Maintenance for the week of December 30:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – December 30
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – December 30
Class Identity: 5 Points
-
JinxxND✭✭✭✭@IAVITNI
Who's biased here? MagBLADES were definitely the most vocal in regards to wings nerf, as 100% of their toolkit was reflected. They even questioned why Strife is considered a projectile. Magsorcs weren't happy, but had Curse, Fury and later Force Pulse to deal with wings.
Dude!
>=C
You could put wings back and magblade would still be in the same place, if they weren't melee they could just swap swallow soul to force pulse the same as magsorc, no you can't just blindly fire your bow you would have to drop the wings with light attacks then bow. I mained a magblade til summer set and yeah while it wasn't the easiest but it was definitely a doable match up if played well but I guess the no one cares about l2p anymore everything has to be dumbed down to the current state of the game we have now, where all ranged dmg can just free cast at will without consequence this includes snipers for stamPC NA -
'Jinxx - Nightblade
'Jinxx X Necromancer2 -
Lord-Otto✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭@IAVITNI
Who's biased here? MagBLADES were definitely the most vocal in regards to wings nerf, as 100% of their toolkit was reflected. They even questioned why Strife is considered a projectile. Magsorcs weren't happy, but had Curse, Fury and later Force Pulse to deal with wings.
Dude!
>=C
What? I was just stating that every time op began to discuss a nerf the post directed the cause to PvP when the reverse is true for other issues that don't fall into the scope of the OP. Just wanted to be clear about the fact that both PvP and PvE affect each changes, it's not just PvP affecting balance, which is what the OP makes it sound like.
This also had nothing to do with the wing discussion, which was a long segway into lazy design decisions. And yes magsorcs were more vocal because there are more magsorcs. If you read my post I literally say magsorcs were more vocal but indicate that magblades were actually countered more so.
Not sure what you're getting at or if you actually read my post or just read Bias+Wings+magsorc+mnb and decided to argue with me based on that.
I flew over a few snippets, but truth be told, I'm not bothering reading every word in a novel about who is to blame for nerfs. I got what your point was after the first paragraph.
What I'm getting at is that nightblades were indeed more outspoken about wings imbalance. Don't blame sorcs for everything! Nightblades had a strong point and made that heard very soundly! That is all.0 -
pieratsos✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
That is because it's a L2P issue. The ultimate wasn't harmful to them because the other guy could use use an easily slottable and readily available skill. The ultimate was harmful to them because they got outplayed by the other guy. That's the concept of player skill. Reflect and double reflect should absolutely come back and meteor, crushing shock and all the other crap that can no longer be reflected should absolutely go back to being reflectable as well.
The issue with wings wasn't that it could reflect. The issue with it was that they balanced the skill in a way that made it a proactive defence which made it unbearable in a 1v1 situation shutting down ranged builds. It should be used reactively. That means very short duration with unlimited projectiles. You see a meteor coming u reflect it. You are getting pummeled with projectiles, you reflect them back as long as u can sustain the skill. That's identity for a class that is supposed to be able to stand its ground.6 -
Joy_Division✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range, had no strategy that entailed following up the ultimate, and did so without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
Edited by Joy_Division on March 17, 2020 2:59PM16 -
Drdeath20✭✭✭✭✭
✭1 way or the other it was a wasted ultimate.
i agree that the aggressor had zero strategy but isnt a wasted ultimate punishment enough for the cost of a little magicka?1 -
GrumpyDuckling✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.7 -
Xvorg✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
and only wings reflected meteor? What about defensive posture?
The reflect wasn't only a DK feature, was available to all classes through weapon skills, so as long as you used meteor as your ultimate you had to consider the fact that it could backfire.
Something similar can be said about old hardened and annullement, javelin and reach/scatter shot and Surprise attack and ransack, just to name a few skills that were similar to class skills. Of course, class skills were more powerful because the game was designed around classes and not around skills. Saddly, that path was lost long ago and now we have a game designed around skills and different colors. And dlc sets...
In the end it's as @Toc de Malsvi says, the game is less (no longer) attractive, which is sad.Sarcasm is something too serious to be taken lightly
I was born with the wrong sign
In the wrong house
With the wrong ascendancy
I took the wrong road
That led to the wrong tendencies
I was in the wrong place at the wrong time
For the wrong reason and the wrong rhyme
On the wrong day of the wrong week
Used the wrong method with the wrong technique4 -
Ishammael✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
You are wrong.
Wings balance was always fine when considered in the context of an invisibility (with purge) button on NBs, incredible movement on sorcs, and healing on Templars.
The skill, along with many others, has been nerfed into the ground so that it's current state is boring and pathetic. Mag NBs don't even get invis anymore!5 -
GrumpyDuckling✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
You are wrong.
Wings balance was always fine when considered in the context of an invisibility (with purge) button on NBs, incredible movement on sorcs, and healing on Templars.
The skill, along with many others, has been nerfed into the ground so that it's current state is boring and pathetic. Mag NBs don't even get invis anymore!
I think you're having some struggles understanding.
All of your examples (cloak/purge + sorc mobility + healing templars) are great because they allow players to play defense. But, none of them align with this particular example I am talking about with wings/meteor, which allowed wings to play defense and offense with an ultimate.4 -
Joy_Division✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
Yes, it's totally fine., When a player just presses a button to attack a random target simply because they have their ultimate up and that unthinking action results in a "fun and entertaining" moment, I have absolutely no problem with that. That fight is taking place in front of a keep with players all over the place. Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else? And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG. No, he had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate. There is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, that's precisely the gameplay that might motivate me to put up with PvP's awful performance. If we can not have such moments under those circumstances, then when can we? The answer is never because you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions in a game where death has absolutely zero consequences.
I've heard these arguments for 6 years, you don;t need to boldface and italics them as if they are somehow things I never considered. I never mained a DK so I don;t want to hear that I am somehow biased or an advocate for them. 90% of my playtime in PvP has been on magicka toons with a heavy reliance on ranged combat. I understand what Reflective Wings does and what it is like to fight against them. You want to talk about balance? How is it balanced or "fair" that certain classes have no choice but to stand their ground and die when the enemy zerg comes, and yet other classes can just say, "nope, I'm leaving, good bye!"? Where was the counterplay for Templars and DKs? Oh, gone because the same classes that could escape railed against Wings and stuff like the original Eclipse. Mag sorcs and Mag NBs want to be able to get into a 1v1 cage match with classes with no mobility but also want the mobility to duck out whenever things get tough. LOL, where's the balance concern there? Why do you suppose that for years sorcerers and nightblades were the goto picks for anyone who even dared to solo? So, no, I never had a problem with a class I was never invested in being able to reflect because that same class had no counterplay when grossly outnumbered. But then again, I was never stubborn enough to bang my head against a wall when there are other targets to drop my meteor on. And if I really was intent on hitting a DK with a meteor, that option was available to me via the various double reflect mechanics, which DKs could do nothing about.
But this is all moot now anyway since ZOS has has taken away DKs signature toy, they have also ruined Nightblades. So we are governed by the principle that balancing means watering down the distinctive things we can do lest some random PuG who is zerging and mindlessly presses buttons might not wind up the subject of an admittedly fun and entertaining Twitch clip.13 -
Lord-Otto✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Joy, the same could be said about wings. They neutered projectile-based classes without any thought involved. If you think a meteor should come flying back to you, then flapping wings should also invoke a risk, like taking more melee damage.5 -
GrumpyDuckling✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
Yes, it's totally fine., When a player just presses a button to attack a random target simply because they have their ultimate up and that unthinking action results in a "fun and entertaining" moment, I have absolutely no problem with that. That fight is taking place in front of a keep with players all over the place. Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else? And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG. No, he had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate. There is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, that's precisely the gameplay that might motivate me to put up with PvP's awful performance. If we can not have such moments under those circumstances, then when can we? The answer is never because you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions in a game where death has absolutely zero consequences.
I've heard these arguments for 6 years, you don;t need to boldface and italics them as if they are somehow things I never considered. I never mained a DK so I don;t want to hear that I am somehow biased or an advocate for them. 90% of my playtime in PvP has been on magicka toons with a heavy reliance on ranged combat. I understand what Reflective Wings does and what it is like to fight against them. You want to talk about balance? How is it balanced or "fair" that certain classes have no choice but to stand their ground and die when the enemy zerg comes, and yet other classes can just say, "nope, I'm leaving, good bye!"? Where was the counterplay for Templars and DKs? Oh, gone because the same classes that could escape railed against Wings and stuff like the original Eclipse. Mag sorcs and Mag NBs want to be able to get into a 1v1 cage match with classes with no mobility but also want the mobility to duck out whenever things get tough. LOL, where's the balance concern there? Why do you suppose that for years sorcerers and nightblades were the goto picks for anyone who even dared to solo? So, no, I never had a problem with a class I was never invested in being able to reflect because that same class had no counterplay when grossly outnumbered. But then again, I was never stubborn enough to bang my head against a wall when there are other targets to drop my meteor on. And if I really was intent on hitting a DK with a meteor, that option was available to me via the various double reflect mechanics, which DKs could do nothing about.
But this is all moot now anyway since ZOS has has taken away DKs signature toy, they have also ruined Nightblades. So we are governed by the principle that balancing means watering down the distinctive things we can do lest some random PuG who is zerging and mindlessly presses buttons might not wind up the subject of an admittedly fun and entertaining Twitch clip.
I get that you are passionate, as we all are, but it's disappointing to see your emotion overcome objectivity. I can see that you are getting into some silly arguments:
"And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG."
That's a strawman (no one "act[ed]" as if Alcast "just had to press a button to delete that PuG").
"...you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions..."
Another strawman (no one cares about feeling sorry for the other player, I have been talking about how skills are balanced in a way that impacts both players' experiences).
"No, [Alcast] had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate."
You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as "mindless" yet you applaud the guy who left the safety of his keep and exposed himself to getting outnumbered without an ultimate. At least, in this instance, it is likely that the player who dropped the meteor can be easily resurrected and continue contributing to his alliance's siege of the keep, while Alcast, if defeated, is at risk of being unable to be resurrected in the midst of enemies (unless there is a forward camp), thus weakening his alliance's defense -- all so he could get a single kill during the battle for a keep?
Do you see how the intelligence argument gets a little murky here? There are multiple ways of viewing this, so you can't blame this overwhelmingly on your judgement of the other player's intelligence. On the flipside, I imagine most of us would have done the same thing Alcast did in that same situation to get that sweet highlight. None of this means, however that a single button press from a readily available, slottable skill should be able to both cancel the damage of an ultimate AND return the damage.4 -
JinxxND✭✭✭✭Joy, the same could be said about wings. They neutered projectile-based classes without any thought involved. If you think a meteor should come flying back to you, then flapping wings should also invoke a risk, like taking more melee damage.
Having to recast wings came at the cost of mag sustain and resource.PC NA -
'Jinxx - Nightblade
'Jinxx X Necromancer2 -
Xvorg✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »
Do you see how the intelligence argument gets a little murky here? There are multiple ways of viewing this, so you can't blame this overwhelmingly on your judgement of the other player's intelligence. On the flipside, I imagine most of us would have done the same thing Alcast did in that same situation to get that sweet highlight. None of this means, however that a single button press from a readily available, slottable skill should be able to both cancel the damage of an ultimate AND return the damage.
Why not? Was the meteor reflected immediately or it went through the same 3 secs channel? As far as I remember the reflect operated in the same way as a normal cast. The only thing required is that you were smart enough to avoid dropping that ultimate against a DK. I mean back in the time you could have easily used, for example, Soul assault against a flapping wings DK, taking advantage of the fact that it went through blocking, the snare and the range... and just doing that by pressing swap + ulti. And if for some reason you misfired a meteor against the guy with the reflect up, you had plenty of time to react... so you cannot say it wasn't a l2p issue.
You are defending the guy who dropped the meteor as if that was the only option he had against Alcast when in fact it wasn't that. That kind of decisions are taken long before you press the R button and that was exactly what was good about ths game because every action you did could have had an ill consequence. Tell me now, what are the current consquences of using meteor from 41 mts? Or the consequences of spamming snipe?
Good games encourage their players through high risk, high reward policies. ESO currently is low risk and low reward and that's precisely what this process of standarization-disguised-as-balance has given us... quite fun, eh?Edited by Xvorg on March 17, 2020 9:29PMSarcasm is something too serious to be taken lightly
I was born with the wrong sign
In the wrong house
With the wrong ascendancy
I took the wrong road
That led to the wrong tendencies
I was in the wrong place at the wrong time
For the wrong reason and the wrong rhyme
On the wrong day of the wrong week
Used the wrong method with the wrong technique3 -
Vaoh✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭@Joy_Division Thank you so much for your post. One of the best I’ve had the pleasure of reading on these forums and I 100% agree with everything you’ve said.
For awhile I’ve hoped to describe my issues with ESO’s combat changes overtime without just straight up saying “changes like the stun removal of Crystal Frags hurt class identity”. So much more has changed overtime that you really do have to look at the game from launch (or at least Homestead vs Morrowind in the case of a lot of skills) to consider mechanic changes. You took Spear Shards/Death Stroke and perfectly broke down why the combat is so messed up. Ofc there are tons of bugs that slow the flow of combat down too now.
One of these days I may put up a thread of all launch day skills for players to reference for this very purpose. ESO used to be a game with tons of class identity and evolving character strength alongside lots of builds. When was the last time we saw blazeplars, saptanks, meteor ping pong... rather than everyone having the same standardized skills with different colors.
0 -
Bashev✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭@Joy_Division Thank you so much for your post. One of the best I’ve had the pleasure of reading on these forums and I 100% agree with everything you’ve said.
For awhile I’ve hoped to describe my issues with ESO’s combat changes overtime without just straight up saying “changes like the stun removal of Crystal Frags hurt class identity”. So much more has changed overtime that you really do have to look at the game from launch (or at least Homestead vs Morrowind in the case of a lot of skills) to consider mechanic changes. You took Spear Shards/Death Stroke and perfectly broke down why the combat is so messed up. Ofc there are tons of bugs that slow the flow of combat down too now.
One of these days I may put up a thread of all launch day skills for players to reference for this very purpose. ESO used to be a game with tons of class identity and evolving character strength alongside lots of builds. When was the last time we saw blazeplars, saptanks, meteor ping pong... rather than everyone having the same standardized skills with different colors.
Yeah Nick Konkle designed the classes really well. 3 of them worked well and NBs were full of bugs. Also then it was not magicka or stamina builds. It was hybrid with smart use of your resources.Because I can!2 -
Vaoh✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭@Joy_Division Thank you so much for your post. One of the best I’ve had the pleasure of reading on these forums and I 100% agree with everything you’ve said.
For awhile I’ve hoped to describe my issues with ESO’s combat changes overtime without just straight up saying “changes like the stun removal of Crystal Frags hurt class identity”. So much more has changed overtime that you really do have to look at the game from launch (or at least Homestead vs Morrowind in the case of a lot of skills) to consider mechanic changes. You took Spear Shards/Death Stroke and perfectly broke down why the combat is so messed up. Ofc there are tons of bugs that slow the flow of combat down too now.
One of these days I may put up a thread of all launch day skills for players to reference for this very purpose. ESO used to be a game with tons of class identity and evolving character strength alongside lots of builds. When was the last time we saw blazeplars, saptanks, meteor ping pong... rather than everyone having the same standardized skills with different colors.
Yeah Nick Konkle designed the classes really well. 3 of them worked well and NBs were full of bugs. Also then it was not magicka or stamina builds. It was hybrid with smart use of your resources.
While I think the old hybrid system was unique, I can also understand why Stamina vs Magicka is a lot easier to balance overtime. It’s the massive changes in how the majority of skills/mechanics function and skill homogenization that’s caused ESO gameplay to become so stale. The classes already had tons of unique features..... the hard part was done at launch.
Instead of focusing on releasing new classes and combat skills to shake up gameplay (Warden, Necromancer, Spellcrafting, One Hand and Rune, etc), they chose to constantly change up ESO’s existing combat skill lines and playstyles via standardization. Standardization of all skills is the easiest way - remember when people used to joke about how we’d all eventually use the exact same skills but with different colors?
Nick Konkle designed the original classes and it seems he was the only Dev who understood them too.0 -
pieratsos✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
You are wrong.
Wings balance was always fine when considered in the context of an invisibility (with purge) button on NBs, incredible movement on sorcs, and healing on Templars.
The skill, along with many others, has been nerfed into the ground so that it's current state is boring and pathetic. Mag NBs don't even get invis anymore!
I think you're having some struggles understanding.
All of your examples (cloak/purge + sorc mobility + healing templars) are great because they allow players to play defense. But, none of them align with this particular example I am talking about with wings/meteor, which allowed wings to play defense and offense with an ultimate.
It's your choice to take the risk and throw a meteor at a DK. Yes I was thinking twice before throwing meteors at DKs unless I was able to double reflect them back at them. That's player choice, making people think cause their actions have consequences, create their strategy and adapt to their opponents, that's class identity and promoting player skill.2 -
Lord-Otto✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Joy, the same could be said about wings. They neutered projectile-based classes without any thought involved. If you think a meteor should come flying back to you, then flapping wings should also invoke a risk, like taking more melee damage.
Having to recast wings came at the cost of mag sustain and resource.
Wasting your meteor cost your ultimate, arguably harder to come by.1 -
Joy_Division✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
Yes, it's totally fine., When a player just presses a button to attack a random target simply because they have their ultimate up and that unthinking action results in a "fun and entertaining" moment, I have absolutely no problem with that. That fight is taking place in front of a keep with players all over the place. Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else? And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG. No, he had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate. There is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, that's precisely the gameplay that might motivate me to put up with PvP's awful performance. If we can not have such moments under those circumstances, then when can we? The answer is never because you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions in a game where death has absolutely zero consequences.
I've heard these arguments for 6 years, you don;t need to boldface and italics them as if they are somehow things I never considered. I never mained a DK so I don;t want to hear that I am somehow biased or an advocate for them. 90% of my playtime in PvP has been on magicka toons with a heavy reliance on ranged combat. I understand what Reflective Wings does and what it is like to fight against them. You want to talk about balance? How is it balanced or "fair" that certain classes have no choice but to stand their ground and die when the enemy zerg comes, and yet other classes can just say, "nope, I'm leaving, good bye!"? Where was the counterplay for Templars and DKs? Oh, gone because the same classes that could escape railed against Wings and stuff like the original Eclipse. Mag sorcs and Mag NBs want to be able to get into a 1v1 cage match with classes with no mobility but also want the mobility to duck out whenever things get tough. LOL, where's the balance concern there? Why do you suppose that for years sorcerers and nightblades were the goto picks for anyone who even dared to solo? So, no, I never had a problem with a class I was never invested in being able to reflect because that same class had no counterplay when grossly outnumbered. But then again, I was never stubborn enough to bang my head against a wall when there are other targets to drop my meteor on. And if I really was intent on hitting a DK with a meteor, that option was available to me via the various double reflect mechanics, which DKs could do nothing about.
But this is all moot now anyway since ZOS has has taken away DKs signature toy, they have also ruined Nightblades. So we are governed by the principle that balancing means watering down the distinctive things we can do lest some random PuG who is zerging and mindlessly presses buttons might not wind up the subject of an admittedly fun and entertaining Twitch clip.
I get that you are passionate, as we all are, but it's disappointing to see your emotion overcome objectivity. I can see that you are getting into some silly arguments:
"And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG."
That's a strawman (no one "act[ed]" as if Alcast "just had to press a button to delete that PuG").
"...you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions..."
Another strawman (no one cares about feeling sorry for the other player, I have been talking about how skills are balanced in a way that impacts both players' experiences).
"No, [Alcast] had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate."
You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as "mindless" yet you applaud the guy who left the safety of his keep and exposed himself to getting outnumbered without an ultimate. At least, in this instance, it is likely that the player who dropped the meteor can be easily resurrected and continue contributing to his alliance's siege of the keep, while Alcast, if defeated, is at risk of being unable to be resurrected in the midst of enemies (unless there is a forward camp), thus weakening his alliance's defense -- all so he could get a single kill during the battle for a keep?
Do you see how the intelligence argument gets a little murky here? There are multiple ways of viewing this, so you can't blame this overwhelmingly on your judgement of the other player's intelligence. On the flipside, I imagine most of us would have done the same thing Alcast did in that same situation to get that sweet highlight. None of this means, however that a single button press from a readily available, slottable skill should be able to both cancel the damage of an ultimate AND return the damage.
Yes, I am passionate, but that does not invalidate my arguments for lack of objectivity.
And while we're talking strawmen, let's address yours: "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor." No and I did not make a "judgement of the other player's intelligence." I trashed the strategy they used. I made a judgement regarding the action of just dropping a meteor on a player at max range with no follow up. It's perhaps a understandable inference. Sort of like the inference I made when you asked "to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance" and "How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?" as caring about the experience of the other player.
Because you asked to consider the other player, that's why I looked at the clip. Yes, I trashed the strategy of the player who dropped the meteor because it was objectively bad. Yes, I applauded what Alcast did because his actions actually resulted in the death of his target and it was "fun and entertaining" as you admit. The conjecture that Alcast may have put himself in a dangerous position if the keep was flagged and if there was no forward camp does not have anything to do the issue. Besides, that's a lot of hypotheticals and it's clear you did not watch the video as closely as I did or you would have known the keep was not bursted. Alcast's strategy and action could certainly be critiqued as being a too much of a glory hound, but to compare it his opponent's is being disingenuous.
If there are multiple ways of viewing this, why do you keep repeating that those people who disagree with you are either not being objective and "anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively." Multiple ways perhaps, but not objective ways.
Although I don't agree with the position that an ultimate should not be reflected, I do maintain there is a logic and objectivity, to use a word getting thrown around, to believing that. While I contend the game would be more fun to play if that feature were reintroduced, it's just that, a contention. The example shown in the video was 100% avoidable and so I do not see it as being problematic.Edited by Joy_Division on March 17, 2020 11:19PM4 -
GrumpyDuckling✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
Yes, it's totally fine., When a player just presses a button to attack a random target simply because they have their ultimate up and that unthinking action results in a "fun and entertaining" moment, I have absolutely no problem with that. That fight is taking place in front of a keep with players all over the place. Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else? And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG. No, he had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate. There is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, that's precisely the gameplay that might motivate me to put up with PvP's awful performance. If we can not have such moments under those circumstances, then when can we? The answer is never because you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions in a game where death has absolutely zero consequences.
I've heard these arguments for 6 years, you don;t need to boldface and italics them as if they are somehow things I never considered. I never mained a DK so I don;t want to hear that I am somehow biased or an advocate for them. 90% of my playtime in PvP has been on magicka toons with a heavy reliance on ranged combat. I understand what Reflective Wings does and what it is like to fight against them. You want to talk about balance? How is it balanced or "fair" that certain classes have no choice but to stand their ground and die when the enemy zerg comes, and yet other classes can just say, "nope, I'm leaving, good bye!"? Where was the counterplay for Templars and DKs? Oh, gone because the same classes that could escape railed against Wings and stuff like the original Eclipse. Mag sorcs and Mag NBs want to be able to get into a 1v1 cage match with classes with no mobility but also want the mobility to duck out whenever things get tough. LOL, where's the balance concern there? Why do you suppose that for years sorcerers and nightblades were the goto picks for anyone who even dared to solo? So, no, I never had a problem with a class I was never invested in being able to reflect because that same class had no counterplay when grossly outnumbered. But then again, I was never stubborn enough to bang my head against a wall when there are other targets to drop my meteor on. And if I really was intent on hitting a DK with a meteor, that option was available to me via the various double reflect mechanics, which DKs could do nothing about.
But this is all moot now anyway since ZOS has has taken away DKs signature toy, they have also ruined Nightblades. So we are governed by the principle that balancing means watering down the distinctive things we can do lest some random PuG who is zerging and mindlessly presses buttons might not wind up the subject of an admittedly fun and entertaining Twitch clip.
I get that you are passionate, as we all are, but it's disappointing to see your emotion overcome objectivity. I can see that you are getting into some silly arguments:
"And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG."
That's a strawman (no one "act[ed]" as if Alcast "just had to press a button to delete that PuG").
"...you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions..."
Another strawman (no one cares about feeling sorry for the other player, I have been talking about how skills are balanced in a way that impacts both players' experiences).
"No, [Alcast] had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate."
You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as "mindless" yet you applaud the guy who left the safety of his keep and exposed himself to getting outnumbered without an ultimate. At least, in this instance, it is likely that the player who dropped the meteor can be easily resurrected and continue contributing to his alliance's siege of the keep, while Alcast, if defeated, is at risk of being unable to be resurrected in the midst of enemies (unless there is a forward camp), thus weakening his alliance's defense -- all so he could get a single kill during the battle for a keep?
Do you see how the intelligence argument gets a little murky here? There are multiple ways of viewing this, so you can't blame this overwhelmingly on your judgement of the other player's intelligence. On the flipside, I imagine most of us would have done the same thing Alcast did in that same situation to get that sweet highlight. None of this means, however that a single button press from a readily available, slottable skill should be able to both cancel the damage of an ultimate AND return the damage.
Yes, I am passionate, but that does not invalidate my arguments for lack of objectivity.
And while we're talking strawmen, let's address yours: "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor." No and I did not make a "judgement of the other player's intelligence." I trashed the strategy they used. I made a judgement regarding the action of just dropping a meteor on a player at max range with no follow up. It's perhaps a understandable inference. Sort of like the inference I made when you asked "to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance" and "How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?" as caring about the experience of the other player.
Because you asked to consider the other player, that's why I looked at the clip. Yes, I trashed the strategy of the player who dropped the meteor because it was objectively bad. Yes, I applauded what Alcast did because his actions actually resulted in the death of his target and it was "fun and entertaining" as you admit. The conjecture that Alcast may have put himself in a dangerous position if the keep was flagged and if there was no forward camp does not have anything to do the issue. Besides, that's a lot of hypotheticals and it's clear you did not watch the video as closely as I did or you would have known the keep was not bursted. Alcast's strategy and action could certainly be critiqued as being a too much of a glory hound, but to compare it his opponent's is being disingenuous.
If there are multiple ways of viewing this, why do you keep repeating that those people who disagree with you are either not being objective and "anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively." Multiple ways perhaps, but not objective ways.
Although I don't agree with the position that an ultimate should not be reflected, I do maintain there is a logic and objectivity, to use a word getting thrown around, to believing that. While I contend the game would be more fun to play if that feature were reintroduced, it's just that, a contention. The example shown in the video was 100% avoidable and so I do not see it as being problematic.
Nice job cutting out part of my quote so you could change the context (see bold^). The full context of the quote says, "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as 'mindless'..."
Weird how you cut that out so you could ONCE AGAIN, set up another strawman. Get that junk out oh here. You're just hurting your own credibility with that nonsense.2 -
Rikumaru✭✭✭✭✭
✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
Yes, it's totally fine., When a player just presses a button to attack a random target simply because they have their ultimate up and that unthinking action results in a "fun and entertaining" moment, I have absolutely no problem with that. That fight is taking place in front of a keep with players all over the place. Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else? And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG. No, he had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate. There is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, that's precisely the gameplay that might motivate me to put up with PvP's awful performance. If we can not have such moments under those circumstances, then when can we? The answer is never because you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions in a game where death has absolutely zero consequences.
I've heard these arguments for 6 years, you don;t need to boldface and italics them as if they are somehow things I never considered. I never mained a DK so I don;t want to hear that I am somehow biased or an advocate for them. 90% of my playtime in PvP has been on magicka toons with a heavy reliance on ranged combat. I understand what Reflective Wings does and what it is like to fight against them. You want to talk about balance? How is it balanced or "fair" that certain classes have no choice but to stand their ground and die when the enemy zerg comes, and yet other classes can just say, "nope, I'm leaving, good bye!"? Where was the counterplay for Templars and DKs? Oh, gone because the same classes that could escape railed against Wings and stuff like the original Eclipse. Mag sorcs and Mag NBs want to be able to get into a 1v1 cage match with classes with no mobility but also want the mobility to duck out whenever things get tough. LOL, where's the balance concern there? Why do you suppose that for years sorcerers and nightblades were the goto picks for anyone who even dared to solo? So, no, I never had a problem with a class I was never invested in being able to reflect because that same class had no counterplay when grossly outnumbered. But then again, I was never stubborn enough to bang my head against a wall when there are other targets to drop my meteor on. And if I really was intent on hitting a DK with a meteor, that option was available to me via the various double reflect mechanics, which DKs could do nothing about.
But this is all moot now anyway since ZOS has has taken away DKs signature toy, they have also ruined Nightblades. So we are governed by the principle that balancing means watering down the distinctive things we can do lest some random PuG who is zerging and mindlessly presses buttons might not wind up the subject of an admittedly fun and entertaining Twitch clip.
I get that you are passionate, as we all are, but it's disappointing to see your emotion overcome objectivity. I can see that you are getting into some silly arguments:
"And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG."
That's a strawman (no one "act[ed]" as if Alcast "just had to press a button to delete that PuG").
"...you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions..."
Another strawman (no one cares about feeling sorry for the other player, I have been talking about how skills are balanced in a way that impacts both players' experiences).
"No, [Alcast] had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate."
You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as "mindless" yet you applaud the guy who left the safety of his keep and exposed himself to getting outnumbered without an ultimate. At least, in this instance, it is likely that the player who dropped the meteor can be easily resurrected and continue contributing to his alliance's siege of the keep, while Alcast, if defeated, is at risk of being unable to be resurrected in the midst of enemies (unless there is a forward camp), thus weakening his alliance's defense -- all so he could get a single kill during the battle for a keep?
Do you see how the intelligence argument gets a little murky here? There are multiple ways of viewing this, so you can't blame this overwhelmingly on your judgement of the other player's intelligence. On the flipside, I imagine most of us would have done the same thing Alcast did in that same situation to get that sweet highlight. None of this means, however that a single button press from a readily available, slottable skill should be able to both cancel the damage of an ultimate AND return the damage.
Yes, I am passionate, but that does not invalidate my arguments for lack of objectivity.
And while we're talking strawmen, let's address yours: "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor." No and I did not make a "judgement of the other player's intelligence." I trashed the strategy they used. I made a judgement regarding the action of just dropping a meteor on a player at max range with no follow up. It's perhaps a understandable inference. Sort of like the inference I made when you asked "to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance" and "How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?" as caring about the experience of the other player.
Because you asked to consider the other player, that's why I looked at the clip. Yes, I trashed the strategy of the player who dropped the meteor because it was objectively bad. Yes, I applauded what Alcast did because his actions actually resulted in the death of his target and it was "fun and entertaining" as you admit. The conjecture that Alcast may have put himself in a dangerous position if the keep was flagged and if there was no forward camp does not have anything to do the issue. Besides, that's a lot of hypotheticals and it's clear you did not watch the video as closely as I did or you would have known the keep was not bursted. Alcast's strategy and action could certainly be critiqued as being a too much of a glory hound, but to compare it his opponent's is being disingenuous.
If there are multiple ways of viewing this, why do you keep repeating that those people who disagree with you are either not being objective and "anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively." Multiple ways perhaps, but not objective ways.
Although I don't agree with the position that an ultimate should not be reflected, I do maintain there is a logic and objectivity, to use a word getting thrown around, to believing that. While I contend the game would be more fun to play if that feature were reintroduced, it's just that, a contention. The example shown in the video was 100% avoidable and so I do not see it as being problematic.
Nice job cutting out part of my quote so you could change the context (see bold^). The full context of the quote says, "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as 'mindless'..."
Weird how you cut that out so you could ONCE AGAIN, set up another strawman. Get that junk out oh here. You're just hurting your own credibility with that nonsense.
The only person who's hurting their own credibility here is you. As pointed out earlier, why is it fine that sorc's can streak away into the sunset or NB's perma cloak to negate anything you can deal to them but it's unfair that wings can reflect ranged abilities? People like you are the reason why ZOS has gotten rid of so many unique and interesting mechanics in the game which gave every class their identity. Oh and before you start calling me a DK main or something, my main is a magicka nb, the very class which wings 100% countered.Overload rework. Power Overload now does physical damage and grants you the power of a tornado: You throw a brick at the target with a light attack, and you hammer your head into that brick with every heavy attack. We have decreased its Ultimate cost, but increased the chance that you get stuck in the animation.8 -
Goren✭✭✭It's not so much the homogenization that bothers me but the theme of classes and their respective skills which don't resemble them. The stamDK deals poison damage for example. But it has neither in common with a dragon, nor with a knight. Poison isn't mentioned in their description, nor in their lore books and their skill lines are named "Ardent Flame", "Draconic Power" and "Earthen Heart".
It's the same with stamNB. Nightblades are the typical assassin type and assassins use poison right? Well let's give them the disease damage type. I don't even understand why there has to be a distinction between physical and magical damage types in the first place.
Now the warden. The class was released with Morrowind three years ago and most of its skills are based on Vvardenfell's flora and fauna. Except for the bear and the entire Winter's Embrace skill line. Even after three years there's no way to change the animals according to where your warden is from.
It seems like not only the developers but also a lot of people here on the forum don't care about this kind of theme in a class.5 -
Ishammael✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
You are wrong.
Wings balance was always fine when considered in the context of an invisibility (with purge) button on NBs, incredible movement on sorcs, and healing on Templars.
The skill, along with many others, has been nerfed into the ground so that it's current state is boring and pathetic. Mag NBs don't even get invis anymore!
I think you're having some struggles understanding.
All of your examples (cloak/purge + sorc mobility + healing templars) are great because they allow players to play defense. But, none of them align with this particular example I am talking about with wings/meteor, which allowed wings to play defense and offense with an ultimate.
This thread is about class identity.
Wings was part of DK identity in the same way other skills were part of other class identity.
Your niche example of meteor reflect was hashed to death nearly five years ago. It is also irrelevant to the discussion at hand.5 -
GrumpyDuckling✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
Yes, it's totally fine., When a player just presses a button to attack a random target simply because they have their ultimate up and that unthinking action results in a "fun and entertaining" moment, I have absolutely no problem with that. That fight is taking place in front of a keep with players all over the place. Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else? And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG. No, he had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate. There is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, that's precisely the gameplay that might motivate me to put up with PvP's awful performance. If we can not have such moments under those circumstances, then when can we? The answer is never because you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions in a game where death has absolutely zero consequences.
I've heard these arguments for 6 years, you don;t need to boldface and italics them as if they are somehow things I never considered. I never mained a DK so I don;t want to hear that I am somehow biased or an advocate for them. 90% of my playtime in PvP has been on magicka toons with a heavy reliance on ranged combat. I understand what Reflective Wings does and what it is like to fight against them. You want to talk about balance? How is it balanced or "fair" that certain classes have no choice but to stand their ground and die when the enemy zerg comes, and yet other classes can just say, "nope, I'm leaving, good bye!"? Where was the counterplay for Templars and DKs? Oh, gone because the same classes that could escape railed against Wings and stuff like the original Eclipse. Mag sorcs and Mag NBs want to be able to get into a 1v1 cage match with classes with no mobility but also want the mobility to duck out whenever things get tough. LOL, where's the balance concern there? Why do you suppose that for years sorcerers and nightblades were the goto picks for anyone who even dared to solo? So, no, I never had a problem with a class I was never invested in being able to reflect because that same class had no counterplay when grossly outnumbered. But then again, I was never stubborn enough to bang my head against a wall when there are other targets to drop my meteor on. And if I really was intent on hitting a DK with a meteor, that option was available to me via the various double reflect mechanics, which DKs could do nothing about.
But this is all moot now anyway since ZOS has has taken away DKs signature toy, they have also ruined Nightblades. So we are governed by the principle that balancing means watering down the distinctive things we can do lest some random PuG who is zerging and mindlessly presses buttons might not wind up the subject of an admittedly fun and entertaining Twitch clip.
I get that you are passionate, as we all are, but it's disappointing to see your emotion overcome objectivity. I can see that you are getting into some silly arguments:
"And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG."
That's a strawman (no one "act[ed]" as if Alcast "just had to press a button to delete that PuG").
"...you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions..."
Another strawman (no one cares about feeling sorry for the other player, I have been talking about how skills are balanced in a way that impacts both players' experiences).
"No, [Alcast] had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate."
You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as "mindless" yet you applaud the guy who left the safety of his keep and exposed himself to getting outnumbered without an ultimate. At least, in this instance, it is likely that the player who dropped the meteor can be easily resurrected and continue contributing to his alliance's siege of the keep, while Alcast, if defeated, is at risk of being unable to be resurrected in the midst of enemies (unless there is a forward camp), thus weakening his alliance's defense -- all so he could get a single kill during the battle for a keep?
Do you see how the intelligence argument gets a little murky here? There are multiple ways of viewing this, so you can't blame this overwhelmingly on your judgement of the other player's intelligence. On the flipside, I imagine most of us would have done the same thing Alcast did in that same situation to get that sweet highlight. None of this means, however that a single button press from a readily available, slottable skill should be able to both cancel the damage of an ultimate AND return the damage.
Yes, I am passionate, but that does not invalidate my arguments for lack of objectivity.
And while we're talking strawmen, let's address yours: "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor." No and I did not make a "judgement of the other player's intelligence." I trashed the strategy they used. I made a judgement regarding the action of just dropping a meteor on a player at max range with no follow up. It's perhaps a understandable inference. Sort of like the inference I made when you asked "to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance" and "How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?" as caring about the experience of the other player.
Because you asked to consider the other player, that's why I looked at the clip. Yes, I trashed the strategy of the player who dropped the meteor because it was objectively bad. Yes, I applauded what Alcast did because his actions actually resulted in the death of his target and it was "fun and entertaining" as you admit. The conjecture that Alcast may have put himself in a dangerous position if the keep was flagged and if there was no forward camp does not have anything to do the issue. Besides, that's a lot of hypotheticals and it's clear you did not watch the video as closely as I did or you would have known the keep was not bursted. Alcast's strategy and action could certainly be critiqued as being a too much of a glory hound, but to compare it his opponent's is being disingenuous.
If there are multiple ways of viewing this, why do you keep repeating that those people who disagree with you are either not being objective and "anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively." Multiple ways perhaps, but not objective ways.
Although I don't agree with the position that an ultimate should not be reflected, I do maintain there is a logic and objectivity, to use a word getting thrown around, to believing that. While I contend the game would be more fun to play if that feature were reintroduced, it's just that, a contention. The example shown in the video was 100% avoidable and so I do not see it as being problematic.
Nice job cutting out part of my quote so you could change the context (see bold^). The full context of the quote says, "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as 'mindless'..."
Weird how you cut that out so you could ONCE AGAIN, set up another strawman. Get that junk out oh here. You're just hurting your own credibility with that nonsense.
The only person who's hurting their own credibility here is you. As pointed out earlier, why is it fine that sorc's can streak away into the sunset or NB's perma cloak to negate anything you can deal to them but it's unfair that wings can reflect ranged abilities? People like you are the reason why ZOS has gotten rid of so many unique and interesting mechanics in the game which gave every class their identity. Oh and before you start calling me a DK main or something, my main is a magicka nb, the very class which wings 100% countered.
"People like you are the reason why ZOS has gotten rid of so many unique and interesting mechanics in the game which gave every class their identity."
That's a bold, inaccurate statement. Check out the original class rep Dragonknight thread... you know, the one designed to give us players the platform to list 2 pain points. You'll see my post on the first page, and you'll see that I used one of my two available pain points to advocate for DK escapability. That was in May 2018. So don't even try using the examples of sorc streak/nb permacloak against me. I've wanted DK mobility/escapability for a long time, and when the opportunity rose where we might have a chance to actually be heard, I used one of my two bullets in the DK thread to advocate for it. No one listened.
Clearly, "people like [me]" aren't the problem.3 -
pieratsos✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
Yes, it's totally fine., When a player just presses a button to attack a random target simply because they have their ultimate up and that unthinking action results in a "fun and entertaining" moment, I have absolutely no problem with that. That fight is taking place in front of a keep with players all over the place. Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else? And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG. No, he had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate. There is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, that's precisely the gameplay that might motivate me to put up with PvP's awful performance. If we can not have such moments under those circumstances, then when can we? The answer is never because you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions in a game where death has absolutely zero consequences.
I've heard these arguments for 6 years, you don;t need to boldface and italics them as if they are somehow things I never considered. I never mained a DK so I don;t want to hear that I am somehow biased or an advocate for them. 90% of my playtime in PvP has been on magicka toons with a heavy reliance on ranged combat. I understand what Reflective Wings does and what it is like to fight against them. You want to talk about balance? How is it balanced or "fair" that certain classes have no choice but to stand their ground and die when the enemy zerg comes, and yet other classes can just say, "nope, I'm leaving, good bye!"? Where was the counterplay for Templars and DKs? Oh, gone because the same classes that could escape railed against Wings and stuff like the original Eclipse. Mag sorcs and Mag NBs want to be able to get into a 1v1 cage match with classes with no mobility but also want the mobility to duck out whenever things get tough. LOL, where's the balance concern there? Why do you suppose that for years sorcerers and nightblades were the goto picks for anyone who even dared to solo? So, no, I never had a problem with a class I was never invested in being able to reflect because that same class had no counterplay when grossly outnumbered. But then again, I was never stubborn enough to bang my head against a wall when there are other targets to drop my meteor on. And if I really was intent on hitting a DK with a meteor, that option was available to me via the various double reflect mechanics, which DKs could do nothing about.
But this is all moot now anyway since ZOS has has taken away DKs signature toy, they have also ruined Nightblades. So we are governed by the principle that balancing means watering down the distinctive things we can do lest some random PuG who is zerging and mindlessly presses buttons might not wind up the subject of an admittedly fun and entertaining Twitch clip.
I get that you are passionate, as we all are, but it's disappointing to see your emotion overcome objectivity. I can see that you are getting into some silly arguments:
"And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG."
That's a strawman (no one "act[ed]" as if Alcast "just had to press a button to delete that PuG").
"...you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions..."
Another strawman (no one cares about feeling sorry for the other player, I have been talking about how skills are balanced in a way that impacts both players' experiences).
"No, [Alcast] had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate."
You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as "mindless" yet you applaud the guy who left the safety of his keep and exposed himself to getting outnumbered without an ultimate. At least, in this instance, it is likely that the player who dropped the meteor can be easily resurrected and continue contributing to his alliance's siege of the keep, while Alcast, if defeated, is at risk of being unable to be resurrected in the midst of enemies (unless there is a forward camp), thus weakening his alliance's defense -- all so he could get a single kill during the battle for a keep?
Do you see how the intelligence argument gets a little murky here? There are multiple ways of viewing this, so you can't blame this overwhelmingly on your judgement of the other player's intelligence. On the flipside, I imagine most of us would have done the same thing Alcast did in that same situation to get that sweet highlight. None of this means, however that a single button press from a readily available, slottable skill should be able to both cancel the damage of an ultimate AND return the damage.
Yes, I am passionate, but that does not invalidate my arguments for lack of objectivity.
And while we're talking strawmen, let's address yours: "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor." No and I did not make a "judgement of the other player's intelligence." I trashed the strategy they used. I made a judgement regarding the action of just dropping a meteor on a player at max range with no follow up. It's perhaps a understandable inference. Sort of like the inference I made when you asked "to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance" and "How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?" as caring about the experience of the other player.
Because you asked to consider the other player, that's why I looked at the clip. Yes, I trashed the strategy of the player who dropped the meteor because it was objectively bad. Yes, I applauded what Alcast did because his actions actually resulted in the death of his target and it was "fun and entertaining" as you admit. The conjecture that Alcast may have put himself in a dangerous position if the keep was flagged and if there was no forward camp does not have anything to do the issue. Besides, that's a lot of hypotheticals and it's clear you did not watch the video as closely as I did or you would have known the keep was not bursted. Alcast's strategy and action could certainly be critiqued as being a too much of a glory hound, but to compare it his opponent's is being disingenuous.
If there are multiple ways of viewing this, why do you keep repeating that those people who disagree with you are either not being objective and "anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively." Multiple ways perhaps, but not objective ways.
Although I don't agree with the position that an ultimate should not be reflected, I do maintain there is a logic and objectivity, to use a word getting thrown around, to believing that. While I contend the game would be more fun to play if that feature were reintroduced, it's just that, a contention. The example shown in the video was 100% avoidable and so I do not see it as being problematic.
Nice job cutting out part of my quote so you could change the context (see bold^). The full context of the quote says, "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as 'mindless'..."
Weird how you cut that out so you could ONCE AGAIN, set up another strawman. Get that junk out oh here. You're just hurting your own credibility with that nonsense.
The only person who's hurting their own credibility here is you. As pointed out earlier, why is it fine that sorc's can streak away into the sunset or NB's perma cloak to negate anything you can deal to them but it's unfair that wings can reflect ranged abilities? People like you are the reason why ZOS has gotten rid of so many unique and interesting mechanics in the game which gave every class their identity. Oh and before you start calling me a DK main or something, my main is a magicka nb, the very class which wings 100% countered.
"People like you are the reason why ZOS has gotten rid of so many unique and interesting mechanics in the game which gave every class their identity."
That's a bold, inaccurate statement. Check out the original class rep Dragonknight thread... you know, the one designed to give us players the platform to list 2 pain points. You'll see my post on the first page, and you'll see that I used one of my two available pain points to advocate for DK escapability. That was in May 2018. So don't even try using the examples of sorc streak/nb permacloak against me. I've wanted DK mobility/escapability for a long time, and when the opportunity rose where we might have a chance to actually be heard, I used one of my two bullets in the DK thread to advocate for it. No one listened.
Clearly, "people like [me]" aren't the problem.
Except that the identity of DK as a class its to be able to hold its ground. That was the whole point of wings in the first place. So if your argument was that wings as a mechanic shouldn't exist and that DKs should have mobility and escapability instead then that is exactly what you are doing. Arguing for homogenization and the removal of unique and interesting mechanics that made each class unique.5 -
GrumpyDuckling✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
Yes, it's totally fine., When a player just presses a button to attack a random target simply because they have their ultimate up and that unthinking action results in a "fun and entertaining" moment, I have absolutely no problem with that. That fight is taking place in front of a keep with players all over the place. Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else? And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG. No, he had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate. There is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, that's precisely the gameplay that might motivate me to put up with PvP's awful performance. If we can not have such moments under those circumstances, then when can we? The answer is never because you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions in a game where death has absolutely zero consequences.
I've heard these arguments for 6 years, you don;t need to boldface and italics them as if they are somehow things I never considered. I never mained a DK so I don;t want to hear that I am somehow biased or an advocate for them. 90% of my playtime in PvP has been on magicka toons with a heavy reliance on ranged combat. I understand what Reflective Wings does and what it is like to fight against them. You want to talk about balance? How is it balanced or "fair" that certain classes have no choice but to stand their ground and die when the enemy zerg comes, and yet other classes can just say, "nope, I'm leaving, good bye!"? Where was the counterplay for Templars and DKs? Oh, gone because the same classes that could escape railed against Wings and stuff like the original Eclipse. Mag sorcs and Mag NBs want to be able to get into a 1v1 cage match with classes with no mobility but also want the mobility to duck out whenever things get tough. LOL, where's the balance concern there? Why do you suppose that for years sorcerers and nightblades were the goto picks for anyone who even dared to solo? So, no, I never had a problem with a class I was never invested in being able to reflect because that same class had no counterplay when grossly outnumbered. But then again, I was never stubborn enough to bang my head against a wall when there are other targets to drop my meteor on. And if I really was intent on hitting a DK with a meteor, that option was available to me via the various double reflect mechanics, which DKs could do nothing about.
But this is all moot now anyway since ZOS has has taken away DKs signature toy, they have also ruined Nightblades. So we are governed by the principle that balancing means watering down the distinctive things we can do lest some random PuG who is zerging and mindlessly presses buttons might not wind up the subject of an admittedly fun and entertaining Twitch clip.
I get that you are passionate, as we all are, but it's disappointing to see your emotion overcome objectivity. I can see that you are getting into some silly arguments:
"And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG."
That's a strawman (no one "act[ed]" as if Alcast "just had to press a button to delete that PuG").
"...you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions..."
Another strawman (no one cares about feeling sorry for the other player, I have been talking about how skills are balanced in a way that impacts both players' experiences).
"No, [Alcast] had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate."
You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as "mindless" yet you applaud the guy who left the safety of his keep and exposed himself to getting outnumbered without an ultimate. At least, in this instance, it is likely that the player who dropped the meteor can be easily resurrected and continue contributing to his alliance's siege of the keep, while Alcast, if defeated, is at risk of being unable to be resurrected in the midst of enemies (unless there is a forward camp), thus weakening his alliance's defense -- all so he could get a single kill during the battle for a keep?
Do you see how the intelligence argument gets a little murky here? There are multiple ways of viewing this, so you can't blame this overwhelmingly on your judgement of the other player's intelligence. On the flipside, I imagine most of us would have done the same thing Alcast did in that same situation to get that sweet highlight. None of this means, however that a single button press from a readily available, slottable skill should be able to both cancel the damage of an ultimate AND return the damage.
Yes, I am passionate, but that does not invalidate my arguments for lack of objectivity.
And while we're talking strawmen, let's address yours: "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor." No and I did not make a "judgement of the other player's intelligence." I trashed the strategy they used. I made a judgement regarding the action of just dropping a meteor on a player at max range with no follow up. It's perhaps a understandable inference. Sort of like the inference I made when you asked "to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance" and "How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?" as caring about the experience of the other player.
Because you asked to consider the other player, that's why I looked at the clip. Yes, I trashed the strategy of the player who dropped the meteor because it was objectively bad. Yes, I applauded what Alcast did because his actions actually resulted in the death of his target and it was "fun and entertaining" as you admit. The conjecture that Alcast may have put himself in a dangerous position if the keep was flagged and if there was no forward camp does not have anything to do the issue. Besides, that's a lot of hypotheticals and it's clear you did not watch the video as closely as I did or you would have known the keep was not bursted. Alcast's strategy and action could certainly be critiqued as being a too much of a glory hound, but to compare it his opponent's is being disingenuous.
If there are multiple ways of viewing this, why do you keep repeating that those people who disagree with you are either not being objective and "anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively." Multiple ways perhaps, but not objective ways.
Although I don't agree with the position that an ultimate should not be reflected, I do maintain there is a logic and objectivity, to use a word getting thrown around, to believing that. While I contend the game would be more fun to play if that feature were reintroduced, it's just that, a contention. The example shown in the video was 100% avoidable and so I do not see it as being problematic.
Nice job cutting out part of my quote so you could change the context (see bold^). The full context of the quote says, "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as 'mindless'..."
Weird how you cut that out so you could ONCE AGAIN, set up another strawman. Get that junk out oh here. You're just hurting your own credibility with that nonsense.
The only person who's hurting their own credibility here is you. As pointed out earlier, why is it fine that sorc's can streak away into the sunset or NB's perma cloak to negate anything you can deal to them but it's unfair that wings can reflect ranged abilities? People like you are the reason why ZOS has gotten rid of so many unique and interesting mechanics in the game which gave every class their identity. Oh and before you start calling me a DK main or something, my main is a magicka nb, the very class which wings 100% countered.
"People like you are the reason why ZOS has gotten rid of so many unique and interesting mechanics in the game which gave every class their identity."
That's a bold, inaccurate statement. Check out the original class rep Dragonknight thread... you know, the one designed to give us players the platform to list 2 pain points. You'll see my post on the first page, and you'll see that I used one of my two available pain points to advocate for DK escapability. That was in May 2018. So don't even try using the examples of sorc streak/nb permacloak against me. I've wanted DK mobility/escapability for a long time, and when the opportunity rose where we might have a chance to actually be heard, I used one of my two bullets in the DK thread to advocate for it. No one listened.
Clearly, "people like [me]" aren't the problem.
So if your argument was that wings as a mechanic shouldn't exist and that DKs should have mobility and escapability instead then that is exactly what you are doing.
Did my post argue for replacing "wings as a mechanic?" Check again.
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/416455/class-rep-dragonknight-feedback-thread/p11 -
Joy_Division✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
Yes, it's totally fine., When a player just presses a button to attack a random target simply because they have their ultimate up and that unthinking action results in a "fun and entertaining" moment, I have absolutely no problem with that. That fight is taking place in front of a keep with players all over the place. Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else? And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG. No, he had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate. There is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, that's precisely the gameplay that might motivate me to put up with PvP's awful performance. If we can not have such moments under those circumstances, then when can we? The answer is never because you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions in a game where death has absolutely zero consequences.
I've heard these arguments for 6 years, you don;t need to boldface and italics them as if they are somehow things I never considered. I never mained a DK so I don;t want to hear that I am somehow biased or an advocate for them. 90% of my playtime in PvP has been on magicka toons with a heavy reliance on ranged combat. I understand what Reflective Wings does and what it is like to fight against them. You want to talk about balance? How is it balanced or "fair" that certain classes have no choice but to stand their ground and die when the enemy zerg comes, and yet other classes can just say, "nope, I'm leaving, good bye!"? Where was the counterplay for Templars and DKs? Oh, gone because the same classes that could escape railed against Wings and stuff like the original Eclipse. Mag sorcs and Mag NBs want to be able to get into a 1v1 cage match with classes with no mobility but also want the mobility to duck out whenever things get tough. LOL, where's the balance concern there? Why do you suppose that for years sorcerers and nightblades were the goto picks for anyone who even dared to solo? So, no, I never had a problem with a class I was never invested in being able to reflect because that same class had no counterplay when grossly outnumbered. But then again, I was never stubborn enough to bang my head against a wall when there are other targets to drop my meteor on. And if I really was intent on hitting a DK with a meteor, that option was available to me via the various double reflect mechanics, which DKs could do nothing about.
But this is all moot now anyway since ZOS has has taken away DKs signature toy, they have also ruined Nightblades. So we are governed by the principle that balancing means watering down the distinctive things we can do lest some random PuG who is zerging and mindlessly presses buttons might not wind up the subject of an admittedly fun and entertaining Twitch clip.
I get that you are passionate, as we all are, but it's disappointing to see your emotion overcome objectivity. I can see that you are getting into some silly arguments:
"And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG."
That's a strawman (no one "act[ed]" as if Alcast "just had to press a button to delete that PuG").
"...you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions..."
Another strawman (no one cares about feeling sorry for the other player, I have been talking about how skills are balanced in a way that impacts both players' experiences).
"No, [Alcast] had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate."
You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as "mindless" yet you applaud the guy who left the safety of his keep and exposed himself to getting outnumbered without an ultimate. At least, in this instance, it is likely that the player who dropped the meteor can be easily resurrected and continue contributing to his alliance's siege of the keep, while Alcast, if defeated, is at risk of being unable to be resurrected in the midst of enemies (unless there is a forward camp), thus weakening his alliance's defense -- all so he could get a single kill during the battle for a keep?
Do you see how the intelligence argument gets a little murky here? There are multiple ways of viewing this, so you can't blame this overwhelmingly on your judgement of the other player's intelligence. On the flipside, I imagine most of us would have done the same thing Alcast did in that same situation to get that sweet highlight. None of this means, however that a single button press from a readily available, slottable skill should be able to both cancel the damage of an ultimate AND return the damage.
Yes, I am passionate, but that does not invalidate my arguments for lack of objectivity.
And while we're talking strawmen, let's address yours: "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor." No and I did not make a "judgement of the other player's intelligence." I trashed the strategy they used. I made a judgement regarding the action of just dropping a meteor on a player at max range with no follow up. It's perhaps a understandable inference. Sort of like the inference I made when you asked "to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance" and "How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?" as caring about the experience of the other player.
Because you asked to consider the other player, that's why I looked at the clip. Yes, I trashed the strategy of the player who dropped the meteor because it was objectively bad. Yes, I applauded what Alcast did because his actions actually resulted in the death of his target and it was "fun and entertaining" as you admit. The conjecture that Alcast may have put himself in a dangerous position if the keep was flagged and if there was no forward camp does not have anything to do the issue. Besides, that's a lot of hypotheticals and it's clear you did not watch the video as closely as I did or you would have known the keep was not bursted. Alcast's strategy and action could certainly be critiqued as being a too much of a glory hound, but to compare it his opponent's is being disingenuous.
If there are multiple ways of viewing this, why do you keep repeating that those people who disagree with you are either not being objective and "anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively." Multiple ways perhaps, but not objective ways.
Although I don't agree with the position that an ultimate should not be reflected, I do maintain there is a logic and objectivity, to use a word getting thrown around, to believing that. While I contend the game would be more fun to play if that feature were reintroduced, it's just that, a contention. The example shown in the video was 100% avoidable and so I do not see it as being problematic.
Nice job cutting out part of my quote so you could change the context (see bold^). The full context of the quote says, "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as 'mindless'..."
Weird how you cut that out so you could ONCE AGAIN, set up another strawman. Get that junk out oh here. You're just hurting your own credibility with that nonsense.
It's one thing to disagree with me and that's fine. It's another to try and hide from what you wrote. The bold does change the substance of the sentence, it does not alter its meaning. You could have accurately wrote just that I spent two post trashing the actions as mindless, but you did not. You consciously choose instead to write that I trashed the player's intelligence. Indeed, you repeated it later on, even adding italics to emphasize the point."GrumpyDuckling wrote:There are multiple ways of viewing this, so you can't blame this overwhelmingly on your judgement of the other player's intelligence.
Whenever you want to engage on the actual issue, I'm waiting.Edited by Joy_Division on March 18, 2020 5:36PM4 -
GrumpyDuckling✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
Yes, it's totally fine., When a player just presses a button to attack a random target simply because they have their ultimate up and that unthinking action results in a "fun and entertaining" moment, I have absolutely no problem with that. That fight is taking place in front of a keep with players all over the place. Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else? And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG. No, he had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate. There is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, that's precisely the gameplay that might motivate me to put up with PvP's awful performance. If we can not have such moments under those circumstances, then when can we? The answer is never because you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions in a game where death has absolutely zero consequences.
I've heard these arguments for 6 years, you don;t need to boldface and italics them as if they are somehow things I never considered. I never mained a DK so I don;t want to hear that I am somehow biased or an advocate for them. 90% of my playtime in PvP has been on magicka toons with a heavy reliance on ranged combat. I understand what Reflective Wings does and what it is like to fight against them. You want to talk about balance? How is it balanced or "fair" that certain classes have no choice but to stand their ground and die when the enemy zerg comes, and yet other classes can just say, "nope, I'm leaving, good bye!"? Where was the counterplay for Templars and DKs? Oh, gone because the same classes that could escape railed against Wings and stuff like the original Eclipse. Mag sorcs and Mag NBs want to be able to get into a 1v1 cage match with classes with no mobility but also want the mobility to duck out whenever things get tough. LOL, where's the balance concern there? Why do you suppose that for years sorcerers and nightblades were the goto picks for anyone who even dared to solo? So, no, I never had a problem with a class I was never invested in being able to reflect because that same class had no counterplay when grossly outnumbered. But then again, I was never stubborn enough to bang my head against a wall when there are other targets to drop my meteor on. And if I really was intent on hitting a DK with a meteor, that option was available to me via the various double reflect mechanics, which DKs could do nothing about.
But this is all moot now anyway since ZOS has has taken away DKs signature toy, they have also ruined Nightblades. So we are governed by the principle that balancing means watering down the distinctive things we can do lest some random PuG who is zerging and mindlessly presses buttons might not wind up the subject of an admittedly fun and entertaining Twitch clip.
I get that you are passionate, as we all are, but it's disappointing to see your emotion overcome objectivity. I can see that you are getting into some silly arguments:
"And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG."
That's a strawman (no one "act[ed]" as if Alcast "just had to press a button to delete that PuG").
"...you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions..."
Another strawman (no one cares about feeling sorry for the other player, I have been talking about how skills are balanced in a way that impacts both players' experiences).
"No, [Alcast] had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate."
You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as "mindless" yet you applaud the guy who left the safety of his keep and exposed himself to getting outnumbered without an ultimate. At least, in this instance, it is likely that the player who dropped the meteor can be easily resurrected and continue contributing to his alliance's siege of the keep, while Alcast, if defeated, is at risk of being unable to be resurrected in the midst of enemies (unless there is a forward camp), thus weakening his alliance's defense -- all so he could get a single kill during the battle for a keep?
Do you see how the intelligence argument gets a little murky here? There are multiple ways of viewing this, so you can't blame this overwhelmingly on your judgement of the other player's intelligence. On the flipside, I imagine most of us would have done the same thing Alcast did in that same situation to get that sweet highlight. None of this means, however that a single button press from a readily available, slottable skill should be able to both cancel the damage of an ultimate AND return the damage.
Yes, I am passionate, but that does not invalidate my arguments for lack of objectivity.
And while we're talking strawmen, let's address yours: "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor." No and I did not make a "judgement of the other player's intelligence." I trashed the strategy they used. I made a judgement regarding the action of just dropping a meteor on a player at max range with no follow up. It's perhaps a understandable inference. Sort of like the inference I made when you asked "to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance" and "How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?" as caring about the experience of the other player.
Because you asked to consider the other player, that's why I looked at the clip. Yes, I trashed the strategy of the player who dropped the meteor because it was objectively bad. Yes, I applauded what Alcast did because his actions actually resulted in the death of his target and it was "fun and entertaining" as you admit. The conjecture that Alcast may have put himself in a dangerous position if the keep was flagged and if there was no forward camp does not have anything to do the issue. Besides, that's a lot of hypotheticals and it's clear you did not watch the video as closely as I did or you would have known the keep was not bursted. Alcast's strategy and action could certainly be critiqued as being a too much of a glory hound, but to compare it his opponent's is being disingenuous.
If there are multiple ways of viewing this, why do you keep repeating that those people who disagree with you are either not being objective and "anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively." Multiple ways perhaps, but not objective ways.
Although I don't agree with the position that an ultimate should not be reflected, I do maintain there is a logic and objectivity, to use a word getting thrown around, to believing that. While I contend the game would be more fun to play if that feature were reintroduced, it's just that, a contention. The example shown in the video was 100% avoidable and so I do not see it as being problematic.
Nice job cutting out part of my quote so you could change the context (see bold^). The full context of the quote says, "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as 'mindless'..."
Weird how you cut that out so you could ONCE AGAIN, set up another strawman. Get that junk out oh here. You're just hurting your own credibility with that nonsense.
It's one thing to disagree with me and that's fine. It's another to try and hide from what you wrote. The bold does change the substance of the sentence, it does not alter its meaning. You could have accurately wrote just that I spent two post trashing the actions as mindless, but you did not. You consciously choose instead to write that I trashed the player's intelligence. Indeed, you repeated it later on, even adding italics to emphasize the point."GrumpyDuckling wrote:There are multiple ways of viewing this, so you can't blame this overwhelmingly on your judgement of the other player's intelligence.
Whenever you want to engage on the actual issue, I'm waiting.
Definition of Intelligence:
the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intelligence
Quotes from @Joy_Division :
"The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation."
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range, had no strategy that entailed following up the ultimate, and did so without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
"Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else?"
Nah, you're absolutely right, you in no way provided commentary on the player's intelligence...6