[Class Rep] Templar Feedback Thread

Minno

Joy_Division wrote: »

Cinbri wrote: »

Here again how inconsistently zos treating Jabs and Eclipse:


Jabs - zos continuing to treat it as ordinary aoe skill affected by evasion. And now with 0.3 less channel time it should work like rest of abilities with 1sec global cooldown. Yet, Jabs were left outside of AoE standardization this update as its base aoe damage is much lower than ordinary aoe damage: 114x4= 456 while rest of AoEs are 615. difference is huuge.
As result: as single-target spammable skill underperform as it can be mitigated by Evasion buff; and also as AoE damage skill it also below of AoE standards.

Eclipse - not just after damage nerf it comparable to damage of self-buffs like Scales/Ice Shield that is rudiculous, but also damage of this single-target breakable cc skill is equal to ordinary AoE damage now. So why does our single target skill with longest Internal Cooldown suppose to deal as much damage as AoE (which suppose to deal lower damage coz area of damage apply in compare to single target pressure skills)?
If zos treat it as self-buffs which are 100% reliable but only against half of attacks (ranged) - make Eclipse unbreakable again and buff its duration from 6sec to 7sec:
1. It already act on same rules of Morrowind unbreakable version, so right now it has weaknesses of unbreakable Morrowind version but don't have strengths of breakable pre-Morrowind version.
2. Beside it wont work against CC-immune enemies, it will be reliable against all attacks (melee/ranged) but only with half efficiency because 7sec duration-7sec cc-immunity. Literally reverted self-buff: self-buffs are 100% efficiency against 50% attacks, Eclipse is 50% efficiency against 100% attacks. (still cooldown inconsistent too).
Or just like was suggested lot of times - make it into ordinary dot with same rules that Inhale has regarding damage-healing skill % of new standards.

This is the problem with standardizing things. When something doesn't fit into a neat category, it gets labeled and forced into category it doesn't belong.

well we know gilliam's take on templar being "masters of AOE". Would be cool if our reps could get the devs to provide the community with an updated design intent for all the classes, both stam/mag versions (be it a webpage discussion or forum thread we can save for future use). Because even the community 3rd party website descriptions are so outdated, it hurts to see and is hard to tailor feedback based on those descriptions because many of them reference skills no longer in the kit.

That is my major painpoint going into the chapter. I need to see what the devs are envisioning the class coming into end of 2019.

edit:
and on that point, its hard to even explain why cinbri's feedback goes unnoticed if she is tailoring the feedback based on that "AOE master" description but goes unnoticed with changes that go against that description. DO the devs see templar as something other than masters of AOE? What are we to them?

BNOC

Minno wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Cinbri wrote: »

Here again how inconsistently zos treating Jabs and Eclipse:


Jabs - zos continuing to treat it as ordinary aoe skill affected by evasion. And now with 0.3 less channel time it should work like rest of abilities with 1sec global cooldown. Yet, Jabs were left outside of AoE standardization this update as its base aoe damage is much lower than ordinary aoe damage: 114x4= 456 while rest of AoEs are 615. difference is huuge.
As result: as single-target spammable skill underperform as it can be mitigated by Evasion buff; and also as AoE damage skill it also below of AoE standards.

Eclipse - not just after damage nerf it comparable to damage of self-buffs like Scales/Ice Shield that is rudiculous, but also damage of this single-target breakable cc skill is equal to ordinary AoE damage now. So why does our single target skill with longest Internal Cooldown suppose to deal as much damage as AoE (which suppose to deal lower damage coz area of damage apply in compare to single target pressure skills)?
If zos treat it as self-buffs which are 100% reliable but only against half of attacks (ranged) - make Eclipse unbreakable again and buff its duration from 6sec to 7sec:
1. It already act on same rules of Morrowind unbreakable version, so right now it has weaknesses of unbreakable Morrowind version but don't have strengths of breakable pre-Morrowind version.
2. Beside it wont work against CC-immune enemies, it will be reliable against all attacks (melee/ranged) but only with half efficiency because 7sec duration-7sec cc-immunity. Literally reverted self-buff: self-buffs are 100% efficiency against 50% attacks, Eclipse is 50% efficiency against 100% attacks. (still cooldown inconsistent too).
Or just like was suggested lot of times - make it into ordinary dot with same rules that Inhale has regarding damage-healing skill % of new standards.

This is the problem with standardizing things. When something doesn't fit into a neat category, it gets labeled and forced into category it doesn't belong.

well we know gilliam's take on templar being "masters of AOE". Would be cool if our reps could get the devs to provide the community with an updated design intent for all the classes, both stam/mag versions (be it a webpage discussion or forum thread we can save for future use). Because even the community 3rd party website descriptions are so outdated, it hurts to see and is hard to tailor feedback based on those descriptions because many of them reference skills no longer in the kit.

That is my major painpoint going into the chapter. I need to see what the devs are envisioning the class coming into end of 2019.

edit:
and on that point, its hard to even explain why cinbri's feedback goes unnoticed if she is tailoring the feedback based on that "AOE master" description but goes unnoticed with changes that go against that description. DO the devs see templar as something other than masters of AOE? What are we to them?

Healbots I assume.

On another note, Cinbri sure does a lot of investigation for Templars, thanks for that!

Minno

BNOC wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Cinbri wrote: »

Here again how inconsistently zos treating Jabs and Eclipse:


Jabs - zos continuing to treat it as ordinary aoe skill affected by evasion. And now with 0.3 less channel time it should work like rest of abilities with 1sec global cooldown. Yet, Jabs were left outside of AoE standardization this update as its base aoe damage is much lower than ordinary aoe damage: 114x4= 456 while rest of AoEs are 615. difference is huuge.
As result: as single-target spammable skill underperform as it can be mitigated by Evasion buff; and also as AoE damage skill it also below of AoE standards.

Eclipse - not just after damage nerf it comparable to damage of self-buffs like Scales/Ice Shield that is rudiculous, but also damage of this single-target breakable cc skill is equal to ordinary AoE damage now. So why does our single target skill with longest Internal Cooldown suppose to deal as much damage as AoE (which suppose to deal lower damage coz area of damage apply in compare to single target pressure skills)?
If zos treat it as self-buffs which are 100% reliable but only against half of attacks (ranged) - make Eclipse unbreakable again and buff its duration from 6sec to 7sec:
1. It already act on same rules of Morrowind unbreakable version, so right now it has weaknesses of unbreakable Morrowind version but don't have strengths of breakable pre-Morrowind version.
2. Beside it wont work against CC-immune enemies, it will be reliable against all attacks (melee/ranged) but only with half efficiency because 7sec duration-7sec cc-immunity. Literally reverted self-buff: self-buffs are 100% efficiency against 50% attacks, Eclipse is 50% efficiency against 100% attacks. (still cooldown inconsistent too).
Or just like was suggested lot of times - make it into ordinary dot with same rules that Inhale has regarding damage-healing skill % of new standards.

This is the problem with standardizing things. When something doesn't fit into a neat category, it gets labeled and forced into category it doesn't belong.

well we know gilliam's take on templar being "masters of AOE". Would be cool if our reps could get the devs to provide the community with an updated design intent for all the classes, both stam/mag versions (be it a webpage discussion or forum thread we can save for future use). Because even the community 3rd party website descriptions are so outdated, it hurts to see and is hard to tailor feedback based on those descriptions because many of them reference skills no longer in the kit.

That is my major painpoint going into the chapter. I need to see what the devs are envisioning the class coming into end of 2019.

edit:
and on that point, its hard to even explain why cinbri's feedback goes unnoticed if she is tailoring the feedback based on that "AOE master" description but goes unnoticed with changes that go against that description. DO the devs see templar as something other than masters of AOE? What are we to them?

Healbots I assume.

On another note, Cinbri sure does a lot of investigation for Templars, thanks for that!

id like to agree, but nerfs to bol and useless changes to hasty prayer suggest otherwise lol

Elsterchen

Checkmath wrote: »

Vapirko wrote: »

Cinbri wrote: »

Here again how inconsistently zos treating Jabs and Eclipse:


Jabs - zos continuing to treat it as ordinary aoe skill affected by evasion. And now with 0.3 less channel time it should work like rest of abilities with 1sec global cooldown. Yet, Jabs were left outside of AoE standardization this update as its base aoe damage is much lower than ordinary aoe damage: 114x4= 456 while rest of AoEs are 615. difference is huuge.
As result: as single-target spammable skill underperform as it can be mitigated by Evasion buff; and also as AoE damage skill it also below of AoE standards.

Eclipse - not just after damage nerf it comparable to damage of self-buffs like Scales/Ice Shield that is rudiculous, but also damage of this single-target breakable cc skill is equal to ordinary AoE damage now. So why does our single target skill with longest Internal Cooldown suppose to deal as much damage as AoE (which suppose to deal lower damage coz area of damage apply in compare to single target pressure skills)?
If zos treat it as self-buffs which are 100% reliable but only against half of attacks (ranged) - make Eclipse unbreakable again and buff its duration from 6sec to 7sec:
1. It already act on same rules of Morrowind unbreakable version, so right now it has weaknesses of unbreakable Morrowind version but don't have strengths of breakable pre-Morrowind version.
2. Beside it wont work against CC-immune enemies, it will be reliable against all attacks (melee/ranged) but only with half efficiency because 7sec duration-7sec cc-immunity. Literally reverted self-buff: self-buffs are 100% efficiency against 50% attacks, Eclipse is 50% efficiency against 100% attacks. (still cooldown inconsistent too).
Or just like was suggested lot of times - make it into ordinary dot with same rules that Inhale has regarding damage-healing skill % of new standards.

They just plain don’t like Templars. Does anyone on the dev team regularly play Stamplar/magplar in PvP?

Rich plays stamplar.

He's a PVE...? Is he the reason for the stupid DW nerfs? If so, he should be forced to wear propper (tight) pants till (s)tamplar problems are at least particially solved!

Sry, EU here so i wouldn't stumble over him in PVP anyways.

Cinbri

Minno wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Cinbri wrote: »

Here again how inconsistently zos treating Jabs and Eclipse:


Jabs - zos continuing to treat it as ordinary aoe skill affected by evasion. And now with 0.3 less channel time it should work like rest of abilities with 1sec global cooldown. Yet, Jabs were left outside of AoE standardization this update as its base aoe damage is much lower than ordinary aoe damage: 114x4= 456 while rest of AoEs are 615. difference is huuge.
As result: as single-target spammable skill underperform as it can be mitigated by Evasion buff; and also as AoE damage skill it also below of AoE standards.

Eclipse - not just after damage nerf it comparable to damage of self-buffs like Scales/Ice Shield that is rudiculous, but also damage of this single-target breakable cc skill is equal to ordinary AoE damage now. So why does our single target skill with longest Internal Cooldown suppose to deal as much damage as AoE (which suppose to deal lower damage coz area of damage apply in compare to single target pressure skills)?
If zos treat it as self-buffs which are 100% reliable but only against half of attacks (ranged) - make Eclipse unbreakable again and buff its duration from 6sec to 7sec:
1. It already act on same rules of Morrowind unbreakable version, so right now it has weaknesses of unbreakable Morrowind version but don't have strengths of breakable pre-Morrowind version.
2. Beside it wont work against CC-immune enemies, it will be reliable against all attacks (melee/ranged) but only with half efficiency because 7sec duration-7sec cc-immunity. Literally reverted self-buff: self-buffs are 100% efficiency against 50% attacks, Eclipse is 50% efficiency against 100% attacks. (still cooldown inconsistent too).
Or just like was suggested lot of times - make it into ordinary dot with same rules that Inhale has regarding damage-healing skill % of new standards.

This is the problem with standardizing things. When something doesn't fit into a neat category, it gets labeled and forced into category it doesn't belong.

well we know gilliam's take on templar being "masters of AOE". Would be cool if our reps could get the devs to provide the community with an updated design intent for all the classes, both stam/mag versions (be it a webpage discussion or forum thread we can save for future use). Because even the community 3rd party website descriptions are so outdated, it hurts to see and is hard to tailor feedback based on those descriptions because many of them reference skills no longer in the kit.

That is my major painpoint going into the chapter. I need to see what the devs are envisioning the class coming into end of 2019.

edit:
and on that point, its hard to even explain why cinbri's feedback goes unnoticed if she is tailoring the feedback based on that "AOE master" description but goes unnoticed with changes that go against that description. DO the devs see templar as something other than masters of AOE? What are we to them?

We heared from Lead PvP Designer that Templars are like anti-necros that suppose to have area of control by its aoe healings of allies, after that I starting to feel that zos simply don't understand what they talking about, especially after Purifying Light ninja nerf that made morph no longer work in organized fights and lost it function of granting "area of control by healing" that was declared to be templar theme.

Minno

Cinbri wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Cinbri wrote: »

Here again how inconsistently zos treating Jabs and Eclipse:


Jabs - zos continuing to treat it as ordinary aoe skill affected by evasion. And now with 0.3 less channel time it should work like rest of abilities with 1sec global cooldown. Yet, Jabs were left outside of AoE standardization this update as its base aoe damage is much lower than ordinary aoe damage: 114x4= 456 while rest of AoEs are 615. difference is huuge.
As result: as single-target spammable skill underperform as it can be mitigated by Evasion buff; and also as AoE damage skill it also below of AoE standards.

Eclipse - not just after damage nerf it comparable to damage of self-buffs like Scales/Ice Shield that is rudiculous, but also damage of this single-target breakable cc skill is equal to ordinary AoE damage now. So why does our single target skill with longest Internal Cooldown suppose to deal as much damage as AoE (which suppose to deal lower damage coz area of damage apply in compare to single target pressure skills)?
If zos treat it as self-buffs which are 100% reliable but only against half of attacks (ranged) - make Eclipse unbreakable again and buff its duration from 6sec to 7sec:
1. It already act on same rules of Morrowind unbreakable version, so right now it has weaknesses of unbreakable Morrowind version but don't have strengths of breakable pre-Morrowind version.
2. Beside it wont work against CC-immune enemies, it will be reliable against all attacks (melee/ranged) but only with half efficiency because 7sec duration-7sec cc-immunity. Literally reverted self-buff: self-buffs are 100% efficiency against 50% attacks, Eclipse is 50% efficiency against 100% attacks. (still cooldown inconsistent too).
Or just like was suggested lot of times - make it into ordinary dot with same rules that Inhale has regarding damage-healing skill % of new standards.

This is the problem with standardizing things. When something doesn't fit into a neat category, it gets labeled and forced into category it doesn't belong.

well we know gilliam's take on templar being "masters of AOE". Would be cool if our reps could get the devs to provide the community with an updated design intent for all the classes, both stam/mag versions (be it a webpage discussion or forum thread we can save for future use). Because even the community 3rd party website descriptions are so outdated, it hurts to see and is hard to tailor feedback based on those descriptions because many of them reference skills no longer in the kit.

That is my major painpoint going into the chapter. I need to see what the devs are envisioning the class coming into end of 2019.

edit:
and on that point, its hard to even explain why cinbri's feedback goes unnoticed if she is tailoring the feedback based on that "AOE master" description but goes unnoticed with changes that go against that description. DO the devs see templar as something other than masters of AOE? What are we to them?

We heared from Lead PvP Designer that Templars are like anti-necros that suppose to have area of control by its aoe healings of allies, after that I starting to feel that zos simply don't understand what they talking about, especially after Purifying Light ninja nerf that made morph no longer work in organized fights and lost it function of granting "area of control by healing" that was declared to be templar theme.

Lol that's funny because if that were true, our repentance would work on necro bodies and Stam could be given to allies lol.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler what's the real design intent for Templar? How come other classes have better healing, tanking and DMG but Templars are stuck in this void of "healbot"? Coming into 2019 and even the devs don't know what Templar is mechanically.

Firstmep

Sadly i dont expect them to respond directly to us

Minno

Firstmep wrote: »

Sadly i dont expect them to respond directly to us

which is a shame in a way.

Because templar currently designed isnt a master of AOE, its a master of flexiblity in combat via the use of AOE/Single Target, Melee/Ranged, DOT/Direct. But all of the changes either look at this from the perspective that we heal and from the perspective from classes that fight templars that rely on reactive healing/defense sets as a defense.


That is my feedback, community feels templars are flexible in combat but have too many niche or specific mechanics and the consistency audit flew past templar in a way that makes us feel dumbfounded.

Jabbs_Giggity

Minno wrote: »

Firstmep wrote: »

Sadly i dont expect them to respond directly to us

which is a shame in a way.

Because templar currently designed isnt a master of AOE, its a master of flexiblity in combat via the use of AOE/Single Target, Melee/Ranged, DOT/Direct. But all of the changes either look at this from the perspective that we heal and from the perspective from classes that fight templars that rely on reactive healing/defense sets as a defense.


That is my feedback, community feels templars are flexible in combat but have too many niche or specific mechanics and the consistency audit flew past templar in a way that makes us feel dumbfounded.

The bigger problem with Templar's "flexibility" is that it's much more difficult to min/max your build than it is with other classes because if the fact that our skills are so differently templated.
For example, why is Sun Fire (& Morphs) fire damage when every other damage based skill is magick? An extremely strong (soon to be nerfed ) DoT/Direct + AoE/ST is affected by too many options that cannot be effectively min/maxed: I.E. straight spell damage vs. a Magic damage buff from War Maiden, or Direct Damage vs. Damage over Time CP's, etc.

Another example is Dark Flare is ranged, but the other morph is Melee. Why can't we have the ability to slot both morphs by spending points on both morphs if we so choose? The tradeoff is having to drop another ability to slot two morphs of one base ability > not a bad tradeoff IMO.

I have zero faith in ZOS to properly audit Templars because they really don't know where to go with the class now as far as identity. All classes can now effectively (to some degree of competitiveness) build for Healer roles, Tank roles and Damage roles. Most classes outperform Templars in all three areas now.

There has been so much feedback for Templars (probably the most feedback with testing analysis and suggestions of any class playerbase) and nothing has really been done about it. Templar playerbase are probably the most conclusive of what they want the class to be overall and ZOS keeps making changes that further contradict this idea.

Wrobel had an idea that Templars were a force to be reckoned with, but only in their "house". Yet ZOS changed the game mechanics to be faster, more mobile and more competitive. Templars were completely left out of this concept.

Now Brian Wheeler, among others don't even want to address Templars in general because of the battle of the NB/Sorcs.

Game is frustrating to even play. I occasionally play other classes just to get some sort of reprieve but end up getting bored. I stopped subbing over a year ago and will continue to boycott any contribution, financially, to this company.

Only playing because there is no other MMO on console that compares.

Minno

Jabbs_Giggity wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Firstmep wrote: »

Sadly i dont expect them to respond directly to us

which is a shame in a way.

Because templar currently designed isnt a master of AOE, its a master of flexiblity in combat via the use of AOE/Single Target, Melee/Ranged, DOT/Direct. But all of the changes either look at this from the perspective that we heal and from the perspective from classes that fight templars that rely on reactive healing/defense sets as a defense.


That is my feedback, community feels templars are flexible in combat but have too many niche or specific mechanics and the consistency audit flew past templar in a way that makes us feel dumbfounded.

The bigger problem with Templar's "flexibility" is that it's much more difficult to min/max your build than it is with other classes because if the fact that our skills are so differently templated.
For example, why is Sun Fire (& Morphs) fire damage when every other damage based skill is magick? An extremely strong (soon to be nerfed ) DoT/Direct + AoE/ST is affected by too many options that cannot be effectively min/maxed: I.E. straight spell damage vs. a Magic damage buff from War Maiden, or Direct Damage vs. Damage over Time CP's, etc.

Another example is Dark Flare is ranged, but the other morph is Melee. Why can't we have the ability to slot both morphs by spending points on both morphs if we so choose? The tradeoff is having to drop another ability to slot two morphs of one base ability > not a bad tradeoff IMO.

I have zero faith in ZOS to properly audit Templars because they really don't know where to go with the class now as far as identity. All classes can now effectively (to some degree of competitiveness) build for Healer roles, Tank roles and Damage roles. Most classes outperform Templars in all three areas now.

There has been so much feedback for Templars (probably the most feedback with testing analysis and suggestions of any class playerbase) and nothing has really been done about it. Templar playerbase are probably the most conclusive of what they want the class to be overall and ZOS keeps making changes that further contradict this idea.

Wrobel had an idea that Templars were a force to be reckoned with, but only in their "house". Yet ZOS changed the game mechanics to be faster, more mobile and more competitive. Templars were completely left out of this concept.

Now Brian Wheeler, among others don't even want to address Templars in general because of the battle of the NB/Sorcs.

Game is frustrating to even play. I occasionally play other classes just to get some sort of reprieve but end up getting bored. I stopped subbing over a year ago and will continue to boycott any contribution, financially, to this company.

Only playing because there is no other MMO on console that compares.

yea that was basically my comment. We have flexibility for combat, that alot of classes wish they had, but it also includes inconsistent mechanics, which for an audit patch, should have been fixed. They touched on some but broke a few more (like gap closers being fixed but cast time/channels being slower than live if you light attack weave lol.)

Joy_Division

Minno wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Cinbri wrote: »

Here again how inconsistently zos treating Jabs and Eclipse:


Jabs - zos continuing to treat it as ordinary aoe skill affected by evasion. And now with 0.3 less channel time it should work like rest of abilities with 1sec global cooldown. Yet, Jabs were left outside of AoE standardization this update as its base aoe damage is much lower than ordinary aoe damage: 114x4= 456 while rest of AoEs are 615. difference is huuge.
As result: as single-target spammable skill underperform as it can be mitigated by Evasion buff; and also as AoE damage skill it also below of AoE standards.

Eclipse - not just after damage nerf it comparable to damage of self-buffs like Scales/Ice Shield that is rudiculous, but also damage of this single-target breakable cc skill is equal to ordinary AoE damage now. So why does our single target skill with longest Internal Cooldown suppose to deal as much damage as AoE (which suppose to deal lower damage coz area of damage apply in compare to single target pressure skills)?
If zos treat it as self-buffs which are 100% reliable but only against half of attacks (ranged) - make Eclipse unbreakable again and buff its duration from 6sec to 7sec:
1. It already act on same rules of Morrowind unbreakable version, so right now it has weaknesses of unbreakable Morrowind version but don't have strengths of breakable pre-Morrowind version.
2. Beside it wont work against CC-immune enemies, it will be reliable against all attacks (melee/ranged) but only with half efficiency because 7sec duration-7sec cc-immunity. Literally reverted self-buff: self-buffs are 100% efficiency against 50% attacks, Eclipse is 50% efficiency against 100% attacks. (still cooldown inconsistent too).
Or just like was suggested lot of times - make it into ordinary dot with same rules that Inhale has regarding damage-healing skill % of new standards.

This is the problem with standardizing things. When something doesn't fit into a neat category, it gets labeled and forced into category it doesn't belong.

well we know gilliam's take on templar being "masters of AOE". Would be cool if our reps could get the devs to provide the community with an updated design intent for all the classes, both stam/mag versions (be it a webpage discussion or forum thread we can save for future use). Because even the community 3rd party website descriptions are so outdated, it hurts to see and is hard to tailor feedback based on those descriptions because many of them reference skills no longer in the kit.

That is my major painpoint going into the chapter. I need to see what the devs are envisioning the class coming into end of 2019.

edit:
and on that point, its hard to even explain why cinbri's feedback goes unnoticed if she is tailoring the feedback based on that "AOE master" description but goes unnoticed with changes that go against that description. DO the devs see templar as something other than masters of AOE? What are we to them?

I told ZOS from the very beginning to do this: that is have a dedicated record of pain points, bugs, issues that have been resolved, issues that still need to be resolved, and future plans for the class. That way there would be a historical record and roadmap for everybody to easily and quickly see.

The need for this is even more profound when Wrobel left, which means we have to repeat all the stuff we communicated in 2018.

Minno

Joy_Division wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Cinbri wrote: »

Here again how inconsistently zos treating Jabs and Eclipse:


Jabs - zos continuing to treat it as ordinary aoe skill affected by evasion. And now with 0.3 less channel time it should work like rest of abilities with 1sec global cooldown. Yet, Jabs were left outside of AoE standardization this update as its base aoe damage is much lower than ordinary aoe damage: 114x4= 456 while rest of AoEs are 615. difference is huuge.
As result: as single-target spammable skill underperform as it can be mitigated by Evasion buff; and also as AoE damage skill it also below of AoE standards.

Eclipse - not just after damage nerf it comparable to damage of self-buffs like Scales/Ice Shield that is rudiculous, but also damage of this single-target breakable cc skill is equal to ordinary AoE damage now. So why does our single target skill with longest Internal Cooldown suppose to deal as much damage as AoE (which suppose to deal lower damage coz area of damage apply in compare to single target pressure skills)?
If zos treat it as self-buffs which are 100% reliable but only against half of attacks (ranged) - make Eclipse unbreakable again and buff its duration from 6sec to 7sec:
1. It already act on same rules of Morrowind unbreakable version, so right now it has weaknesses of unbreakable Morrowind version but don't have strengths of breakable pre-Morrowind version.
2. Beside it wont work against CC-immune enemies, it will be reliable against all attacks (melee/ranged) but only with half efficiency because 7sec duration-7sec cc-immunity. Literally reverted self-buff: self-buffs are 100% efficiency against 50% attacks, Eclipse is 50% efficiency against 100% attacks. (still cooldown inconsistent too).
Or just like was suggested lot of times - make it into ordinary dot with same rules that Inhale has regarding damage-healing skill % of new standards.

This is the problem with standardizing things. When something doesn't fit into a neat category, it gets labeled and forced into category it doesn't belong.

well we know gilliam's take on templar being "masters of AOE". Would be cool if our reps could get the devs to provide the community with an updated design intent for all the classes, both stam/mag versions (be it a webpage discussion or forum thread we can save for future use). Because even the community 3rd party website descriptions are so outdated, it hurts to see and is hard to tailor feedback based on those descriptions because many of them reference skills no longer in the kit.

That is my major painpoint going into the chapter. I need to see what the devs are envisioning the class coming into end of 2019.

edit:
and on that point, its hard to even explain why cinbri's feedback goes unnoticed if she is tailoring the feedback based on that "AOE master" description but goes unnoticed with changes that go against that description. DO the devs see templar as something other than masters of AOE? What are we to them?

I told ZOS from the very beginning to do this: that is have a dedicated record of pain points, bugs, issues that have been resolved, issues that still need to be resolved, and future plans for the class. That way there would be a historical record and roadmap for everybody to easily and quickly see.

The need for this is even more profound when Wrobel left, which means we have to repeat all the stuff we communicated in 2018.

Thank you! I know it doesn't get mentioned as much but I appreciate it.

technohic

Joy_Division wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Cinbri wrote: »

Here again how inconsistently zos treating Jabs and Eclipse:


Jabs - zos continuing to treat it as ordinary aoe skill affected by evasion. And now with 0.3 less channel time it should work like rest of abilities with 1sec global cooldown. Yet, Jabs were left outside of AoE standardization this update as its base aoe damage is much lower than ordinary aoe damage: 114x4= 456 while rest of AoEs are 615. difference is huuge.
As result: as single-target spammable skill underperform as it can be mitigated by Evasion buff; and also as AoE damage skill it also below of AoE standards.

Eclipse - not just after damage nerf it comparable to damage of self-buffs like Scales/Ice Shield that is rudiculous, but also damage of this single-target breakable cc skill is equal to ordinary AoE damage now. So why does our single target skill with longest Internal Cooldown suppose to deal as much damage as AoE (which suppose to deal lower damage coz area of damage apply in compare to single target pressure skills)?
If zos treat it as self-buffs which are 100% reliable but only against half of attacks (ranged) - make Eclipse unbreakable again and buff its duration from 6sec to 7sec:
1. It already act on same rules of Morrowind unbreakable version, so right now it has weaknesses of unbreakable Morrowind version but don't have strengths of breakable pre-Morrowind version.
2. Beside it wont work against CC-immune enemies, it will be reliable against all attacks (melee/ranged) but only with half efficiency because 7sec duration-7sec cc-immunity. Literally reverted self-buff: self-buffs are 100% efficiency against 50% attacks, Eclipse is 50% efficiency against 100% attacks. (still cooldown inconsistent too).
Or just like was suggested lot of times - make it into ordinary dot with same rules that Inhale has regarding damage-healing skill % of new standards.

This is the problem with standardizing things. When something doesn't fit into a neat category, it gets labeled and forced into category it doesn't belong.

well we know gilliam's take on templar being "masters of AOE". Would be cool if our reps could get the devs to provide the community with an updated design intent for all the classes, both stam/mag versions (be it a webpage discussion or forum thread we can save for future use). Because even the community 3rd party website descriptions are so outdated, it hurts to see and is hard to tailor feedback based on those descriptions because many of them reference skills no longer in the kit.

That is my major painpoint going into the chapter. I need to see what the devs are envisioning the class coming into end of 2019.

edit:
and on that point, its hard to even explain why cinbri's feedback goes unnoticed if she is tailoring the feedback based on that "AOE master" description but goes unnoticed with changes that go against that description. DO the devs see templar as something other than masters of AOE? What are we to them?

I told ZOS from the very beginning to do this: that is have a dedicated record of pain points, bugs, issues that have been resolved, issues that still need to be resolved, and future plans for the class. That way there would be a historical record and roadmap for everybody to easily and quickly see.

The need for this is even more profound when Wrobel left, which means we have to repeat all the stuff we communicated in 2018.

Doesnt seem like they have a plan. These patch notes are bipolar.

Minno

technohic wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Cinbri wrote: »

Here again how inconsistently zos treating Jabs and Eclipse:


Jabs - zos continuing to treat it as ordinary aoe skill affected by evasion. And now with 0.3 less channel time it should work like rest of abilities with 1sec global cooldown. Yet, Jabs were left outside of AoE standardization this update as its base aoe damage is much lower than ordinary aoe damage: 114x4= 456 while rest of AoEs are 615. difference is huuge.
As result: as single-target spammable skill underperform as it can be mitigated by Evasion buff; and also as AoE damage skill it also below of AoE standards.

Eclipse - not just after damage nerf it comparable to damage of self-buffs like Scales/Ice Shield that is rudiculous, but also damage of this single-target breakable cc skill is equal to ordinary AoE damage now. So why does our single target skill with longest Internal Cooldown suppose to deal as much damage as AoE (which suppose to deal lower damage coz area of damage apply in compare to single target pressure skills)?
If zos treat it as self-buffs which are 100% reliable but only against half of attacks (ranged) - make Eclipse unbreakable again and buff its duration from 6sec to 7sec:
1. It already act on same rules of Morrowind unbreakable version, so right now it has weaknesses of unbreakable Morrowind version but don't have strengths of breakable pre-Morrowind version.
2. Beside it wont work against CC-immune enemies, it will be reliable against all attacks (melee/ranged) but only with half efficiency because 7sec duration-7sec cc-immunity. Literally reverted self-buff: self-buffs are 100% efficiency against 50% attacks, Eclipse is 50% efficiency against 100% attacks. (still cooldown inconsistent too).
Or just like was suggested lot of times - make it into ordinary dot with same rules that Inhale has regarding damage-healing skill % of new standards.

This is the problem with standardizing things. When something doesn't fit into a neat category, it gets labeled and forced into category it doesn't belong.

well we know gilliam's take on templar being "masters of AOE". Would be cool if our reps could get the devs to provide the community with an updated design intent for all the classes, both stam/mag versions (be it a webpage discussion or forum thread we can save for future use). Because even the community 3rd party website descriptions are so outdated, it hurts to see and is hard to tailor feedback based on those descriptions because many of them reference skills no longer in the kit.

That is my major painpoint going into the chapter. I need to see what the devs are envisioning the class coming into end of 2019.

edit:
and on that point, its hard to even explain why cinbri's feedback goes unnoticed if she is tailoring the feedback based on that "AOE master" description but goes unnoticed with changes that go against that description. DO the devs see templar as something other than masters of AOE? What are we to them?

I told ZOS from the very beginning to do this: that is have a dedicated record of pain points, bugs, issues that have been resolved, issues that still need to be resolved, and future plans for the class. That way there would be a historical record and roadmap for everybody to easily and quickly see.

The need for this is even more profound when Wrobel left, which means we have to repeat all the stuff we communicated in 2018.

Doesnt seem like they have a plan. These patch notes are bipolar.

now that I think about it, why can't the reps compile their notes and create a community road map? If you guys don't have time, mind sharing those notes and I will compile it?

HankTwo

Cinbri wrote: »

Here again how inconsistently zos treating Jabs and Eclipse:


Jabs - zos continuing to treat it as ordinary aoe skill affected by evasion. And now with 0.3 less channel time it should work like rest of abilities with 1sec global cooldown. Yet, Jabs were left outside of AoE standardization this update as its base aoe damage is much lower than ordinary aoe damage: 114x4= 456 while rest of AoEs are 615. difference is huuge.
As result: as single-target spammable skill underperform as it can be mitigated by Evasion buff; and also as AoE damage skill it also below of AoE standards.

Not saying that a small buff to the AOE damage wouldn't be appreciated, but jabs/sweeps is one of the truly unique skills in this game, so standardizing it's damage to skills that behave very differently isn't really required, imo.

Still, if we're looking at the numbers you posted and assume 4 targets hit (like a whole enemy BG team for example), then you would actually get pretty similar numbers:
Puncturing strikes: 298 * 4 + 3 * 114 * 4 = 2560 damage in total, on average 640 damage per target
Radiant ward and unstable core: 616 * 4 = 2464 damage in total

Jabbs_Giggity

HankTwo wrote: »

Cinbri wrote: »

Here again how inconsistently zos treating Jabs and Eclipse:


Jabs - zos continuing to treat it as ordinary aoe skill affected by evasion. And now with 0.3 less channel time it should work like rest of abilities with 1sec global cooldown. Yet, Jabs were left outside of AoE standardization this update as its base aoe damage is much lower than ordinary aoe damage: 114x4= 456 while rest of AoEs are 615. difference is huuge.
As result: as single-target spammable skill underperform as it can be mitigated by Evasion buff; and also as AoE damage skill it also below of AoE standards.

Not saying that a small buff to the AOE damage wouldn't be appreciated, but jabs/sweeps is one of the truly unique skills in this game, so standardizing it's damage to skills that behave very differently isn't really required, imo.

Still, if we're looking at the numbers you posted and assume 4 targets hit (like a whole enemy BG team for example), then you would actually get pretty similar numbers:
Puncturing strikes: 298 * 4 + 3 * 114 * 4 = 2560 damage in total, on average 640 damage per target
Radiant ward and unstable core: 616 * 4 = 2464 damage in total

That is a perfect world 1:1,000,000 chance of ever happening, but the logic makes sense. However, there are way too many factors that would come in to play, ultimately negating those numbers from ever reaching achievement.

StarOfElyon

Jabbs_Giggity wrote: »

Only playing because there is no other MMO on console that compares.

heh. I thought I might've seen your name on Xbox in BGs before.

Jabbs_Giggity

StarOfElyon wrote: »

Jabbs_Giggity wrote: »

Only playing because there is no other MMO on console that compares.

heh. I thought I might've seen your name on Xbox in BGs before.

I'm on xbox NA, yes. GT IX UNCLAIMED XI

Add me we can do some BGs

Firstmep

Jabbs_Giggity wrote: »

HankTwo wrote: »

Cinbri wrote: »

Here again how inconsistently zos treating Jabs and Eclipse:


Jabs - zos continuing to treat it as ordinary aoe skill affected by evasion. And now with 0.3 less channel time it should work like rest of abilities with 1sec global cooldown. Yet, Jabs were left outside of AoE standardization this update as its base aoe damage is much lower than ordinary aoe damage: 114x4= 456 while rest of AoEs are 615. difference is huuge.
As result: as single-target spammable skill underperform as it can be mitigated by Evasion buff; and also as AoE damage skill it also below of AoE standards.

Not saying that a small buff to the AOE damage wouldn't be appreciated, but jabs/sweeps is one of the truly unique skills in this game, so standardizing it's damage to skills that behave very differently isn't really required, imo.

Still, if we're looking at the numbers you posted and assume 4 targets hit (like a whole enemy BG team for example), then you would actually get pretty similar numbers:
Puncturing strikes: 298 * 4 + 3 * 114 * 4 = 2560 damage in total, on average 640 damage per target
Radiant ward and unstable core: 616 * 4 = 2464 damage in total

That is a perfect world 1:1,000,000 chance of ever happening, but the logic makes sense. However, there are way too many factors that would come in to play, ultimately negating those numbers from ever reaching achievement.

Assuming 4 targets hit, well the issues is that the single target portion of this skill is being reduced by major evasion.
Also jabs is a channel, unlike even radiant ward, which leaves you open to counterattack.
Treating jabs like a regular AOE is kind of pointless, beacuse the secondary damage is too small to make a massive difference.
If the skill was more consistent with regards to accuracy, than i wouldnt mind it being negated by evasion, since after all, it is undodge-able, breaks cloak, and in most ways works like an aoe.

One possible solution that would be nice, is to have a guaranteed burning light proc on the first hit, it has an internal cooldown, so i dont think this would be massively broken.

But even this would just be a bandaid fix.

Neoauspex

StarOfElyon wrote: »

Jabbs_Giggity wrote: »

Only playing because there is no other MMO on console that compares.

heh. I thought I might've seen your name on Xbox in BGs before.

I'm pretty sure I've been in Star's BG group before but I've been playing with a Stam DK in no-cp... usually take the magplar main to Vivec. I want in on a forumplar BG group though.

Jabbs_Giggity

@StarOfElyon and @Neoauspex

I usually run in BG's either Stamplar, Magplar or Stamblade - depending on my mood. For Campaigns I am a loyal EP account-wide

Feel free to add me GT was listed.

Firstmep

For next patch ill be running the following setup on my stamplar:

5 Cowards, 5 Trappings(jewelry +2h backbar) 2 BS, master dual wield

I have already been testing this setup and the sustain and tankiness is pretty good, and as an orc with the warrior mundus i still get about 4.2k wep dmg and about 36k stam.
This setup allows me to run lingering hp pots(lingering+vitality), and still get incredible sustain.
Also dropped dubious in preparation for next patch for dual stat food.
I overall get the same amount of max stam as with bone pirate and dubious, but more hp, and trappings next patch will give even more sustain than on live.
Damage is decent enough, and i love having major expedition and protection on demand.
Also using blood craze and double health drain poisons for even more self healing.
Max stam will go down a bit once i transmute 1-2 to protective.

Just realised this is the feedback thread not the templar pvp thread haha sorry.

StarOfElyon

Jabbs_Giggity wrote: »

StarOfElyon wrote: »

Jabbs_Giggity wrote: »

Only playing because there is no other MMO on console that compares.

heh. I thought I might've seen your name on Xbox in BGs before.

I'm on xbox NA, yes. GT IX UNCLAIMED XI

Add me we can do some BGs

Cool.

StarOfElyon

I swear crescent sweep just passes right through opponents like they're not even there too often.

Mr_Nobody

StarOfElyon wrote: »

I swear crescent sweep just passes right through opponents like they're not even there too often.

It doesnt. Its lag and skill's short range. You need to predict where the enemy is going to be or where he actually is now on the server time.

Just a casual templar experience. Im happy to hit 25% of my Sweeps during my fights against potatos who are right in front of me.

Im a lag potato i guess. Or zos is a potato. Choose 1.. or two, lol.

EtTuBrutus

Cinbri wrote: »

Here again how inconsistently zos treating Jabs and Eclipse:


Jabs - zos continuing to treat it as ordinary aoe skill affected by evasion. And now with 0.3 less channel time it should work like rest of abilities with 1sec global cooldown. Yet, Jabs were left outside of AoE standardization this update as its base aoe damage is much lower than ordinary aoe damage: 114x4= 456 while rest of AoEs are 615. difference is huuge.
As result: as single-target spammable skill underperform as it can be mitigated by Evasion buff; and also as AoE damage skill it also below of AoE standards.

Eclipse - not just after damage nerf it comparable to damage of self-buffs like Scales/Ice Shield that is rudiculous, but also damage of this single-target breakable cc skill is equal to ordinary AoE damage now. So why does our single target skill with longest Internal Cooldown suppose to deal as much damage as AoE (which suppose to deal lower damage coz area of damage apply in compare to single target pressure skills)?
If zos treat it as self-buffs which are 100% reliable but only against half of attacks (ranged) - make Eclipse unbreakable again and buff its duration from 6sec to 7sec:
1. It already act on same rules of Morrowind unbreakable version, so right now it has weaknesses of unbreakable Morrowind version but don't have strengths of breakable pre-Morrowind version.
2. Beside it wont work against CC-immune enemies, it will be reliable against all attacks (melee/ranged) but only with half efficiency because 7sec duration-7sec cc-immunity. Literally reverted self-buff: self-buffs are 100% efficiency against 50% attacks, Eclipse is 50% efficiency against 100% attacks. (still cooldown inconsistent too).
Or just like was suggested lot of times - make it into ordinary dot with same rules that Inhale has regarding damage-healing skill % of new standards.

That aoe dmg can can hit 4 times in that same period of 1 spear tho

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO

EtTuBrutus wrote: »

That aoe dmg can can hit 4 times in that same period of 1 spear tho

@Cinbri accounted for that here-

Yet, Jabs were left outside of AoE standardization this update as its base aoe damage is much lower than ordinary aoe damage: 114x4= 456 while rest of AoEs are 615.

read slower next time.

EtTuBrutus

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »

EtTuBrutus wrote: »

That aoe dmg can can hit 4 times in that same period of 1 spear tho

@Cinbri accounted for that here-

Yet, Jabs were left outside of AoE standardization this update as its base aoe damage is much lower than ordinary aoe damage: 114x4= 456 while rest of AoEs are 615.

read slower next time.

You're right i missed that. But 1192 dmg to 1 target (more than twice the aoe benchmark) that no other aoe in the game has the capability of doing.

I would love a buff to sweeps, but do you really think they're going to give it a single target component and an aoe component that's equivalent to a spell without single target capabilities? What about the fact that it heals? It's a single target, aoe, heal, all in 1. There's no reason it should do the same aoe dmg as blazing spear imo.

It's also cheaper than blazing.

Jabs adds savagery in your spammable, awesome.

All it needs is a fix on its reliability to hit imo. But if u can get it buffed go ahead. I just don't think it would be balanced if it did.

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO

You're right i missed that. But 1192 dmg to 1 target (more than twice the aoe benchmark) that no other aoe in the game has the capability of doing.

this is relevant to the topic of aoe. if you are going to compare single target, compare single target. also fact is, single target if all 4 hits land, sweep/jabs will do more damage then surprise attack with the same stats.

you do realize that the base damage is the aoe part and the "single target" is simply "the closest target", which gets an additional 160% damage, multiplied off the aoe base damage, look at an old tooltip to get an idea-

Biting Jabs: Cost: 2509 Stamina.
Launch a relentless assault, striking enemies in front of you four times with your Aedric spear and dealing [274 / 278 / 281 / 285] Physical Damage with each strike. The nearest enemy takes 140% additional damage each strike, and their Movement Speed is reduced by 70% for 2 seconds on the final hit. Also grants you Major Savagery, increasing your Weapon Critical rating by 2191 for 8 seconds

I would love a buff to sweeps, but do you really think they're going to give it a single target component and an aoe component that's equivalent to a spell without single target capabilities? What about the fact that it heals? It's a single target, aoe, heal, all in 1. There's no reason it should do the same aoe dmg as blazing spear imo.

it would be easy to bring sweeps up to the aoe standard that zos has laid out, as i have said, the easiest way to make the skill relevant in AOE is to raise the base damage, the AOE part, and lower the closest target percentage amp. for example, make the AOE part do 35% more damage that it does right now but only give the closest target 90% more damage, this would bring the aoe part inline with other spammable AOEs in the game while keeping the closest target damage the same as it is now, at least going by the numbers, at least going by the numbers @Cinbri has in their post. this would not imbalance anything and keep the single target damage the around the same.

It's also cheaper than blazing.

blazing spear is range. that is what makes it more expensive.

EtTuBrutus

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »

You're right i missed that. But 1192 dmg to 1 target (more than twice the aoe benchmark) that no other aoe in the game has the capability of doing.

this is relevant to the topic of aoe. if you are going to compare single target, compare single target. also fact is, single target if all 4 hits land, sweep/jabs will do more damage then surprise attack with the same stats.

you do realize that the base damage is the aoe part and the "single target" is simply "the closest target", which gets an additional 160% damage, multiplied off the aoe base damage, look at an old tooltip to get an idea-

Biting Jabs: Cost: 2509 Stamina.
Launch a relentless assault, striking enemies in front of you four times with your Aedric spear and dealing [274 / 278 / 281 / 285] Physical Damage with each strike. The nearest enemy takes 140% additional damage each strike, and their Movement Speed is reduced by 70% for 2 seconds on the final hit. Also grants you Major Savagery, increasing your Weapon Critical rating by 2191 for 8 seconds

I would love a buff to sweeps, but do you really think they're going to give it a single target component and an aoe component that's equivalent to a spell without single target capabilities? What about the fact that it heals? It's a single target, aoe, heal, all in 1. There's no reason it should do the same aoe dmg as blazing spear imo.

it would be easy to bring sweeps up to the aoe standard that zos has laid out, as i have said, the easiest way to make the skill relevant in AOE is to raise the base damage, the AOE part, and lower the closest target percentage amp. for example, make the AOE part do 35% more damage that it does right now but only give the closest target 90% more damage, this would bring the aoe part inline with other spammable AOEs in the game while keeping the closest target damage the same as it is now, at least going by the numbers, at least going by the numbers @Cinbri has in their post. this would not imbalance anything and keep the single target damage the around the same.

It's also cheaper than blazing.

blazing spear is range. that is what makes it more expensive.

So u think a skill that could hit an aoe as hard as others, is cheaper, has an increased single target component, heals the caster and has a 70% snare is balanced??

Thats broken.

Sweeps 2952
Spear 3240
Liquid lightning 3520
Twisting path 3510
Sap essence 3240
Winters revenge 3510

Sweeps is meant to be a single target skill with a aoe perk. It just needs a reliable way to hit.