detection, it was simply the speed and streength of the stamden burst that wrong-footed and killed the NB. On the other hand he couldn't touch my health when I blocked. He was quick to get me down after he managed an Incap, but then Stamden is like magplar. No Rally needed. Burst heal is always available. I don't play stamden much. Was running a "standard" heavy armor 2H / 1H+S / 7th Legion / Blood Spawn / Agility / Asylum build. I was impressed with how stamden performed against stamblade.

2.Cloaking once drops the boss aggro from you and forces your enemies to tank it.

Not true. You have to cloak a couple of times before that happens, maybe about 3. That's if you are soloing a boss. If you are in a larger fight it is frequently hard to disengage. Especially if you are grouped, that works against you as NB. You cannot disengage, because the group engages or disengages as a whole. Then, some of the AOEs, such as the poison pools from the arena boss, spawn directly underneath you, even if you are in cloak, and knock you out of cloak.

It seems evident that you have not played NB. I recommend you do that, so you can judge for yourself how "easy" it is to play that class (Hint: It is not). If you play a tanky build, you have an advantage against NBs in IC boss fights. They tend to be exposed, and they tend to take much more damage from bosses than a DK. I'm sorry, if you haven't been able to capitalise on that. Tankier stamblades do exist, but those players are far less aggravating than the typical glass cannon ganker. The latter typically relies on dodge roll as much as Cloak for defense.

NBs use a kill quickly or be killed playstyle. What makes them aggravating is when you can't slow down the fight and are forced to play them on their terms. If you die frequently to them, that may be partly because you are in the bracket that NBs like to attack, e.g. the medium armor low-ish health build, or the light armor build who forgot to shield.

I agree that, for soloing, NB is the class to use (or maybe sorc). As long as you are in cloak, and at a reasonable distance, you are very safe. You get to pick your fights. However, once you are committed, weaving in and out of cloak is only easy, if the opposition in inexperienced and lets you do that. If NBs frequently elude you, then you have to consider that they are not actually using Cloak, but the Shade.

There are so many countermeasures to Cloak, I'm sure I don't need to list them all. The easiest is simply being a sorc, preferably a stamsorc, and running Hurricane / Lightning Form. Overwhelming Surge is a bane, as is ZOS combat text system, which exposes a cloaking NBs location, if they have a DOT on them. Magelight / Expert Hunter are probably some of the most misunderstood skills. They are crap at locating NBs. Their real use is keeping them exposed, when they are on you. Melee NBs can only escape from people who rigorously use those skills via the Shade or gap closing elsewhere.

I would be against a cost increase for Cloak. If that was done, it may be the point where I quit. The longer I play (almost 3 years now), the more I value quality of life. The increased running speed and safety of Cloak + Concealed Weapon is a big draw for all those times where I am iout of combat. Perma-cloaking as a magblade also permits you to survey resources without being detected by NPC guards. It's one of those things that gives a unique feel to the class.

Thank you, fred4. Very articulate and precise explanation. Couldn't have said it better myself.

labambao

Ectheliontnacil wrote: »

The only players you encounter in IC are cancerous degenerates. 2-4 mans all with imperial physique equipped

Okay, this is me, farming in grp of 3 ppl max in physique and kill all players that move. And its not a problem, good skilled guys can come and kill us.
The problem is blue raids on Shor, that playing 15+ ppl in IC and when they see you - 2 heals do REMEBRANCE, all dk leaps etc...

labambao

And one more problem with IC.
Leechers.
I fight as lion, other alliances go home, ic is mine. And at moment when i pull 1st boss coming ALOT of AD khajiit archers and leech. And in few rounds i need to relog for other allance and kill them.
But its still ok.
More RAGE. Gunker tryhard me, die 5-10 times. He cant. What i see. In 10 minutes he comes with MY ALLIANCE to LEECH.

schwarzman1

Talcyndl wrote: »

Ectheliontnacil wrote: »

So yes, I call those people cancerous degenerates, because that's what they are.

How dare they PvP in a PvP zone. Don't they know you are special and deserve to be left alone. From now on, you should wear the wedding dress costume - that should make it clear to everyone.

Lol, for fun one of my guilds pvp with wedding dresses on. It’s a hilarious scene.

schwarzman1

Love IC/IS. Don’t change it other than adding more rewards and bug fixes.

Vizier

Ummm. No. IC is not Fluff. It should be challenging, dangerous and risky. It's what makes it fun. IC was designed for those players that don't mind players being pitted against one another with a real risk / reward system in place.

idk

TheRealPotoroo wrote: »

SupremeRissole wrote: »

Most of what you want changed is literally the whole point of IC. To remove mobs removes half of the farm aspect, to remove the telvar loss pretty much removes any thrill in IC. To me the whole idea of IC is risk/reward, roll in there in full pve setups and get easy tel var but risk losing it all to a pvp setup. Those in a pvp build will have a harder time on bosses, but make up for it with the possibility of taking tel var of someone else. That risk reward concept is the whole idea and personally the only part that makes IC fun.

Except it's not fun so hardly anyone goes there. I'd like to do the quests but I won't go to IC because I loath PVP.

IC was very popular when it was released. However, interest in new zones falls off. The issue with IC is it does not really offer anything to keep people coming back.

So it is not the implementation that was the issue, but the design. Your suggestions for a design change still do not offer any reasons to return to the area.

TheRealPotoroo

idk wrote: »

TheRealPotoroo wrote: »

SupremeRissole wrote: »

Most of what you want changed is literally the whole point of IC. To remove mobs removes half of the farm aspect, to remove the telvar loss pretty much removes any thrill in IC. To me the whole idea of IC is risk/reward, roll in there in full pve setups and get easy tel var but risk losing it all to a pvp setup. Those in a pvp build will have a harder time on bosses, but make up for it with the possibility of taking tel var of someone else. That risk reward concept is the whole idea and personally the only part that makes IC fun.

Except it's not fun so hardly anyone goes there. I'd like to do the quests but I won't go to IC because I loath PVP.

IC was very popular when it was released. However, interest in new zones falls off. The issue with IC is it does not really offer anything to keep people coming back.

So it is not the implementation that was the issue, but the design. Your suggestions for a design change still do not offer any reasons to return to the area.

Oh, yes they do. They offer the VAST MAJORITY of players the opportunity to finish their quests without ganking scum spoiling their day.

Maryal

Initially, people (including content creators on Youtube) "considered" the sewers to be where most pve'ers went and the districts where most pvp'ers went. And, in the beginning, this was mostly true.

Unfortunately, what you could do as a pvp'er in the districts was limited (compared to what you could do in Cyrodiil). IC had no siege equipment, no busting down structures, no faction control or power struggle over who has what structure, nothing to 'win' (no alliance benefit). ... there just wasn't enough to keep most of the pvp crowd from returning to Cyrodiil.

When the IC pvp-stragglers began having little to no luck finding any pvp action in the districts, they turned more and more to the sewers. For them, sewer ganking became their new fun and excitement ... yea, for them.

The problem with sewer ganking was that it caused the number of pve'ers in the sewers to drop. So now we have a ghost town, people started complaining about how empty IC was.

ZOS did things to make IC more appealing. They lowered the difficulty of the mobs in IC, they tried to incentivize pvp'ers to the districts by making them capturable and increased the telvar drop for districts your faction owned (and not in the sewers), they did other things as well, but in the end, none of that really helped much.

Solutions are only as good as the problem identified. In other words, for a solution to work, you must first identify the correct problem.

The mixed pvp/pve content doesn't work. It might work in other games, but other games are not ESO.

PVE - IC holds one of the most well developed pve questlines we have and it's set in some of the most visually immersive surroundings. Sadly, when doing the pve content, you don't know when it will be cut short (via a gank), and when it is 'cut short,' there is no point in returning anytime soon ... it could be days, weeks, months (or never) when you get back to try and finish the storyline. It sucks the fun right out of the entire experience when you have to rush through a pve quest line while simultaneously trying to watch your back for gankers.

PVP - IC is a visually awesome area and has great potential to be an equally great pvp area ... but that potential was never realized. In the end, what you could as a pvp'er in Cyrodiil was simply 'more fun.' As I previously mentioned, sieging is a lot of fun and the power struggle over what faction owns what structure in Cyrodiil is fun. Each faction has their own 'home' areas on the map that the other factions can capture and this backdrop creates a (fun) power struggle, both on an individual level and for the alliances. Conversely, whatever you did in IC, benefitted the individual (not the alliance). Most pvp'ers in IC simply got bored chasing each other around trying to kill the other for telvar stones.

Bottom line: IC cannot be fixed without making two separate instances (one for pvp and the other for pve). The pve instance would require minimal re-working. However, the same isn't true for the pvp instance -- it would require a lot of re-working (re-coding) to make the changes necessary for it become an attractive alternative to Cyrodiil ... and I don't think that will happen anytime soon.

I can only hope that ZOS never ever again combines a pve and pvp zone.

Marginis

Maryal wrote: »

Initially, people (including content creators on Youtube) "considered" the sewers to be where most pve'ers went and the districts where most pvp'ers went. And, in the beginning, this was mostly true.

Unfortunately, what you could do as a pvp'er in the districts was limited (compared to what you could do in Cyrodiil). IC had no siege equipment, no busting down structures, no faction control or power struggle over who has what structure, nothing to 'win' (no alliance benefit). ... there just wasn't enough to keep most of the pvp crowd from returning to Cyrodiil.

When the IC pvp-stragglers began having little to no luck finding any pvp action in the districts, they turned more and more to the sewers. For them, sewer ganking became their new fun and excitement ... yea, for them.

The problem with sewer ganking was that it caused the number of pve'ers in the sewers to drop. So now we have a ghost town, people started complaining about how empty IC was.

ZOS did things to make IC more appealing. They lowered the difficulty of the mobs in IC, they tried to incentivize pvp'ers to the districts by making them capturable and increased the telvar drop for districts your faction owned (and not in the sewers), they did other things as well, but in the end, none of that really helped much.

Solutions are only as good as the problem identified. In other words, for a solution to work, you must first identify the correct problem.

The mixed pvp/pve content doesn't work. It might work in other games, but other games are not ESO.

PVE - IC holds one of the most well developed pve questlines we have and it's set in some of the most visually immersive surroundings. Sadly, when doing the pve content, you don't know when it will be cut short (via a gank), and when it is 'cut short,' there is no point in returning anytime soon ... it could be days, weeks, months (or never) when you get back to try and finish the storyline. It sucks the fun right out of the entire experience when you have to rush through a pve quest line while simultaneously trying to watch your back for gankers.

PVP - IC is a visually awesome area and has great potential to be an equally great pvp area ... but that potential was never realized. In the end, what you could as a pvp'er in Cyrodiil was simply 'more fun.' As I previously mentioned, sieging is a lot of fun and the power struggle over what faction owns what structure in Cyrodiil is fun. Each faction has their own 'home' areas on the map that the other factions can capture and this backdrop creates a (fun) power struggle, both on an individual level and for the alliances. Conversely, whatever you did in IC, benefitted the individual (not the alliance). Most pvp'ers in IC simply got bored chasing each other around trying to kill the other for telvar stones.

Bottom line: IC cannot be fixed without making two separate instances (one for pvp and the other for pve). The pve instance would require minimal re-working. However, the same isn't true for the pvp instance -- it would require a lot of re-working (re-coding) to make the changes necessary for it become an attractive alternative to Cyrodiil ... and I don't think that will happen anytime soon.

I can only hope that ZOS never ever again combines a pve and pvp zone.

Well said. I don't know if I'd agree that the only solution is to just abandon PVP/PVE areas (unless you're not considering any more drastic design overhauls), but you hit the nail on the head as far as identifying what's up goes.

Xsorus

Want IC to be popular? Add more special rewards to buy with telvar points. Basically every patch they need to add 2 or 3 more sets to that zone and cycle out old ones.