About ultimate costs..

kalunte

It feels to me that ultimate costs dot fit any balance for now neither in terms of cost/dmg ratio or cost/utility.

of course some are cheeper than others, but when you take a quick look at them it's so random that it cant have been oversight yet.

maybe the time as come to check that?

i'm asking those question because i think that the next arena to come could alter them ultimate now that each basic weapon skill have had its own arena weapon, and before thinking of adding a weapon altering ultimate, it could be interesting to finally have a look at them ultimate. by that i dont mean puting some freaking hated castime on them but yeah, a fair one for once..

Taleof2Cities

“Balance” is different for each and every one of the 3 million active players in ESO, @kalunte.

Not everyone is going to agree ... especially when different players play different kinds of content.

ZOS has the task of balancing the game across all playstyles and content types. It’s an enormous task that they do a decent job with.

I noticed you stayed away from discussing specific ultimate abilities, @kalunte. You might get a healthier discussion if you can relay what you think is lacking in specific ultimate abilities.

kalunte

since i'm a bow/bow pve nightblade or a bow/2h pvp nightblade using procsets (i've always been using them but now they are supposed to be meta) i dont think i could obtain anyone's agreement if trying to go for specific ultimate.

What i can tell you is that even when checking a simple thing like dmg/ultimate cost on single target the disparity is somehow laughable. varying between 198 to 329 (that's more than 50%) regardless if they are /chaneled/casted (therefor not block-castable) single target, aoe, melee or range, and unlike all non-ultimate skills the melee ones are not necessarly the one getting the best ratio. there is an absolute blindness when it comes to ultimates compared to non-ultimate skills where side effects are somehow taken into consideration so that utility skills do less dmg for exemple, or melee does slightly more dmg and so on.

put aside shalks and blastbones for any decent comparison tho

kalunte

also by "balance" i meant a "fair mathematical threatment considering damage done at least"

MrBrownstone

Ultimates have many more variables than damage alone.

lolo_01b16_ESO

Yeah, would be nice to see a buff to some less used ultimates. Mainly defensive ones like veil of blades, nova, remembrence, life giver.

kalunte

MrBrownstone wrote: »

Ultimates have many more variables than damage alone.

this is why i put some "at least" at the end of my sentence ^^

like i said, for non-ultimate skills, the fact that they are giving buffs, doing dmg, being single target or aoe, being range or melee, over time or direct, everything is somehow monitored with some cost/range/dmg/healing output . ultimates arent, at all.

YandereGirlfriend

People seem to be wanting to nit-pick you, OP, but you're totally right.

Especially with the recent changes to the m/M Buffs (e.g. mainly nerfs as far as class ultimates go) the costs are sideways for a bunch of ultimates.

As an unrelated aside though, why is it 2020 and we still don't have an Undaunted ultimate yet?!

kalunte

@YandereGirlfriend good question.. they are just saving room for improvment, always

Finedaible

Yeah, I tried pointing this out on the PTS forum but they went through with the half-assed Major/Minor rework without buffing the affected Ultimates accordingly. Some skills and ultimates affected by the nerfs should receive at the very least an increase in buff/debuff duration. Looking at you, Reaper's Mark, with your useless 5s major berserk for 10% dmg after killing a target :P Slimecraw is also now under-budgeted and they changed every other set EXCEPT Slimecraw for no apparent reason. This is what you get when you try to standardized stuff which can't be standardized.