You have to give ZOS credit for the AOE tests

PrimusNephilim

this is just a bandaid on top of bandaids, they're avoiding the real issue....servers. if you read the thread, the servers can't handle the calculations so they want to reduce the calculations....they're nerfing combat again

paulychan

Are 2 handed attacks gonna be on a 3 sec cd? Asking for a friend

Tommy_The_Gun

mairwen85 wrote: »

I give them credit for proving the actual problem when they added capacity for the MYM event and much of the performance issues went away. After which this series of tests and proposals feels disingenuous and cheap.

Performance were better because during MYM there was A LOT of players PvP-ing, that normally do PvE. Also, probably those were umm... "low APM" players. As a side effect it was much harder for a PvP guild to login & form a group in Cyro - resulting in way less Ball groups, consisting mostly of "high APM" players. You know, the ones that spam & animation cancel AOEs and cause huge stress on the server & de-syncs.

West93

1vx as stamina templar already hard with no good healing ,buggy rally, now it won't be possible to even win 1v1 against someone decent in cyro.

Thanks ZOS.

TineaCruris

Nemesis7884 wrote: »

They do care and they are trying to improve Cyrodiil - pvp players are not forgotten...

Do I like the approach they are taking? No, as a Templar main I am highly concerned that my class basically gets wrecked, and seeing how long any type of skill revision takes them I have huge doubts they will be able to simply rework all classes (AGAIN)...

That being said, we are out of options and need to look for solutions where we find them...so people should approach this with open minds and participate in the tests if they can....

Why can't they manage the servers how they did during the Midyear Mayem event in the mean time? We know that cleared up a lot of the performance issues. Why can't they do at least as good as they did during the event at all times? We know they could be doing what ever that was right now and they are choosing not to for some reason.

Thoragaal

Nemesis7884 wrote: »

They do care and they are trying to improve Cyrodiil - pvp players are not forgotten...

Do I like the approach they are taking? No, as a Templar main I am highly concerned that my class basically gets wrecked, and seeing how long any type of skill revision takes them I have huge doubts they will be able to simply rework all classes (AGAIN)...

That being said, we are out of options and need to look for solutions where we find them...so people should approach this with open minds and participate in the tests if they can....

I'm sorry if this is completely Off Topic, but I'm too lazy to actually create my own thread and at the same time I value your opinion.

First off, I agree that I don't see pvp players as forgotten. Second of all, I completely understand your concern, and I share the same one, however I hope they don't take the route of actually implementing CD's on skills even if these tests prove to give a positive result. Ever! Period!

But what concerns me is what's going to happen further down the road, if these tests return positive and ZOS changes AoE abilities, it will cause a ripple effect on all other skills people are actively using in Cyrodiil.
Some classes are almost entierly dependant on AoE abilities (such as for example MagPlars). Without adding suffecient enough changes to other abilities (which they mentioned they would do), these classes will be left behind in a terrible state.
It means ZOS would have to change almost the entire toolkit of skills for these classes. And many skills that are being used aren't specific to templars, so the changes will pour over to other classes as well.
It sometimes takes them several months to change a skill, that we all know is broken/underperforming/OP.
They would also have to evaluate the other classes, and their toolkit of skills, in order to maintain some sort of balance.
It literally means, the way I see it, that ZOS would have to rework almost every single ability. And as we all know (and as I mentioned above) changing skills takes time. Not to mention, they just "recently" had a skill audit (we're still waiting for the class skill audit) which now will have to be reworked. Again!
The way skill audits have been handled so far has been tedious, annoying and down right frustrating so far.
If we're gonna have to wait for 2 years, or more, to see the full effect of these changes (with the way skills have been changed so far, in their respective audits) then we're back to this "tedious, annoying and down right frustrating" period again, where players are "forced" to change entire builds every 3-6 months.
That's my concern. I don't want that. Not the way changes have been implemented so far. In that case I might as well quit and come back in a few years to see if they are finally done changing things, so I can finally have a build that I'm happy with.

What are your thoughts?

TineaCruris

Sarannah wrote: »

The performance improvements are not just empty words... the performance improvements did help alot. Faster loading, better performance, less lag, etc. The major problem they are facing is that something is causing the lag, something they haven't looked at or thought off yet. Right now they want to see if AOE's are the issue.

Personally I do hope the AOE change is and stays PvP only, and that they change spammable AOE's like for example the templar's puncturing sweep in PvP to a single target attack for the time being. As you can't rip a class's main attack from them, and then hope they are fine.

I love my AOE's, and really hope they start looking at other directions for things to nerf. Like single bar PvP, and no more light attack weaving. As those are things some players gain a major advantage on as well, depending on lag/delay. This would both make PvP more fair/balanced, as well as reduce lag.

Performance is at an all time low right now. The only times it's been worse is when we can't log in at all or can't stay logged in for more than 15 minutes.

Why can't we have the performance we had during the MYM event full time? What is the story with things getting better just for the duration of the event then going back to the trash can? They showed us they can make things MUCH better than they are, and they can make it better right now if they wanted to.

vamp_emily

Instead of testing changes on PTS, they should just test it on live server. What is the worst that could happen? We push a button 10 times instead of 5 times before the skills fire off? Lag shouldn't be an issue because it is not common to have no lag for a long period of time.

Elsonso

I_am_Groot wrote: »

this is just a bandaid on top of bandaids, they're avoiding the real issue....servers. if you read the thread, the servers can't handle the calculations so they want to reduce the calculations....they're nerfing combat again

Yes, another bandaid.

I disagree that the problem is server hardware. Add hardware, optimize, or else. I think they have reached the upper limit of what their chosen commercial server architecture can do. They say that they have exhausted what they can optimize. After hardware and optimization, all that is left is the "or else". They seem to think they are at the "or else" phase.

I do agree that they need to come up with a comprehensive solution to computational pileups and not engineer around the problem while adding more sustain, more power, more AoE to the game.

Sarannah

TineaCruris wrote: »

Sarannah wrote: »

The performance improvements are not just empty words... the performance improvements did help alot. Faster loading, better performance, less lag, etc. The major problem they are facing is that something is causing the lag, something they haven't looked at or thought off yet. Right now they want to see if AOE's are the issue.

Personally I do hope the AOE change is and stays PvP only, and that they change spammable AOE's like for example the templar's puncturing sweep in PvP to a single target attack for the time being. As you can't rip a class's main attack from them, and then hope they are fine.

I love my AOE's, and really hope they start looking at other directions for things to nerf. Like single bar PvP, and no more light attack weaving. As those are things some players gain a major advantage on as well, depending on lag/delay. This would both make PvP more fair/balanced, as well as reduce lag.

Performance is at an all time low right now. The only times it's been worse is when we can't log in at all or can't stay logged in for more than 15 minutes.

Why can't we have the performance we had during the MYM event full time? What is the story with things getting better just for the duration of the event then going back to the trash can? They showed us they can make things MUCH better than they are, and they can make it better right now if they wanted to.

Read my second post, it might have something to do with PvE players filling many slots.

During midyearmayhem the issues could have been temporarily fixed as the players were spread out over more PvP instances/shards. Combined with those shards all containing many PvE players as well. PvE players which aren't maxed out, and trying to push every ounce of power out of their character(less light attack weaving, lower skill amount usage, less bar swapping, lesser procs, doing PvE, etc). Meaning less calculations for the servers, simply due to who were playing.

In short: The volume of the type of combat might play a major part in the PvP issues.

PvE players put less strain on the server.

TequilaFire

Now I have heard everything.

TineaCruris

Elsonso wrote: »

I_am_Groot wrote: »

this is just a bandaid on top of bandaids, they're avoiding the real issue....servers. if you read the thread, the servers can't handle the calculations so they want to reduce the calculations....they're nerfing combat again

Yes, another bandaid.

I disagree that the problem is server hardware. Add hardware, optimize, or else. I think they have reached the upper limit of what their chosen commercial server architecture can do. They say that they have exhausted what they can optimize. After hardware and optimization, all that is left is the "or else". They seem to think they are at the "or else" phase.

I do agree that they need to come up with a comprehensive solution to computational pileups and not engineer around the problem while adding more sustain, more power, more AoE to the game.

Maybe they should upgrade their chosen commercial server architecture.....like they did for the duration of the MYM event.

TineaCruris

Sarannah wrote: »

TineaCruris wrote: »

Sarannah wrote: »

The performance improvements are not just empty words... the performance improvements did help alot. Faster loading, better performance, less lag, etc. The major problem they are facing is that something is causing the lag, something they haven't looked at or thought off yet. Right now they want to see if AOE's are the issue.

Personally I do hope the AOE change is and stays PvP only, and that they change spammable AOE's like for example the templar's puncturing sweep in PvP to a single target attack for the time being. As you can't rip a class's main attack from them, and then hope they are fine.

I love my AOE's, and really hope they start looking at other directions for things to nerf. Like single bar PvP, and no more light attack weaving. As those are things some players gain a major advantage on as well, depending on lag/delay. This would both make PvP more fair/balanced, as well as reduce lag.

Performance is at an all time low right now. The only times it's been worse is when we can't log in at all or can't stay logged in for more than 15 minutes.

Why can't we have the performance we had during the MYM event full time? What is the story with things getting better just for the duration of the event then going back to the trash can? They showed us they can make things MUCH better than they are, and they can make it better right now if they wanted to.

Read my second post, it might have something to do with PvE players filling many slots.

During midyearmayhem the issues could have been temporarily fixed as the players were spread out over more PvP instances/shards. Combined with those shards all containing many PvE players as well. PvE players which aren't maxed out, and trying to push every ounce of power out of their character(less light attack weaving, lower skill amount usage, less bar swapping, lesser procs, doing PvE, etc). Meaning less calculations for the servers, simply due to who were playing.

In short: The volume of the type of combat might play a major part in the PvP issues.

PvE players put less strain on the server.

I was in Grey Host the majority of the event. The player makeup during the event did not change significantly for the event. Most PvE players populated the alternate, event specific campaigns. The same guilds that run in Grey Host every day ran every day during the MYM event, and performance was much improved. As soon as they did the post event maintenance, performance instantly went back into the trash can. So we know they can fix much of the performance issues right now if they wanted to. They just did for the MYM event.

Sarannah

TineaCruris wrote: »

Sarannah wrote: »

TineaCruris wrote: »

Sarannah wrote: »

The performance improvements are not just empty words... the performance improvements did help alot. Faster loading, better performance, less lag, etc. The major problem they are facing is that something is causing the lag, something they haven't looked at or thought off yet. Right now they want to see if AOE's are the issue.

Personally I do hope the AOE change is and stays PvP only, and that they change spammable AOE's like for example the templar's puncturing sweep in PvP to a single target attack for the time being. As you can't rip a class's main attack from them, and then hope they are fine.

I love my AOE's, and really hope they start looking at other directions for things to nerf. Like single bar PvP, and no more light attack weaving. As those are things some players gain a major advantage on as well, depending on lag/delay. This would both make PvP more fair/balanced, as well as reduce lag.

Performance is at an all time low right now. The only times it's been worse is when we can't log in at all or can't stay logged in for more than 15 minutes.

Why can't we have the performance we had during the MYM event full time? What is the story with things getting better just for the duration of the event then going back to the trash can? They showed us they can make things MUCH better than they are, and they can make it better right now if they wanted to.

Read my second post, it might have something to do with PvE players filling many slots.

During midyearmayhem the issues could have been temporarily fixed as the players were spread out over more PvP instances/shards. Combined with those shards all containing many PvE players as well. PvE players which aren't maxed out, and trying to push every ounce of power out of their character(less light attack weaving, lower skill amount usage, less bar swapping, lesser procs, doing PvE, etc). Meaning less calculations for the servers, simply due to who were playing.

In short: The volume of the type of combat might play a major part in the PvP issues.

PvE players put less strain on the server.

I was in Grey Host the majority of the event. The player makeup during the event did not change significantly for the event. Most PvE players populated the alternate, event specific campaigns. The same guilds that run in Grey Host every day ran every day during the MYM event, and performance was much improved. As soon as they did the post event maintenance, performance instantly went back into the trash can. So we know they can fix much of the performance issues right now if they wanted to. They just did for the MYM event.

Seeing the same guilds does not account for the players you cannot see, which during the event could all have been PvE players doing something else on that server. While after the MYM event, those spots were re-taken by PvPers again.

Let's do some experimental calculations:
Lets say the Cyrodiil player limit is 500 players maximum. And lets say PvP players account for 100 servercalculations per second(hitting, getting hit, buffs, debuffs, movement, etc). When the server is filled with just PvP players, this comes down to 500 times a 100 servercalculations per second. So a total of 50.000 calculations per second. Now let's say 50% of the players during the event was a PvE player, making 50 servercalculations per second. This means 250 players make 100 servercalculations per second, plus 250 players making 50 servercalculations per second. Which comes down to a total of 25.000 plus 12.500, is 37.500 server calculations per second. Which comes down to a 25% reduced strain on the servers, each second. Which might have been just enough to keep the servers from overstraining. Ofcourse maybe only 10% being PvE players already would cause this, as it is an exponential decrease in strain. If the server allows for more players to be in Cyrodiil, it would make even more of a difference. Ofcourse this is all theoretical, as only ZOS knows numbers.

Tandor

Cinbri wrote: »

I concerned that because of test you simply wont be able to play proper templar in cyro for straight 1 month. And if you have PvPer and have friends - you cant play bgs either. So, just take a break with this game it seems.

Or you could play your templar through the tests and provide some feedback on how it's affecting you, rather than complaining about it before and after the tests while taking a break inbetween.

Jeremy

Scion_of_Yggdrasil wrote: »

This is what happens when you constantly listen to the players who complain about "potato combat." You cannot realistically expect performance to hold up when you constantly want the pace of combat to continue to speed up. ESO combat doesn't need to be slow, but it doesn't need to be 100mph either. If you want that kind of experience, play a different game.

Unpopular Opinions:

• Animation cancelling should have been nipped in the bud. It was an accidental discovery, turned exploit. Then more balancing took place to account for the upped performance while using this exploit... seems backwards to me.
• Running out of stamina or magicka is supposed to happen... Its why TES has chosen the unique approach of having resources instead of cool downs. Having a META build with amazing sustain is part of the problem. There are supposed to be lulls in combat where you have to take a second to regen.

Im curious about what these tests discover, but am worried about what the official change might be. I am very much against cool downs, but do believe there are acceptable exceptions. I currently have 4 AOE skills barred... do I spam them though? No. Guess we will see what happens!

Slowing the combat down some would also narrow the skill gap between high APM (actions per minute) players and low APM players - which was something they said they were interested in addressing. So that could be part of the reasoning behind these changes.

mb10

So if they remove all skills and make it light or heavy attack only I should give them credit too?

OtarTheMad

TineaCruris wrote: »

Nemesis7884 wrote: »

They do care and they are trying to improve Cyrodiil - pvp players are not forgotten...

Do I like the approach they are taking? No, as a Templar main I am highly concerned that my class basically gets wrecked, and seeing how long any type of skill revision takes them I have huge doubts they will be able to simply rework all classes (AGAIN)...

That being said, we are out of options and need to look for solutions where we find them...so people should approach this with open minds and participate in the tests if they can....

Why can't they manage the servers how they did during the Midyear Mayem event in the mean time? We know that cleared up a lot of the performance issues. Why can't they do at least as good as they did during the event at all times? We know they could be doing what ever that was right now and they are choosing not to for some reason.

The issue is people had different MYM experiences based on the time they were playing and what campaign they were in. My friends in Gray Host didn't really notice a difference, it was pretty much just as crappy. I ran in Blackreach most of the time, it was pretty good until the population got really high and then it went to crap. The new campaigns they had worked a little smoother but that is probably because they never got the population numbers that Gray Host and some other regular campaigns got to.

volkeswagon

What's credit?

ThreeFacedLiar

Cinbri wrote: »

I concerned that because of test you simply wont be able to play proper templar in cyro for straight 1 month. And if you have PvPer and have friends - you cant play bgs either. So, just take a break with this game it seems.

BG's will not be affected. Only cyro.

Cadbury

volkeswagon wrote: »

What's credit?

Your credit card

Faulgor

Which is why claims that they don't want to go for the "obvious solution and just upgrade the servers" because they want to save money seem so ridiculous. They have spent way too much effort, time and money trying to get this concrete plane off the ground for that to make any sense to me.

Brrrofski

Sarannah wrote: »

The performance improvements are not just empty words... the performance improvements did help alot. Faster loading, better performance, less lag, etc. The major problem they are facing is that something is causing the lag, something they haven't looked at or thought off yet. Right now they want to see if AOE's are the issue.

Personally I do hope the AOE change is and stays PvP only, and that they change spammable AOE's like for example the templar's puncturing sweep in PvP to a single target attack for the time being. As you can't rip a class's main attack from them, and then hope they are fine.

I love my AOE's, and really hope they start looking at other directions for things to nerf. Like single bar PvP, and no more light attack weaving. As those are things some players gain a major advantage on as well, depending on lag/delay. This would both make PvP more fair/balanced, as well as reduce lag.

Performance is just as bad, if not worse than ever on Xbox EU.

Sure, my client closes down less, but actual combat is way more jittery than it was.

Rather than ruin the combat in this game, there are way better steps to try.

Limit group size to 12 and don't allow heals to heal those outside your group (also, some abilities heals guards - is that needed and surely complicates things?).

Don't let heals stack - if someone cast rapid regen on me, then someone else does, wipe the first one off.

There's a DC ball group on Xbox EU made up with like 20 people and I'm not joking, it feels like 15 of them are Stam wardens. Shalk and steel tornado spam. But guess what, they're not that laggy to fight. Way less than smaller groups you come across. They don't really have much cross healing. They run single target self heals like resolving vigor and rally.

So many people are in the fence about this game right now. A big, sweeping change like they're trialling (honestly, any of them are bad) will be it for a lot of people.

And I know it's only a test, but ZOS have a history of putting changes in that everyone tells them will take more fun out of combat, but they put them in.

Who needs AOE abilities when everyone will just be running proc sets next patch anyway - something else ZOS will completely ignore feedback on and make Cyro a worse experience.

zaria

Sarannah wrote: »

TineaCruris wrote: »

Sarannah wrote: »

TineaCruris wrote: »

Sarannah wrote: »

The performance improvements are not just empty words... the performance improvements did help alot. Faster loading, better performance, less lag, etc. The major problem they are facing is that something is causing the lag, something they haven't looked at or thought off yet. Right now they want to see if AOE's are the issue.

Personally I do hope the AOE change is and stays PvP only, and that they change spammable AOE's like for example the templar's puncturing sweep in PvP to a single target attack for the time being. As you can't rip a class's main attack from them, and then hope they are fine.

I love my AOE's, and really hope they start looking at other directions for things to nerf. Like single bar PvP, and no more light attack weaving. As those are things some players gain a major advantage on as well, depending on lag/delay. This would both make PvP more fair/balanced, as well as reduce lag.

Performance is at an all time low right now. The only times it's been worse is when we can't log in at all or can't stay logged in for more than 15 minutes.

Why can't we have the performance we had during the MYM event full time? What is the story with things getting better just for the duration of the event then going back to the trash can? They showed us they can make things MUCH better than they are, and they can make it better right now if they wanted to.

Read my second post, it might have something to do with PvE players filling many slots.

During midyearmayhem the issues could have been temporarily fixed as the players were spread out over more PvP instances/shards. Combined with those shards all containing many PvE players as well. PvE players which aren't maxed out, and trying to push every ounce of power out of their character(less light attack weaving, lower skill amount usage, less bar swapping, lesser procs, doing PvE, etc). Meaning less calculations for the servers, simply due to who were playing.

In short: The volume of the type of combat might play a major part in the PvP issues.

PvE players put less strain on the server.

I was in Grey Host the majority of the event. The player makeup during the event did not change significantly for the event. Most PvE players populated the alternate, event specific campaigns. The same guilds that run in Grey Host every day ran every day during the MYM event, and performance was much improved. As soon as they did the post event maintenance, performance instantly went back into the trash can. So we know they can fix much of the performance issues right now if they wanted to. They just did for the MYM event.

Seeing the same guilds does not account for the players you cannot see, which during the event could all have been PvE players doing something else on that server. While after the MYM event, those spots were re-taken by PvPers again.

Let's do some experimental calculations:
Lets say the Cyrodiil player limit is 500 players maximum. And lets say PvP players account for 100 servercalculations per second(hitting, getting hit, buffs, debuffs, movement, etc). When the server is filled with just PvP players, this comes down to 500 times a 100 servercalculations per second. So a total of 50.000 calculations per second. Now let's say 50% of the players during the event was a PvE player, making 50 servercalculations per second. This means 250 players make 100 servercalculations per second, plus 250 players making 50 servercalculations per second. Which comes down to a total of 25.000 plus 12.500, is 37.500 server calculations per second. Which comes down to a 25% reduced strain on the servers, each second. Which might have been just enough to keep the servers from overstraining. Ofcourse maybe only 10% being PvE players already would cause this, as it is an exponential decrease in strain. If the server allows for more players to be in Cyrodiil, it would make even more of a difference. Ofcourse this is all theoretical, as only ZOS knows numbers.

Yes, huge battles between ball groups give lots of calculations. PvDoor gives far fewer.

carlos424

OtarTheMad wrote: »

I have to agree, ZOS is trying out some theories and I applaud them for asking for our assistance. Do I want a cooldown system? No, but I see that they are trying to fix this on a mass scale because minor fixes just aren't enough. I mean they can reduce group size but players will still ride together, that's too minor. I really don't see what they are trying as lazy either but that's just my opinion.

@Firstmep While I understand what you're saying I have to disagree. You say they need to look at individual skills and evaluate them, not everything at once but that's all they have been doing for years. They have been trying to change skills, passives, classes, skill lines, weapon lines, etc. for years and nothing helped the servers. Heck, we are still in the middle of a class/skill audit right now that was put on hold for server improvements. (NB and Templar aren't finished, plus some changes to Necro) That approach isn't working and so they have to adjust.

I know a lot of us love the combat system in ESO and I agree, it's great... in PvE. In PvP, during prime time, one can say... what combat system? Things need to change and as much as we all like to think we have the answer truthfully we don't. Even though I am afraid they will pick Test 1 or 2 as a solution I am willing to help anyway if it helps Cyrodiil because honestly... it's unplayable anyway so why not try. (Honestly, I like Test 3, good ball groups will find a way around it but it's a start and should help)

With the impact of the changes they are planning to make, they almost have to make it seem like we have some sort of say in the process. I would be very surprised if we do. If you read the statement, they are simply trying to prepare us. They have clearly stated that if their "hypothesis" is found to be true they WILL implement changes (probably one of the four tests or some combination). They already have all the data they need, to know what the issues are. They've been tracking it for years. These tests are just to see which of the 4 tests provides the best solution, and decide which one(s) they will use.

Elsonso

Faulgor wrote: »

Which is why claims that they don't want to go for the "obvious solution and just upgrade the servers" because they want to save money seem so ridiculous. They have spent way too much effort, time and money trying to get this concrete plane off the ground for that to make any sense to me.

Exactly. I have to think that a server upgrade would cost them a fraction of what they are spending. No sane finance person would go for that sort of thing. It's like doing $100k worth of repairs on a car that you could replace for $20k.

Athyrium93

I'll give them credit for trying something new, I'll even take my poor Magplar Healer down to Cyrodiil to get repeatedly wrecked all in the name of trying to do my part and to see how the difference feels...

What I refuse to give them credit for is the fact that they said they are going through with the changes eventually, they just want to confirm their hypothesis, not test it, confirm it. It won't matter if these changes actually make lag worse, they are still planning to make them eventually.

Blackout341

Adding a cooldown to all the AOE would butcher the gameplay. I don't get why they would think modifying the gameplay rather then upgrading the servers is a good solution..

I didn't have the chance to try Cyrodiil yet so I have no idea how many players are in there usually. But IMO, they should either upgrade the servers or try to add layers (i.e. max 50 or 100 players per layer/instance at a time) to this open world pvp zone.

Blizzard went with the layer system for World or Warcraft to reduce the max number of players in the zones with multiple instances and it did help with the performance.

The gameplay isn't the problem, Zos's servers/hardware is.

Firstmep

Athyrium93 wrote: »

I'll give them credit for trying something new, I'll even take my poor Magplar Healer down to Cyrodiil to get repeatedly wrecked all in the name of trying to do my part and to see how the difference feels...

What I refuse to give them credit for is the fact that they said they are going through with the changes eventually, they just want to confirm their hypothesis, not test it, confirm it. It won't matter if these changes actually make lag worse, they are still planning to make them eventually.

I'm not looking forward to any of their so called solutions, and they will have to remake some classes like Templar from pretty much ground up if they do.

Sanctum74

Jeremy wrote: »

Scion_of_Yggdrasil wrote: »

This is what happens when you constantly listen to the players who complain about "potato combat." You cannot realistically expect performance to hold up when you constantly want the pace of combat to continue to speed up. ESO combat doesn't need to be slow, but it doesn't need to be 100mph either. If you want that kind of experience, play a different game.

Unpopular Opinions:

• Animation cancelling should have been nipped in the bud. It was an accidental discovery, turned exploit. Then more balancing took place to account for the upped performance while using this exploit... seems backwards to me.
• Running out of stamina or magicka is supposed to happen... Its why TES has chosen the unique approach of having resources instead of cool downs. Having a META build with amazing sustain is part of the problem. There are supposed to be lulls in combat where you have to take a second to regen.

Im curious about what these tests discover, but am worried about what the official change might be. I am very much against cool downs, but do believe there are acceptable exceptions. I currently have 4 AOE skills barred... do I spam them though? No. Guess we will see what happens!

Slowing the combat down some would also narrow the skill gap between high APM (actions per minute) players and low APM players - which was something they said they were interested in addressing. So that could be part of the reasoning behind these changes.

Most high apm players play single target builds which are not affected by the aoe change so if anything its just going to make the skill gap larger imo.