The Gold Road Chapter – which includes the Scribing system – and Update 42 is now available to test on the PTS! You can read the latest patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/656454/
Maintenance for the week of April 22:
• [COMPLETE] PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 22, 4:00AM EDT (08:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 24, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 24, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 22, 4:00AM EDT (08:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 24, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 24, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
please revert heals being group only in pvp (WE DID IT! its being rolled back!)
-
robertthebard✭✭✭✭✭robertthebard wrote: »It's not like anyone is locked out from solo work, just from healing from outside a group, maybe buffs work the same way?
Healers are literally locked out from solo work. And yes, that includes buffing randoms.Goregrinder wrote: »So you don't want to join a group? Awesome, no worries do your thang bro!
How do solo healers "do [their] thang", bro, if they don't join a group? Their """"thang"""" is healing and buffing their alliance. They can't do that if they don't join a group now.
By joining a group in their alliance, maybe?0 -
Sgrug✭✭✭✭✭robertthebard wrote: »robertthebard wrote: »It's not like anyone is locked out from solo work, just from healing from outside a group, maybe buffs work the same way?
Healers are literally locked out from solo work. And yes, that includes buffing randoms.Goregrinder wrote: »So you don't want to join a group? Awesome, no worries do your thang bro!
How do solo healers "do [their] thang", bro, if they don't join a group? Their """"thang"""" is healing and buffing their alliance. They can't do that if they don't join a group now.
By joining a group in their alliance, maybe?
Then why can DPS help their alliance, including those they are not grouped with? Should not players be locked from also DPSing enemy encounters then if the enemy is already engaged with a non grouped alliance member?Edited by Sgrug on January 22, 2021 1:48AM4 -
robertthebard✭✭✭✭✭robertthebard wrote: »robertthebard wrote: »It's not like anyone is locked out from solo work, just from healing from outside a group, maybe buffs work the same way?
Healers are literally locked out from solo work. And yes, that includes buffing randoms.Goregrinder wrote: »So you don't want to join a group? Awesome, no worries do your thang bro!
How do solo healers "do [their] thang", bro, if they don't join a group? Their """"thang"""" is healing and buffing their alliance. They can't do that if they don't join a group now.
By joining a group in their alliance, maybe?
Then why can DPS help their alliance, including those they are not grouped with? Should not players be locked from also DPSing enemy encounters then if the enemy is already engaged with a non grouped alliance member?
Why? The issue here is "but I can't heal other players if I'm not grouped with them", not "but I can't DPS on an objective if I'm not grouped with them". It's nice that you have to go to absurd lengths to try to make a point, but it's not all that convincing.
Hey, maybe they could do what some Neverwinter Nights servers used to do, and put all players into groups when they log in. If you drop the group for any reason, you're booted from the zone. They could even apply the same rules they use for PvE in that case, where one is locked out of participation at all for x amount of time.
Alternatively, players can just play the way they want, with the caveat that if your intention is to be a healer you're going to need to be in a group. Nothing stopping that solo healer from DPSing on an objective outside of the group.0 -
eso_lags✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Joy_Division wrote: »
Im not implying you've said these things, maybe you have or havent i really dont know, but the point is that some of these things are valid arguments that people love to make about solo players, or people who complain about a certain change. So arent people choosing to not group putting themselves at an unnecessary disadvantage?
Well, you are right in that you don;t really know anything about me since you assume I have disdain for solo players or feel I HAVE to go chase three people around a tower.
I didn't chase people around resource towers, but what I did do a lot in the open environment that is Cyrodiil was get into a spontaneous fight at some random place on the map against say 3 grouped players with say 2 other ungrouped players. That should and used to be an honest competition in which everyone played by the same rules. Now, that's not the case and the 3 ungrouped players have to engage the fight with a hand tied behind their back or analogous to playing a game of chess spotting a piece. That is what is most frustrating to me personally. I do have a self heal, I do know how to play, I can accept losing to a more experienced player. It absolutely sucks that fight is now dictated more by the different rules-sets ZOS has in place rather than player skill. Even the people who are grouped should look with disdain at such circumstances since they are being "carried," to use a term that is brandied about a lot here, especially if they have the slightest bit of competitive drive. I don't think that you feeling that you are getting trolled by high health healers is an acceptable justification for robbing the spontaneous and impromptu competitive aspects that emerge in an open world environment.
The other thing I enjoyed most about Cyrodiil is defending castles. Everyone in the castle is on my team and I am dependent on them to win, not just the people I am grouped with. We win/lose together and the Alliance war keeps track of the entire result, not just the actions of separate groups. This is an Alliance War with Alliance objectives; not an instanced Battleground arena that is disconnected from the rest of the campaign. We need brave souls to get off the roof spamming light attacks and actually contest the flags in the face of ridiculously strong siege and multiple groups of enemy players charging in. Those brave souls can't possibly stand up against an Alliance of enemies just relying on the few healers that might happen to be in their group. The entire keep's defenses need to be directed at the critical spot and that is now not possible, but somehow the entire attackers' offensive skills can be. Once again, a key component of Alliance competition is being thrown out the window.
So, no, I don't have disdain for solo players. I'm just kind of funny that when I play a game or engage in competition, I have the expectation that the rules will be the same for everyone, regardless of their preferences and how they choose to play said game. I also expect that in a game that is simulating a military conflict, that players who are supposedly on my Alliance and whose actions contribute directly to whether or not I win or lose, that we would not be faced in an analogous scenario to say a British medic during D-Day who would tell his American "ally," "Sorry ol' chap, it seems my medical kit isn't able to tend to your wounds."
Well, you are right in that you don;t really know anything about me since you assume I have disdain for solo players or feel I HAVE to go chase three people around a tower.
The reason I said HAVE to was because of this statement. No is forcing anyone to go into a tower and chase 3 "tower humpers". Like for example I fight people in a tower who will die and relentlessly come back even though they are pretty much getting farmed. Its the same idea with bigger groups of people farming even bigger groups in towers. No one is forcing you to go in. Its not a keep, its a resource, yet that seems to be where large groups of randoms get farmed daily.
Also I figured you have disdain for solo players, or small scale players, since you used the phrase "tower ***" which implies you mean people kiting around towers. You need to kite most of the time if you are going to fight outnumbered. Not everyone can face tank 5 people and come out on top.Not to mention it is unreasonable to expect and demand that in order for players not to suffer from an artificial debuff before engaging 3 tower humpers, people have to all gather at a designated spot by the resource and go through the process of grouping each other (we won't even get into sorting out roles, coordinating sets/skills, having someone step up and host a discord) while the three ulti bomb them. It's often not practical because of the open world nature of Cyrodiil and thus hardly a justification why players deserve to play under a disadvantageous ruleset.
That should and used to be an honest competition in which everyone played by the same rules. Now, that's not the case and the 3 ungrouped players have to engage the fight with a hand tied behind their back or analogous to playing a game of chess spotting a piece.
But everyone has the opportunity to play by the same rules! Nothing is holding them back from grouping up. The only thing I can now think of is something someone else mentioned, that more healers are unable to find groups because so many healers are lfg. But even then I find it hard to believe that people cant start a group and fill it pretty easily. And maybe there should be a way to heal other players with a single target heal, im not against that.
That is what is most frustrating to me personally. I do have a self heal, I do know how to play, I can accept losing to a more experienced player. It absolutely sucks that fight is now dictated more by the different rules-sets ZOS has in place rather than player skill. Even the people who are grouped should look with disdain at such circumstances since they are being "carried," to use a term that is brandied about a lot here, especially if they have the slightest bit of competitive drive. I don't think that you feeling that you are getting trolled by high health healers is an acceptable justification for robbing the spontaneous and impromptu competitive aspects that emerge in an open world environment.
Look im not saying because I have to deal with unkillable healers, carrying garbage players, that zos should change the way the game works. Im not someone who HAS to do something in this game. I dont HAVE to chase people i know i cant kill. If i know i cant kill a 40k health magplar carrying a group of bots ill just leave. But I am saying if something is broken then you find a better way.
I think healing is pretty broken in this game, and not just healing others. I dont believe werewolves should be damn near unkillable while also doing a *** ton of damage. I dont believe healers should be able to build like tanks and also infinitely sustain unless they have a good amount of people on them. The healing in this game combined with the resistances, sustain, and damage mitigation you can stack, and sometimes even damage, is ridiculous. Simply ridiculous.
You wanna talk about skill and competition? This game has changed so much over the years and added so many things that carry bad players, and removed so much skill and competition. *** the performance alone makes it so non competitive. But thats the direction zos went. Tell me how earthgore, at its best, encouraged competition. Because imo it encouraged brainless gameplay. And theres plenty more stuff like it.
All im saying is I agree with them trying to make things better and i dont think this is an awful way to do it because people have the opportunity to group up. But maybe there is a better way, im not opposed to anything thats an improvement.
Let me put it like this, people have always gotten farmed by better players in this game. I dont see any difference between a group of 24 random players getting farmed on a resource a year ago vs a group of 24 random, or even 2 large groups, of players getting farmed on a resource now. Sure they stood a better chance a year ago when random healers could heal them but they are still going to get farmed.
We just play differently and will never agree. I cant fathom someone seeing "competition" as banging your head against the wall until more numbers show up so you can outnumber the other group, and heal your group of randoms to victory. Because thats what this sounds like to me.
Opposed to this scenario, you see a group in a tower that everyone wants to kill. You all go up to kill them and get destroyed. You respwan at your keep and go back towards the resource and start grouping up. You form some kind of strategy to take them down. And you probably still get wiped but at least you tried.
But after reading more posts I understand more about how this has messed with some peoples play styles. I understand being a solo healer isnt really an option anymore. I understand defending a keep against a coordinated group is a much bigger task today, as a bunch of randoms trying to defend, then it was a year ago (although i do see large groups of randoms still do this everyday). And so I feel for those people. Like I said before maybe zos will change things so that healers can still have an option to heal random single targets instead of the ridiculous mass aoe spamming that went on, and goes on but to a lesser extent, in cyrodil every day. Im not against that.
So, no, I don't have disdain for solo players. I'm just kind of funny that when I play a game or engage in competition, I have the expectation that the rules will be the same for everyone, regardless of their preferences and how they choose to play said game. I also expect that in a game that is simulating a military conflict, that players who are supposedly on my Alliance and whose actions contribute directly to whether or not I win or lose, that we would not be faced in an analogous scenario to say a British medic during D-Day who would tell his American "ally," "Sorry ol' chap, it seems my medical kit isn't able to tend to your wounds
Again we will never agree here. We will never agree about what real competition is or what "everyone playing by the same rules" is. Or what skill is, apparently. Because skill still matters in eso in 2021, but not like it used to. Not even close.
As I see it everyone has the same options to do whatever they want in this game or in cyrodil. Its up to them. I choose to play solo so when I get chased down by 30 people and relentlessly bagged for 10 minutes, what can I say? It is what it is. If you choose to not play in a group and go try to fight a ball group in a tower, with a bunch of randoms, well idk what you expect.1 -
Jaraal✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Goregrinder wrote: »
So you're saying everybody needs to grab a bow or a staff and stand in two lines 20 meters apart and go "pew pew pew" until there's only one person left standing?
RIP Bosmer Nation. 4/4/14 - 2/25/19.2 -
ExistingRug61✭✭✭✭Goregrinder wrote: »ExistingRug61 wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »ExistingRug61 wrote: »
@Goregrinder I don't necessarily disagree with your premise, ie: "damage being a higher priority than healing".Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »none of these changes make sense to me.... but I typically only play PVP healer in SUB50 non-vet.
Seems like *** changes. Who's at the helm for these changes now?
The changes already happened a while ago. Like 2 patches ago now I think yeah?
yeah I'm only recently back after long hiatus. Hence i'm all for reverting them.
Ah gotcha, yeah it took some of us a bit to adapt to the new flow of combat but I'm personally digging the group size limit change and the group requirement for AoE heals. That means there is a hard limit to how many AoE heals can actually hit a single player, your own plus up to 11 other player's AoE heals, nothing more.
when they make a similar limit to block AOE dps to a single group call me.....Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »none of these changes make sense to me.... but I typically only play PVP healer in SUB50 non-vet.
Seems like *** changes. Who's at the helm for these changes now?
The changes already happened a while ago. Like 2 patches ago now I think yeah?
yeah I'm only recently back after long hiatus. Hence i'm all for reverting them.
Ah gotcha, yeah it took some of us a bit to adapt to the new flow of combat but I'm personally digging the group size limit change and the group requirement for AoE heals. That means there is a hard limit to how many AoE heals can actually hit a single player, your own plus up to 11 other player's AoE heals, nothing more.
when they make a similar limit to block AOE dps to a single group call me.....
I don't really have to call you, AoE healing is already limited to a group of 12....as it should be, so I am already good to go.
not so fast.... AOE is limited to 12, but not limited to "group" right? I mean if 32 singletons run through a gate and you AOE DPS skill then 12 will be hit right? So how does that work with AOE heals?
The point is you can't heal randoms, but you can AOE DPS them (up to 12).
Yes, exactly. Healing and dealing damage shouldn't be balanced equal to each other like you are proposing they should, is my point. Players being able to deal damage to other players should be of the highest priority, with healing/survivability falling somewhere underneath. You're saying they should share the highest priority equally, I am saying they should not.....with damage being a higher priority than healing. Which means being able to cast AoE damage spells and hit more than 12 other targets, but only being able to heal those in your group is more balanced than treating them equally.
If players will each other too fast, what are you left with? You're still left with Player Versus Player, with players able to kill other players.
But if players can out heal each other's damage indefinitely, what do you have? If no one is actually dying, it's not actually Player Vs Player...it's just player's casting glowing lights together at the same time for an hour...literally nothing else.
But,
The change to heals only affecting groups only makes a difference to that equation in the case where you have more players on each side than can fit in one group, or if players aren't grouped.
In all other cases, the healing restriction change hasn't addressed your point at all, ie:
1 X-person group vs another X-person ball group
1v1
etc
In all of these cases, the balance of damage vs healing hasn't been changed at all.
So if your point is that we need to shift the balance between damage and healing back in favour of damage, then this change isn't really useful is it? We still have the same issue with a potential stalemate in a 1v1, with one players damage unable to overcome the others self heals. Or an organised group unable to overcome another organised group's heals. Or an ungrouped group of players unable to overcome an actual grouped group's heals (but strangely not the reverse).
Shouldn't addressing this issue you raise point mean having a look at the relative power of all healing abilities (and/or modifiers). Otherwise it's just arbitrarily imposing the disadvantage on some players who choose to play a certain way, while others are unaffected.
With heals being restricted to group members only, and a group size now consisting of only 12 players now....that means instead of 30 or 40 players being able to all heal each other, now only up to 12 players can heal each other in Cyrodiil, and they all have to be grouped....no more out of group dumbfire heals. That means less potential heals per player, which means more potential incoming damage per player, which means the likely hood of players dying increased rather than decreased, which is good. Are you saying that's not actually the case?
No, I don't disagree that what you say is correct - it has reduced the healing available in that situation, and that it means players may die more easily. In that situation. (30 or 40 players)
Rather, what I am saying is that in almost any other situation, nothing has changed.
ie:
if you only have one 12 person group fighting another 12 person group. No change, same amount of healing as before
if you have a 1v1. No change, same amount of healing as before.
So if your premise is that we need more damage vs healing, why don't we ALSO need it in these scenarios?
In which case, shouldn't you be advocating for a change that affects everyone, rather than just an arbitrary set of players who happen to play a certain way?
So if in every other situation nothing has changed, but in one situation something has changed, then I see that at least progress is being made. Baby steps is better than no steps at all.
Yeah I get that. I guess my preference for these global style changes, if they are to be made in baby steps (ie: small changes) is that they are small in the context of the effect, not the the number of players affected, ie: a smallish change that applies relatively consistently across the players, rather than a dramatic change that only affects a subset of players. Although its likely I'm a bit bias as in this instance I fall into the subset of players who feel negatively affected.
And then its unsurprising that in the latter case there is quite a dramatic response from those players who have been affected (case in point this thread and all the similar ones) especially when they feel that no-one else has been affected. This also makes it doubly galling when the unaffected players come in and give suggestions that don't actually address the affected player's playstyles, or things like being told to "adapt" by players who haven't actually had to do that themselves as they themselves are unaffected or benefit.
Also, if we were to assume that this was a baby step in the direction of changing the amount of damage vs healing across the board, I'm not sure where they can go with this sort of change? What could the next one be? I don't see how this change could be expanded/modified to change the other situations, short of either reducing the group size even further (which would come with even more pushback I believe) or come up with something totally different.Edited by ExistingRug61 on January 22, 2021 2:49AM2 -
VaranisArano✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Goregrinder wrote: »ExistingRug61 wrote: »
@Goregrinder I don't necessarily disagree with your premise, ie: "damage being a higher priority than healing".Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »none of these changes make sense to me.... but I typically only play PVP healer in SUB50 non-vet.
Seems like *** changes. Who's at the helm for these changes now?
The changes already happened a while ago. Like 2 patches ago now I think yeah?
yeah I'm only recently back after long hiatus. Hence i'm all for reverting them.
Ah gotcha, yeah it took some of us a bit to adapt to the new flow of combat but I'm personally digging the group size limit change and the group requirement for AoE heals. That means there is a hard limit to how many AoE heals can actually hit a single player, your own plus up to 11 other player's AoE heals, nothing more.
when they make a similar limit to block AOE dps to a single group call me.....Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »none of these changes make sense to me.... but I typically only play PVP healer in SUB50 non-vet.
Seems like *** changes. Who's at the helm for these changes now?
The changes already happened a while ago. Like 2 patches ago now I think yeah?
yeah I'm only recently back after long hiatus. Hence i'm all for reverting them.
Ah gotcha, yeah it took some of us a bit to adapt to the new flow of combat but I'm personally digging the group size limit change and the group requirement for AoE heals. That means there is a hard limit to how many AoE heals can actually hit a single player, your own plus up to 11 other player's AoE heals, nothing more.
when they make a similar limit to block AOE dps to a single group call me.....
I don't really have to call you, AoE healing is already limited to a group of 12....as it should be, so I am already good to go.
not so fast.... AOE is limited to 12, but not limited to "group" right? I mean if 32 singletons run through a gate and you AOE DPS skill then 12 will be hit right? So how does that work with AOE heals?
The point is you can't heal randoms, but you can AOE DPS them (up to 12).
Yes, exactly. Healing and dealing damage shouldn't be balanced equal to each other like you are proposing they should, is my point. Players being able to deal damage to other players should be of the highest priority, with healing/survivability falling somewhere underneath. You're saying they should share the highest priority equally, I am saying they should not.....with damage being a higher priority than healing. Which means being able to cast AoE damage spells and hit more than 12 other targets, but only being able to heal those in your group is more balanced than treating them equally.
If players will each other too fast, what are you left with? You're still left with Player Versus Player, with players able to kill other players.
But if players can out heal each other's damage indefinitely, what do you have? If no one is actually dying, it's not actually Player Vs Player...it's just player's casting glowing lights together at the same time for an hour...literally nothing else.
But,
The change to heals only affecting groups only makes a difference to that equation in the case where you have more players on each side than can fit in one group, or if players aren't grouped.
In all other cases, the healing restriction change hasn't addressed your point at all, ie:
1 X-person group vs another X-person ball group
1v1
etc
In all of these cases, the balance of damage vs healing hasn't been changed at all.
So if your point is that we need to shift the balance between damage and healing back in favour of damage, then this change isn't really useful is it? We still have the same issue with a potential stalemate in a 1v1, with one players damage unable to overcome the others self heals. Or an organised group unable to overcome another organised group's heals. Or an ungrouped group of players unable to overcome an actual grouped group's heals (but strangely not the reverse).
Shouldn't addressing this issue you raise point mean having a look at the relative power of all healing abilities (and/or modifiers). Otherwise it's just arbitrarily imposing the disadvantage on some players who choose to play a certain way, while others are unaffected.
With heals being restricted to group members only, and a group size now consisting of only 12 players now....that means instead of 30 or 40 players being able to all heal each other, now only up to 12 players can heal each other in Cyrodiil, and they all have to be grouped....no more out of group dumbfire heals. That means less potential heals per player, which means more potential incoming damage per player, which means the likely hood of players dying increased rather than decreased, which is good. Are you saying that's not actually the case?
In actual practice, the only people for whom that's true are PUGs.
Ball groups, who ran in 12-player groups and who's dedicated healers pump out a ton more healing than any PUG or "solo" healer, were hardly impacted. (Source: I've done all three and nothing matches the healspam my dedicated healer can pump out from the protection of a coordinated group with stacked support sets. PUGs scatter and my "solo" healer has to play defensively.)
Result?
Ball groups hardly lost any healing and definitely lost no damage. Purely in terms of healing and buffs, they are as hard to kill than ever. As we've seen, they are not more likely to die now.
Their PUG opponents, on the other hand, lost a lot of healing from players not in their group. As you say, this increases their likelihood of dying, something we've seen as they get farmed worse than ever by ball groups whose healing wasn't touched.
Have we hit the point in the argument where PUGs are the true scourge of Cyrodiil yet?
I can only chalk this up to the difference between organized small scale and organized guild raids. As a member of an organized guild raid, I watch us slaughter PUGs and think "We didn't need a leg up against PUGs, ZOS." Whereas I assume that certain small scalers are thinking, "ZOS, we'll take every advantage we can get against that horde of PUGs!"8 -
Goregrinder✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭VaranisArano wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »ExistingRug61 wrote: »
@Goregrinder I don't necessarily disagree with your premise, ie: "damage being a higher priority than healing".Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »none of these changes make sense to me.... but I typically only play PVP healer in SUB50 non-vet.
Seems like *** changes. Who's at the helm for these changes now?
The changes already happened a while ago. Like 2 patches ago now I think yeah?
yeah I'm only recently back after long hiatus. Hence i'm all for reverting them.
Ah gotcha, yeah it took some of us a bit to adapt to the new flow of combat but I'm personally digging the group size limit change and the group requirement for AoE heals. That means there is a hard limit to how many AoE heals can actually hit a single player, your own plus up to 11 other player's AoE heals, nothing more.
when they make a similar limit to block AOE dps to a single group call me.....Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »none of these changes make sense to me.... but I typically only play PVP healer in SUB50 non-vet.
Seems like *** changes. Who's at the helm for these changes now?
The changes already happened a while ago. Like 2 patches ago now I think yeah?
yeah I'm only recently back after long hiatus. Hence i'm all for reverting them.
Ah gotcha, yeah it took some of us a bit to adapt to the new flow of combat but I'm personally digging the group size limit change and the group requirement for AoE heals. That means there is a hard limit to how many AoE heals can actually hit a single player, your own plus up to 11 other player's AoE heals, nothing more.
when they make a similar limit to block AOE dps to a single group call me.....
I don't really have to call you, AoE healing is already limited to a group of 12....as it should be, so I am already good to go.
not so fast.... AOE is limited to 12, but not limited to "group" right? I mean if 32 singletons run through a gate and you AOE DPS skill then 12 will be hit right? So how does that work with AOE heals?
The point is you can't heal randoms, but you can AOE DPS them (up to 12).
Yes, exactly. Healing and dealing damage shouldn't be balanced equal to each other like you are proposing they should, is my point. Players being able to deal damage to other players should be of the highest priority, with healing/survivability falling somewhere underneath. You're saying they should share the highest priority equally, I am saying they should not.....with damage being a higher priority than healing. Which means being able to cast AoE damage spells and hit more than 12 other targets, but only being able to heal those in your group is more balanced than treating them equally.
If players will each other too fast, what are you left with? You're still left with Player Versus Player, with players able to kill other players.
But if players can out heal each other's damage indefinitely, what do you have? If no one is actually dying, it's not actually Player Vs Player...it's just player's casting glowing lights together at the same time for an hour...literally nothing else.
But,
The change to heals only affecting groups only makes a difference to that equation in the case where you have more players on each side than can fit in one group, or if players aren't grouped.
In all other cases, the healing restriction change hasn't addressed your point at all, ie:
1 X-person group vs another X-person ball group
1v1
etc
In all of these cases, the balance of damage vs healing hasn't been changed at all.
So if your point is that we need to shift the balance between damage and healing back in favour of damage, then this change isn't really useful is it? We still have the same issue with a potential stalemate in a 1v1, with one players damage unable to overcome the others self heals. Or an organised group unable to overcome another organised group's heals. Or an ungrouped group of players unable to overcome an actual grouped group's heals (but strangely not the reverse).
Shouldn't addressing this issue you raise point mean having a look at the relative power of all healing abilities (and/or modifiers). Otherwise it's just arbitrarily imposing the disadvantage on some players who choose to play a certain way, while others are unaffected.
With heals being restricted to group members only, and a group size now consisting of only 12 players now....that means instead of 30 or 40 players being able to all heal each other, now only up to 12 players can heal each other in Cyrodiil, and they all have to be grouped....no more out of group dumbfire heals. That means less potential heals per player, which means more potential incoming damage per player, which means the likely hood of players dying increased rather than decreased, which is good. Are you saying that's not actually the case?
In actual practice, the only people for whom that's true are PUGs.
Ball groups, who ran in 12-player groups and who's dedicated healers pump out a ton more healing than any PUG or "solo" healer, were hardly impacted. (Source: I've done all three and nothing matches the healspam my dedicated healer can pump out from the protection of a coordinated group with stacked support sets. PUGs scatter and my "solo" healer has to play defensively.)
Result?
Ball groups hardly lost any healing and definitely lost no damage. Purely in terms of healing and buffs, they are as hard to kill than ever. As we've seen, they are not more likely to die now.
Their PUG opponents, on the other hand, lost a lot of healing from players not in their group. As you say, this increases their likelihood of dying, something we've seen as they get farmed worse than ever by ball groups whose healing wasn't touched.
Have we hit the point in the argument where PUGs are the true scourge of Cyrodiil yet?
I can only chalk this up to the difference between organized small scale and organized guild raids. As a member of an organized guild raid, I watch us slaughter PUGs and think "We didn't need a leg up against PUGs, ZOS." Whereas I assume that certain small scalers are thinking, "ZOS, we'll take every advantage we can get against that horde of PUGs!"
How much healing they lost doesn't concern me that much, just that they in fact lost some healing, which is progress. Damage staying the same with the loss of some healing, means players can die faster which is also good. Organized groups always had an advantage over Pugs, and they always will. That's the nature of a well oiled machine vs a duct tape and glued together contraption.
As long as healing is going towards the right direction (being reduced), or at least the required effort in order to heal the same amount is being increased, then there is hope for open world PVP after all....7 years later.1 -
VaranisArano✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭roberthebard, Cyrodiil isn't a PVE dungeon where you can easily slap on a groupfinder.
1. There's no "normal" mode you can pick when you want an easy run or figure you can carry your teammates.
2. There's no 15-minute timeout when you leave. There's a queue that's based on how many players are in Cyrodiil. Once the population locks, you can't join until others leave. At primetime, think half-hour to hour long waits to rejoin Cyrodiil.
3. You don't get ported into the same instanced dungeon with your team. In Cyrodiil, you have to transit to the nearest connected keep and then ride to join them. Better hope you don't get repeatedly ganked on the way.
4. There's no guidance on roles, so you might well not have a single healer on a 12-person team.
5. There's no vote kick feature. You stay in group at the sufferance of your Crown. If they drop you because you crashed, you were too slow, or you made too many mistakes, you get kicked instantly. (This is one reason there's no penalty for leaving group in Cyrodiil.)
Finally, how do we know that Cyrodiil groupfinder doesn't work?
We had one.
ZOS removed it when they did the Activity Finder rework because it was rarely used.
I suggest you take off the PVE lenses and look at Cyrodiil for what it is.5 -
VaranisArano✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Goregrinder wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »ExistingRug61 wrote: »
@Goregrinder I don't necessarily disagree with your premise, ie: "damage being a higher priority than healing".Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »none of these changes make sense to me.... but I typically only play PVP healer in SUB50 non-vet.
Seems like *** changes. Who's at the helm for these changes now?
The changes already happened a while ago. Like 2 patches ago now I think yeah?
yeah I'm only recently back after long hiatus. Hence i'm all for reverting them.
Ah gotcha, yeah it took some of us a bit to adapt to the new flow of combat but I'm personally digging the group size limit change and the group requirement for AoE heals. That means there is a hard limit to how many AoE heals can actually hit a single player, your own plus up to 11 other player's AoE heals, nothing more.
when they make a similar limit to block AOE dps to a single group call me.....Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »none of these changes make sense to me.... but I typically only play PVP healer in SUB50 non-vet.
Seems like *** changes. Who's at the helm for these changes now?
The changes already happened a while ago. Like 2 patches ago now I think yeah?
yeah I'm only recently back after long hiatus. Hence i'm all for reverting them.
Ah gotcha, yeah it took some of us a bit to adapt to the new flow of combat but I'm personally digging the group size limit change and the group requirement for AoE heals. That means there is a hard limit to how many AoE heals can actually hit a single player, your own plus up to 11 other player's AoE heals, nothing more.
when they make a similar limit to block AOE dps to a single group call me.....
I don't really have to call you, AoE healing is already limited to a group of 12....as it should be, so I am already good to go.
not so fast.... AOE is limited to 12, but not limited to "group" right? I mean if 32 singletons run through a gate and you AOE DPS skill then 12 will be hit right? So how does that work with AOE heals?
The point is you can't heal randoms, but you can AOE DPS them (up to 12).
Yes, exactly. Healing and dealing damage shouldn't be balanced equal to each other like you are proposing they should, is my point. Players being able to deal damage to other players should be of the highest priority, with healing/survivability falling somewhere underneath. You're saying they should share the highest priority equally, I am saying they should not.....with damage being a higher priority than healing. Which means being able to cast AoE damage spells and hit more than 12 other targets, but only being able to heal those in your group is more balanced than treating them equally.
If players will each other too fast, what are you left with? You're still left with Player Versus Player, with players able to kill other players.
But if players can out heal each other's damage indefinitely, what do you have? If no one is actually dying, it's not actually Player Vs Player...it's just player's casting glowing lights together at the same time for an hour...literally nothing else.
But,
The change to heals only affecting groups only makes a difference to that equation in the case where you have more players on each side than can fit in one group, or if players aren't grouped.
In all other cases, the healing restriction change hasn't addressed your point at all, ie:
1 X-person group vs another X-person ball group
1v1
etc
In all of these cases, the balance of damage vs healing hasn't been changed at all.
So if your point is that we need to shift the balance between damage and healing back in favour of damage, then this change isn't really useful is it? We still have the same issue with a potential stalemate in a 1v1, with one players damage unable to overcome the others self heals. Or an organised group unable to overcome another organised group's heals. Or an ungrouped group of players unable to overcome an actual grouped group's heals (but strangely not the reverse).
Shouldn't addressing this issue you raise point mean having a look at the relative power of all healing abilities (and/or modifiers). Otherwise it's just arbitrarily imposing the disadvantage on some players who choose to play a certain way, while others are unaffected.
With heals being restricted to group members only, and a group size now consisting of only 12 players now....that means instead of 30 or 40 players being able to all heal each other, now only up to 12 players can heal each other in Cyrodiil, and they all have to be grouped....no more out of group dumbfire heals. That means less potential heals per player, which means more potential incoming damage per player, which means the likely hood of players dying increased rather than decreased, which is good. Are you saying that's not actually the case?
In actual practice, the only people for whom that's true are PUGs.
Ball groups, who ran in 12-player groups and who's dedicated healers pump out a ton more healing than any PUG or "solo" healer, were hardly impacted. (Source: I've done all three and nothing matches the healspam my dedicated healer can pump out from the protection of a coordinated group with stacked support sets. PUGs scatter and my "solo" healer has to play defensively.)
Result?
Ball groups hardly lost any healing and definitely lost no damage. Purely in terms of healing and buffs, they are as hard to kill than ever. As we've seen, they are not more likely to die now.
Their PUG opponents, on the other hand, lost a lot of healing from players not in their group. As you say, this increases their likelihood of dying, something we've seen as they get farmed worse than ever by ball groups whose healing wasn't touched.
Have we hit the point in the argument where PUGs are the true scourge of Cyrodiil yet?
I can only chalk this up to the difference between organized small scale and organized guild raids. As a member of an organized guild raid, I watch us slaughter PUGs and think "We didn't need a leg up against PUGs, ZOS." Whereas I assume that certain small scalers are thinking, "ZOS, we'll take every advantage we can get against that horde of PUGs!"
How much healing they lost doesn't concern me that much, just that they in fact lost some healing, which is progress. Damage staying the same with the loss of some healing, means players can die faster which is also good. Organized groups always had an advantage over Pugs, and they always will. That's the nature of a well oiled machine vs a duct tape and glued together contraption.
As long as healing is going towards the right direction (being reduced), or at least the required effort in order to heal the same amount is being increased, then there is hope for open world PVP after all....7 years later.
What I'm getting out of this response to my points is:
A) "ZOS nerfed PUG healing! Yay, progress!!!"
B.) "ZOS didn't nerf ball group healing. Who cares, they will always be awesome."
C) "Ball groups have an easier time slaughtering nerfed PUGs? Who cares, after all, ball groups are always going to be better than PUGs."
Am I wrong?7 -
Goregrinder✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭VaranisArano wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »ExistingRug61 wrote: »
@Goregrinder I don't necessarily disagree with your premise, ie: "damage being a higher priority than healing".Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »none of these changes make sense to me.... but I typically only play PVP healer in SUB50 non-vet.
Seems like *** changes. Who's at the helm for these changes now?
The changes already happened a while ago. Like 2 patches ago now I think yeah?
yeah I'm only recently back after long hiatus. Hence i'm all for reverting them.
Ah gotcha, yeah it took some of us a bit to adapt to the new flow of combat but I'm personally digging the group size limit change and the group requirement for AoE heals. That means there is a hard limit to how many AoE heals can actually hit a single player, your own plus up to 11 other player's AoE heals, nothing more.
when they make a similar limit to block AOE dps to a single group call me.....Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »none of these changes make sense to me.... but I typically only play PVP healer in SUB50 non-vet.
Seems like *** changes. Who's at the helm for these changes now?
The changes already happened a while ago. Like 2 patches ago now I think yeah?
yeah I'm only recently back after long hiatus. Hence i'm all for reverting them.
Ah gotcha, yeah it took some of us a bit to adapt to the new flow of combat but I'm personally digging the group size limit change and the group requirement for AoE heals. That means there is a hard limit to how many AoE heals can actually hit a single player, your own plus up to 11 other player's AoE heals, nothing more.
when they make a similar limit to block AOE dps to a single group call me.....
I don't really have to call you, AoE healing is already limited to a group of 12....as it should be, so I am already good to go.
not so fast.... AOE is limited to 12, but not limited to "group" right? I mean if 32 singletons run through a gate and you AOE DPS skill then 12 will be hit right? So how does that work with AOE heals?
The point is you can't heal randoms, but you can AOE DPS them (up to 12).
Yes, exactly. Healing and dealing damage shouldn't be balanced equal to each other like you are proposing they should, is my point. Players being able to deal damage to other players should be of the highest priority, with healing/survivability falling somewhere underneath. You're saying they should share the highest priority equally, I am saying they should not.....with damage being a higher priority than healing. Which means being able to cast AoE damage spells and hit more than 12 other targets, but only being able to heal those in your group is more balanced than treating them equally.
If players will each other too fast, what are you left with? You're still left with Player Versus Player, with players able to kill other players.
But if players can out heal each other's damage indefinitely, what do you have? If no one is actually dying, it's not actually Player Vs Player...it's just player's casting glowing lights together at the same time for an hour...literally nothing else.
But,
The change to heals only affecting groups only makes a difference to that equation in the case where you have more players on each side than can fit in one group, or if players aren't grouped.
In all other cases, the healing restriction change hasn't addressed your point at all, ie:
1 X-person group vs another X-person ball group
1v1
etc
In all of these cases, the balance of damage vs healing hasn't been changed at all.
So if your point is that we need to shift the balance between damage and healing back in favour of damage, then this change isn't really useful is it? We still have the same issue with a potential stalemate in a 1v1, with one players damage unable to overcome the others self heals. Or an organised group unable to overcome another organised group's heals. Or an ungrouped group of players unable to overcome an actual grouped group's heals (but strangely not the reverse).
Shouldn't addressing this issue you raise point mean having a look at the relative power of all healing abilities (and/or modifiers). Otherwise it's just arbitrarily imposing the disadvantage on some players who choose to play a certain way, while others are unaffected.
With heals being restricted to group members only, and a group size now consisting of only 12 players now....that means instead of 30 or 40 players being able to all heal each other, now only up to 12 players can heal each other in Cyrodiil, and they all have to be grouped....no more out of group dumbfire heals. That means less potential heals per player, which means more potential incoming damage per player, which means the likely hood of players dying increased rather than decreased, which is good. Are you saying that's not actually the case?
In actual practice, the only people for whom that's true are PUGs.
Ball groups, who ran in 12-player groups and who's dedicated healers pump out a ton more healing than any PUG or "solo" healer, were hardly impacted. (Source: I've done all three and nothing matches the healspam my dedicated healer can pump out from the protection of a coordinated group with stacked support sets. PUGs scatter and my "solo" healer has to play defensively.)
Result?
Ball groups hardly lost any healing and definitely lost no damage. Purely in terms of healing and buffs, they are as hard to kill than ever. As we've seen, they are not more likely to die now.
Their PUG opponents, on the other hand, lost a lot of healing from players not in their group. As you say, this increases their likelihood of dying, something we've seen as they get farmed worse than ever by ball groups whose healing wasn't touched.
Have we hit the point in the argument where PUGs are the true scourge of Cyrodiil yet?
I can only chalk this up to the difference between organized small scale and organized guild raids. As a member of an organized guild raid, I watch us slaughter PUGs and think "We didn't need a leg up against PUGs, ZOS." Whereas I assume that certain small scalers are thinking, "ZOS, we'll take every advantage we can get against that horde of PUGs!"
How much healing they lost doesn't concern me that much, just that they in fact lost some healing, which is progress. Damage staying the same with the loss of some healing, means players can die faster which is also good. Organized groups always had an advantage over Pugs, and they always will. That's the nature of a well oiled machine vs a duct tape and glued together contraption.
As long as healing is going towards the right direction (being reduced), or at least the required effort in order to heal the same amount is being increased, then there is hope for open world PVP after all....7 years later.
What I'm getting out of this response to my points is:
A) "ZOS nerfed PUG healing! Yay, progress!!!"
B.) "ZOS didn't nerf ball group healing. Who cares, they will always be awesome."
C) "Ball groups have an easier time slaughtering nerfed PUGs? Who cares, after all, ball groups are always going to be better than PUGs."
Am I wrong?
You're allowed to get whatever you want out of it, and since I'm not you, I can't tell you if you're right or wrong...if that's what you're getting out of it then that's what you're getting out of it. You're the only person who can confirm or deny what you get out of something.
0 -
Jaraal✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭ExistingRug61 wrote: »Yeah I get that. I guess my preference for these global style changes, if they are to be made in baby steps (ie: small changes) is that they are small in the context of the effect, not the the number of players affected, ie: a smallish change that applies relatively consistently across the players, rather than a dramatic change that only affects a subset of players. Although its likely I'm a bit bias as in this instance I fall into the subset of players who feel negatively affected.
And then its unsurprising that in the latter case there is quite a dramatic response from those players who have been affected (case in point this thread and all the similar ones) especially when they feel that no-one else has been affected. This also makes it doubly galling when the unaffected players come in and give suggestions that don't actually address the affected player's playstyles, or things like being told to "adapt" by players who haven't actually had to do that themselves as they themselves are unaffected or benefit.
And isn't it ironic that they keep mentioning this vision of "standardization" and "balance," and then they go and do something like this.
It's balanced to be in an overpowered ball group, so let's get rid of large groups that may have been able to counter them, and let's nerf solo players and especially solo healers, so that they will be even less effective against the elite small groups.
I would have liked to have been a fly on the wall in the developers meetings that resulted in these changes, and see what reasoning led to these particular conclusions.
RIP Bosmer Nation. 4/4/14 - 2/25/19.6 -
Xuhora✭✭✭✭✭The horror, they made something group-centric in an MMO? What were they even thinking? Not to worry though, it's not like I'm one of those people that insists dungeons be made solo-able either, I'd have the same advice for that crowd. In a "PuGs are bad" thread, I suggested the very simple, and logical "don't PuG". Don't have 11 friends, or there aren't enough people in your guilds? Then make a smaller group, and do what you can with that. Are you a true solo player, meaning you're not even in a guild, let alone multiples? Make some friends for when you want to do some group oriented stuff. Reading through here, it's likely you could recruit from the thread. You can definitely recruit from the map.
You see, I feel like encouraging group play in an MMO is a good thing. It's not like anyone is locked out from solo work, just from healing from outside a group, maybe buffs work the same way? So yes, I find this thread hilarious. If a group really needs your heals, they could add you to their party, yes?
encouraging is not equal to forcing, but some one else allready pointed that out for you.
And to add to that even further. the core-concept of any MMO is not the groupplay, its allowing as much interaction between players while not in a group. if that would not be the case, MMOs would feel instanced.
its vital to an MMO that you can see as many other players as possible, so it does not feel empty at any given time. the other vital point of an MMO is that you can interact with other players. be it trading, chatting, healing or damaging them. Groups should be merely a tool to make interactions easier, not a mandatory condition to interact.
with your setentence that encouraging group play is a good thing cyrodill should look like that: If in a group your heals heal for 100% inside of the group, while having a non grouped penalty (50% of the healing) outside of the group with smartheals prioritizing members of the group.
what cyrodill looks like now: if in a group your heals heal for 100% inside of the group, while having a non grouped penalty of 100% with smartheals prioritizing members of the group.
I as healer should be able to interact with every player on my faction, the same as a DPS should be able to interact with every player outside of his faction. but thats not how it works now. healers have their interaction with others artificially hindered with a unsatisfying argument "we liked the behavioral changes".
since you cannot understand our outcry, then try to imagine a szenario where your interactions with others is hindered by just not beeing in a group. and dont come to me and say "its nice that you have to go to absurd lengths to try to make a point" thats exactly what ZOS did to us, and we are trying to argue against that absurd length ZOS went to try to make a point in their argument "we liked the behavioral changes". All you do is underline our point that its absurd to have something like that implemented.
12 -
Raevyness✭✭✭The horror, they made something group-centric in an MMO? What were they even thinking? Not to worry though, it's not like I'm one of those people that insists dungeons be made solo-able either, I'd have the same advice for that crowd. In a "PuGs are bad" thread, I suggested the very simple, and logical "don't PuG". Don't have 11 friends, or there aren't enough people in your guilds? Then make a smaller group, and do what you can with that. Are you a true solo player, meaning you're not even in a guild, let alone multiples? Make some friends for when you want to do some group oriented stuff. Reading through here, it's likely you could recruit from the thread. You can definitely recruit from the map.
You see, I feel like encouraging group play in an MMO is a good thing. It's not like anyone is locked out from solo work, just from healing from outside a group, maybe buffs work the same way? So yes, I find this thread hilarious. If a group really needs your heals, they could add you to their party, yes?
encouraging is not equal to forcing, but some one else allready pointed that out for you.
And to add to that even further. the core-concept of any MMO is not the groupplay, its allowing as much interaction between players while not in a group. if that would not be the case, MMOs would feel instanced.
its vital to an MMO that you can see as many other players as possible, so it does not feel empty at any given time. the other vital point of an MMO is that you can interact with other players. be it trading, chatting, healing or damaging them. Groups should be merely a tool to make interactions easier, not a mandatory condition to interact.
with your setentence that encouraging group play is a good thing cyrodill should look like that: If in a group your heals heal for 100% inside of the group, while having a non grouped penalty (50% of the healing) outside of the group with smartheals prioritizing members of the group.
what cyrodill looks like now: if in a group your heals heal for 100% inside of the group, while having a non grouped penalty of 100% with smartheals prioritizing members of the group.
I as healer should be able to interact with every player on my faction, the same as a DPS should be able to interact with every player outside of his faction. but thats not how it works now. healers have their interaction with others artificially hindered with a unsatisfying argument "we liked the behavioral changes".
since you cannot understand our outcry, then try to imagine a szenario where your interactions with others is hindered by just not beeing in a group. and dont come to me and say "its nice that you have to go to absurd lengths to try to make a point" thats exactly what ZOS did to us, and we are trying to argue against that absurd length ZOS went to try to make a point in their argument "we liked the behavioral changes". All you do is underline our point that its absurd to have something like that implemented.
I still REALLY wanna know what these "behavioral changes" are. We all keep hearing of these 'changes' without ever actually KNOWING what the changes are.
The only change I SEE as a player is pead off healers who a quitting/respecing in PVP. Less cohesion and less community working together. I.E. Big guilds and organized groups still rolling over those learning PVP.
What a HOSTILE environment. Welcome to ESO PVP 2021.
Edited by Raevyness on January 22, 2021 9:59AM12 -
Varana✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Goregrinder wrote: »How much healing they lost doesn't concern me that much, just that they in fact lost some healing, which is progress. Damage staying the same with the loss of some healing, means players can die faster which is also good. Organized groups always had an advantage over Pugs, and they always will. That's the nature of a well oiled machine vs a duct tape and glued together contraption.
As long as healing is going towards the right direction (being reduced), or at least the required effort in order to heal the same amount is being increased, then there is hope for open world PVP after all....7 years later.
It's getting a bit ridiculous.
What this essentially boils down to is "I don't like healing in PvP". If you say so, but if "players die" is PvP, we should also do away with hit points. Every hit a one-shot, players will die in droves!
"I don't care whether this change makes sense or not, as long as healers have it harder!"
If we use this logic for other aspects of the game, the absurdity of it becomes clearer.
Too many people use the dungeon finder so it breaks down.
"As a baby step towards a solution, Nightblades cannot use the dungeon finder any more. Sucks, but we like the behavioural change."
Skills don't fire on time.
"As a baby step towards a solution, the skills of Pact players will be resolved first, then Covenant, then Dominion. We like the behavioural change."
People complain about "fake tanks".
"As a baby step towards a solution, all DKs get 50k health and automatically draw aggro. We like the behavioural change."
And so on.
It's not a solution, a random part of the player base gets effed over, and no reason given why this is seen as a good thing.
But hey, baby steps.9 -
VaranisArano✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Goregrinder wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »ExistingRug61 wrote: »
@Goregrinder I don't necessarily disagree with your premise, ie: "damage being a higher priority than healing".Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »none of these changes make sense to me.... but I typically only play PVP healer in SUB50 non-vet.
Seems like *** changes. Who's at the helm for these changes now?
The changes already happened a while ago. Like 2 patches ago now I think yeah?
yeah I'm only recently back after long hiatus. Hence i'm all for reverting them.
Ah gotcha, yeah it took some of us a bit to adapt to the new flow of combat but I'm personally digging the group size limit change and the group requirement for AoE heals. That means there is a hard limit to how many AoE heals can actually hit a single player, your own plus up to 11 other player's AoE heals, nothing more.
when they make a similar limit to block AOE dps to a single group call me.....Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »Goregrinder wrote: »QuebraRegra wrote: »none of these changes make sense to me.... but I typically only play PVP healer in SUB50 non-vet.
Seems like *** changes. Who's at the helm for these changes now?
The changes already happened a while ago. Like 2 patches ago now I think yeah?
yeah I'm only recently back after long hiatus. Hence i'm all for reverting them.
Ah gotcha, yeah it took some of us a bit to adapt to the new flow of combat but I'm personally digging the group size limit change and the group requirement for AoE heals. That means there is a hard limit to how many AoE heals can actually hit a single player, your own plus up to 11 other player's AoE heals, nothing more.
when they make a similar limit to block AOE dps to a single group call me.....
I don't really have to call you, AoE healing is already limited to a group of 12....as it should be, so I am already good to go.
not so fast.... AOE is limited to 12, but not limited to "group" right? I mean if 32 singletons run through a gate and you AOE DPS skill then 12 will be hit right? So how does that work with AOE heals?
The point is you can't heal randoms, but you can AOE DPS them (up to 12).
Yes, exactly. Healing and dealing damage shouldn't be balanced equal to each other like you are proposing they should, is my point. Players being able to deal damage to other players should be of the highest priority, with healing/survivability falling somewhere underneath. You're saying they should share the highest priority equally, I am saying they should not.....with damage being a higher priority than healing. Which means being able to cast AoE damage spells and hit more than 12 other targets, but only being able to heal those in your group is more balanced than treating them equally.
If players will each other too fast, what are you left with? You're still left with Player Versus Player, with players able to kill other players.
But if players can out heal each other's damage indefinitely, what do you have? If no one is actually dying, it's not actually Player Vs Player...it's just player's casting glowing lights together at the same time for an hour...literally nothing else.
But,
The change to heals only affecting groups only makes a difference to that equation in the case where you have more players on each side than can fit in one group, or if players aren't grouped.
In all other cases, the healing restriction change hasn't addressed your point at all, ie:
1 X-person group vs another X-person ball group
1v1
etc
In all of these cases, the balance of damage vs healing hasn't been changed at all.
So if your point is that we need to shift the balance between damage and healing back in favour of damage, then this change isn't really useful is it? We still have the same issue with a potential stalemate in a 1v1, with one players damage unable to overcome the others self heals. Or an organised group unable to overcome another organised group's heals. Or an ungrouped group of players unable to overcome an actual grouped group's heals (but strangely not the reverse).
Shouldn't addressing this issue you raise point mean having a look at the relative power of all healing abilities (and/or modifiers). Otherwise it's just arbitrarily imposing the disadvantage on some players who choose to play a certain way, while others are unaffected.
With heals being restricted to group members only, and a group size now consisting of only 12 players now....that means instead of 30 or 40 players being able to all heal each other, now only up to 12 players can heal each other in Cyrodiil, and they all have to be grouped....no more out of group dumbfire heals. That means less potential heals per player, which means more potential incoming damage per player, which means the likely hood of players dying increased rather than decreased, which is good. Are you saying that's not actually the case?
In actual practice, the only people for whom that's true are PUGs.
Ball groups, who ran in 12-player groups and who's dedicated healers pump out a ton more healing than any PUG or "solo" healer, were hardly impacted. (Source: I've done all three and nothing matches the healspam my dedicated healer can pump out from the protection of a coordinated group with stacked support sets. PUGs scatter and my "solo" healer has to play defensively.)
Result?
Ball groups hardly lost any healing and definitely lost no damage. Purely in terms of healing and buffs, they are as hard to kill than ever. As we've seen, they are not more likely to die now.
Their PUG opponents, on the other hand, lost a lot of healing from players not in their group. As you say, this increases their likelihood of dying, something we've seen as they get farmed worse than ever by ball groups whose healing wasn't touched.
Have we hit the point in the argument where PUGs are the true scourge of Cyrodiil yet?
I can only chalk this up to the difference between organized small scale and organized guild raids. As a member of an organized guild raid, I watch us slaughter PUGs and think "We didn't need a leg up against PUGs, ZOS." Whereas I assume that certain small scalers are thinking, "ZOS, we'll take every advantage we can get against that horde of PUGs!"
How much healing they lost doesn't concern me that much, just that they in fact lost some healing, which is progress. Damage staying the same with the loss of some healing, means players can die faster which is also good. Organized groups always had an advantage over Pugs, and they always will. That's the nature of a well oiled machine vs a duct tape and glued together contraption.
As long as healing is going towards the right direction (being reduced), or at least the required effort in order to heal the same amount is being increased, then there is hope for open world PVP after all....7 years later.
What I'm getting out of this response to my points is:
A) "ZOS nerfed PUG healing! Yay, progress!!!"
B.) "ZOS didn't nerf ball group healing. Who cares, they will always be awesome."
C) "Ball groups have an easier time slaughtering nerfed PUGs? Who cares, after all, ball groups are always going to be better than PUGs."
Am I wrong?
You're allowed to get whatever you want out of it, and since I'm not you, I can't tell you if you're right or wrong...if that's what you're getting out of it then that's what you're getting out of it. You're the only person who can confirm or deny what you get out of something.
Then let me restate. Is that what you meant?0 -
Reaper_00✭✭✭✭
No. What's really absurd is that you don't see the hypocrisy of what you are writing.robertthebard wrote: »Why? The issue here is "but I can't heal other players if I'm not grouped with them", not "but I can't DPS on an objective if I'm not grouped with them". It's nice that you have to go to absurd lengths to try to make a point, but it's not all that convincing.
You are saying it's fine for one type of player to be forced to play in a group but not for another type. The fact that one is a dps and one is healer is irrelevant in the terms of discussing forced grouping. If you and others are promoting this change as great for encouraging group play, then everyone should be forced into group play as well, so everyone gets to experience the wonders of working as a group.
Sure healing is out of hand, but this should be fixed by balancing healing overall (both self and healer provided) not just sweeping it under the rug like this.
5 -
Agalloch✭✭✭✭✭Cyrodiil is not a battleground map . For this we have battlegrounds. Cyrodiil is for AvA play ..massive warfare...where every player from a faction fight , heal, help for all the faction...not for only 12 people.
Is like in pandemic you could not help others than your family and if your family/friends exceed 12 ppl you cannot help them...
This is awful.
Edited by Agalloch on January 22, 2021 1:45PM9 -
Agalloch✭✭✭✭✭The horror, they made something group-centric in an MMO? What were they even thinking? Not to worry though, it's not like I'm one of those people that insists dungeons be made solo-able either, I'd have the same advice for that crowd. In a "PuGs are bad" thread, I suggested the very simple, and logical "don't PuG". Don't have 11 friends, or there aren't enough people in your guilds? Then make a smaller group, and do what you can with that. Are you a true solo player, meaning you're not even in a guild, let alone multiples? Make some friends for when you want to do some group oriented stuff. Reading through here, it's likely you could recruit from the thread. You can definitely recruit from the map.
You see, I feel like encouraging group play in an MMO is a good thing. It's not like anyone is locked out from solo work, just from healing from outside a group, maybe buffs work the same way? So yes, I find this thread hilarious. If a group really needs your heals, they could add you to their party, yes?
encouraging is not equal to forcing, but some one else allready pointed that out for you.
And to add to that even further. the core-concept of any MMO is not the groupplay, its allowing as much interaction between players while not in a group. if that would not be the case, MMOs would feel instanced.
its vital to an MMO that you can see as many other players as possible, so it does not feel empty at any given time. the other vital point of an MMO is that you can interact with other players. be it trading, chatting, healing or damaging them. Groups should be merely a tool to make interactions easier, not a mandatory condition to interact.
with your setentence that encouraging group play is a good thing cyrodill should look like that: If in a group your heals heal for 100% inside of the group, while having a non grouped penalty (50% of the healing) outside of the group with smartheals prioritizing members of the group.
what cyrodill looks like now: if in a group your heals heal for 100% inside of the group, while having a non grouped penalty of 100% with smartheals prioritizing members of the group.
I as healer should be able to interact with every player on my faction, the same as a DPS should be able to interact with every player outside of his faction. but thats not how it works now. healers have their interaction with others artificially hindered with a unsatisfying argument "we liked the behavioral changes".
since you cannot understand our outcry, then try to imagine a szenario where your interactions with others is hindered by just not beeing in a group. and dont come to me and say "its nice that you have to go to absurd lengths to try to make a point" thats exactly what ZOS did to us, and we are trying to argue against that absurd length ZOS went to try to make a point in their argument "we liked the behavioral changes". All you do is underline our point that its absurd to have something like that implemented.
I still REALLY wanna know what these "behavioral changes" are. We all keep hearing of these 'changes' without ever actually KNOWING what the changes are.
The only change I SEE as a player is pead off healers who a quitting/respecing in PVP. Less cohesion and less community working together. I.E. Big guilds and organized groups still rolling over those learning PVP.
What a HOSTILE environment. Welcome to ESO PVP 2021.
And no answer / update from the devs!4 -
robertthebard✭✭✭✭✭VaranisArano wrote: »roberthebard, Cyrodiil isn't a PVE dungeon where you can easily slap on a groupfinder.
1. There's no "normal" mode you can pick when you want an easy run or figure you can carry your teammates.
2. There's no 15-minute timeout when you leave. There's a queue that's based on how many players are in Cyrodiil. Once the population locks, you can't join until others leave. At primetime, think half-hour to hour long waits to rejoin Cyrodiil.
3. You don't get ported into the same instanced dungeon with your team. In Cyrodiil, you have to transit to the nearest connected keep and then ride to join them. Better hope you don't get repeatedly ganked on the way.
4. There's no guidance on roles, so you might well not have a single healer on a 12-person team.
5. There's no vote kick feature. You stay in group at the sufferance of your Crown. If they drop you because you crashed, you were too slow, or you made too many mistakes, you get kicked instantly. (This is one reason there's no penalty for leaving group in Cyrodiil.)
Finally, how do we know that Cyrodiil groupfinder doesn't work?
We had one.
ZOS removed it when they did the Activity Finder rework because it was rarely used.
I suggest you take off the PVE lenses and look at Cyrodiil for what it is.
Here's the problem, I am. Hey, I could do a hell of a job solo PvPing in Aion, but I didn't show up for sieges solo. I joined the Alliance, or one of them, and did my job. What seems to be the real issue is that I'm not feeling sorry for a support class archetype complaining about not being able to solo. Maybe they're trying to keep them from breaking their arms trying to pat themselves on the back? Maybe they're trying to encourage group play in an MMO, as I said earlier, in regard to that, "the horror", right?
Make your own group? Join an existing group? Spam map chat looking for a group? Adjust your playstyle to continue solo PvP in a group setting? Just as I would recommend in a "PuGs suck thread" or a "dungeons should have a solo mode" thread. The irony of "group content should be group content, except where I don't want it to be", and that's what we're looking at now, since you have to be in a group to heal a group, isn't lost on me, and all the thrashing around looking for reasons that it shouldn't be that way doesn't convince me, it simply amuses me.1 -
Sylosi✭✭✭✭✭I mean I hardly play the PvP in this game because it is low skilled and uncompetitve, thus generally boring unless you have no real interest in decent PvP gameplay, so I guess my view is moot. But this change does nothing to encourage me to play Cyrodil.
It is frankly bizarre in an alleged massively multiplayer game that they actually remove the ability to interact with other players unless you specifically form a group with them, is it an MMORPG or a co-op?
Also I'm not sure why people are so fixated on just the solo aspect, this change effects groups also. E.G - if a group of 3 guys go take a resource, another group of 4 guys from their faction rolls up, then a group of 10 from an opposing faction comes along. Now with this change the 3 + 4 man groups are not only at the disadvantage from having 3 less players than the opposing 10 man group, now they are also at an extra disadvantage that they can't heal guys from the other group.
With design like this you can see why PvP is so "successful" in this game...
Edited by Sylosi on January 22, 2021 5:18PM5 -
Knockmaker✭✭✭✭Let us just not forget that these changes (heals and reduced group sizes) were mainly made to "improve performance."
As I always say, they shouldn't have messed with gameplay mechanics hoping to improve horrible server problems without having a complete, detailed plan and have shared it with the player base. Look, it only got us fighting each other over an unthinked change to gameplay mechanics, straying from the root cause of the problem, which is server performance, and hence these uncalled-for changes.0 -
Xuhora✭✭✭✭✭Knockmaker wrote: »Let us just not forget that these changes (heals and reduced group sizes) were mainly made to "improve performance."
As I always say, they shouldn't have messed with gameplay mechanics hoping to improve horrible server problems without having a complete, detailed plan and have shared it with the player base. Look, it only got us fighting each other over an unthinked change to gameplay mechanics, straying from the root cause of the problem, which is server performance, and hence these uncalled-for changes.
that is false. ZOS themselfs statet that all these test were indeed improving the overall performance, but are on their own to insignificant to justify an implementation solely for the performance sake.
But they did like the "behavioral changes" that came with them, so they implemented the healing and grouping changes.
edit: Quote from Gina Bruno: "In reviewing the data for all the different tests, we did see some marked improvements in performance – on average, there was approximately a 25% reduction in the magnitude of server frame spikes and a slight reduction in the frequency of those spikes. While these improvements look good on a spreadsheet, they do not have a significant enough impact on improving the overall player experience. As a result, we will not be making any major changes at this time.
That said, there were a few elements from the various tests that we’ve decided to enable for both PC and console for the foreseeable future, as we liked the behavioral changes they brought. Starting on Monday, November 9 for consoles and November 16 for PC, we will be limiting group sizes in Cyrodiil to 12 players, and all ally-targeted abilities will only apply to those in your group.
edit 2: and let us just not forget what that means: in ZOS' eyes this changes are not major changes, they are small changes just because they liked something about it and never told us what it is. as I, Raevyness and Varanis stated above and in many other threads, these changes have a major impact and should be regarded as major changes from ZOS' side with an explenation at the very least.
What this means in the grand scheme of things: they very well could launch another testrow with even more restrictions, just to get the performance issues solved, because in their books (and in ours) the performance is not better.Edited by Xuhora on January 22, 2021 3:07PM5 -
Knockmaker✭✭✭✭Knockmaker wrote: »Let us just not forget that these changes (heals and reduced group sizes) were mainly made to "improve performance."
As I always say, they shouldn't have messed with gameplay mechanics hoping to improve horrible server problems without having a complete, detailed plan and have shared it with the player base. Look, it only got us fighting each other over an unthinked change to gameplay mechanics, straying from the root cause of the problem, which is server performance, and hence these uncalled-for changes.
that is false. ZOS themselfs statet that all these test were indeed improving the overall performance, but are on their own to insignificant to justify an implementation solely for the performance sake.
But they did like the "behavioral changes" that came with them, so they implemented the healing and grouping changes.
edit: Quote from Gina Bruno: "In reviewing the data for all the different tests, we did see some marked improvements in performance – on average, there was approximately a 25% reduction in the magnitude of server frame spikes and a slight reduction in the frequency of those spikes. While these improvements look good on a spreadsheet, they do not have a significant enough impact on improving the overall player experience. As a result, we will not be making any major changes at this time.
That said, there were a few elements from the various tests that we’ve decided to enable for both PC and console for the foreseeable future, as we liked the behavioral changes they brought. Starting on Monday, November 9 for consoles and November 16 for PC, we will be limiting group sizes in Cyrodiil to 12 players, and all ally-targeted abilities will only apply to those in your group.
Conclusion? They did not improve the performance, which was the reason they tested them in the first place. They just kept them for behavioral changes like you said (which I believe means more groups scattered around on the map, hence fewer ppl in the same place, which should indirectly help with lag. That's why they keep what those changes are so secret cos if they revealed, that would mean admitting their incompetence and resorting workarounds instead).
So, it isn't false. But, maybe I should have said "initially aimed, but were kept anyway" instead.0 -
Xuhora✭✭✭✭✭yes that phrase would have been better. nontheless i apologize for beeing on needles when it comes to this topic, thus shouting false at the very start of a statement. i just cant get it in my head that there is no further explenation from ZOS' side and that there are actually players that cant wrap their heads arround the problems these changes cause.3
-
Knockmaker✭✭✭✭No need to apologize. As I said, though, this whole thing by zos seems to have been a fiasco and all it has achieved so far is getting us players to fight each other.
I just hope they are seriously considering a true fixes this time, and with a proper roadmap.Edited by Knockmaker on January 22, 2021 3:24PM3 -
Joy_Division✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭robertthebard wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »roberthebard, Cyrodiil isn't a PVE dungeon where you can easily slap on a groupfinder.
1. There's no "normal" mode you can pick when you want an easy run or figure you can carry your teammates.
2. There's no 15-minute timeout when you leave. There's a queue that's based on how many players are in Cyrodiil. Once the population locks, you can't join until others leave. At primetime, think half-hour to hour long waits to rejoin Cyrodiil.
3. You don't get ported into the same instanced dungeon with your team. In Cyrodiil, you have to transit to the nearest connected keep and then ride to join them. Better hope you don't get repeatedly ganked on the way.
4. There's no guidance on roles, so you might well not have a single healer on a 12-person team.
5. There's no vote kick feature. You stay in group at the sufferance of your Crown. If they drop you because you crashed, you were too slow, or you made too many mistakes, you get kicked instantly. (This is one reason there's no penalty for leaving group in Cyrodiil.)
Finally, how do we know that Cyrodiil groupfinder doesn't work?
We had one.
ZOS removed it when they did the Activity Finder rework because it was rarely used.
I suggest you take off the PVE lenses and look at Cyrodiil for what it is.
Here's the problem, I am. Hey, I could do a hell of a job solo PvPing in Aion, but I didn't show up for sieges solo. I joined the Alliance, or one of them, and did my job. What seems to be the real issue is that I'm not feeling sorry for a support class archetype complaining about not being able to solo. Maybe they're trying to keep them from breaking their arms trying to pat themselves on the back? Maybe they're trying to encourage group play in an MMO, as I said earlier, in regard to that, "the horror", right?
Make your own group? Join an existing group? Spam map chat looking for a group? Adjust your playstyle to continue solo PvP in a group setting? Just as I would recommend in a "PuGs suck thread" or a "dungeons should have a solo mode" thread. The irony of "group content should be group content, except where I don't want it to be", and that's what we're looking at now, since you have to be in a group to heal a group, isn't lost on me, and all the thrashing around looking for reasons that it shouldn't be that way doesn't convince me, it simply amuses me.
If ZOS was trying to encourage group play, they have a funny way of showing it in that they release sets like Crimson that allow solo players to tank entire raids, devised a game in which in which damage oriented character have by far the easiest time healing themselves of any fantasy game I have played, and failed to also implement mechanics to disable the functioning of solitary DPS skills, which happen to the largest category in the playerbase.
Not to mention, they would have flat out said it in their explanation for why these changes were implemented. Especially since, as you say, this is an MMO and grouping up would seem to be a logical part of the game. That they didn;t speaks volumes. Instead it's just the vague "behavioral changes," probably because being more specific would have easily enabled players to call them out on the holes and inconsistency of these changes.
What ZOS did do was specifically target just a part of the playerbase, who understandably feel like they are being scapegoated and just plain picked on not just by the developers, but also by other players who are still able to play as they want to and can only muster the insensitive response, "join a group."
If joining and making a group or spamming LFG in zone was the be all to end all and this wonderful, enlightening, and powerful game playing experience as you and the other "just join a group" advocates imply, then people would already be doing that and wouldn't be complaining at being all but forced to do so. As someone who has done all 3 (group joining, group making, and LFGing in zone) I know that people who are just saying join a group either know nothing of the frustrations of doing so or do know but are so insensitive that they just say it anyway.
A lot of players obviously prefer not to deal with those frustrations. Those frustrations are valid in that they detract from the customer's enjoyment of the game and unfair in that they are the result of the developers making a conscious change that only afflict a minuity of the customer base, which is why ZOS has been able to get away with it. If such "encouragement" was directed at and against the desires of their high profile streamers or the majority (i.e., DPS), then these changes would have never left the drawing table.
Edited by Joy_Division on January 22, 2021 4:11PM15 -
VaranisArano✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭robertthebard wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »roberthebard, Cyrodiil isn't a PVE dungeon where you can easily slap on a groupfinder.
1. There's no "normal" mode you can pick when you want an easy run or figure you can carry your teammates.
2. There's no 15-minute timeout when you leave. There's a queue that's based on how many players are in Cyrodiil. Once the population locks, you can't join until others leave. At primetime, think half-hour to hour long waits to rejoin Cyrodiil.
3. You don't get ported into the same instanced dungeon with your team. In Cyrodiil, you have to transit to the nearest connected keep and then ride to join them. Better hope you don't get repeatedly ganked on the way.
4. There's no guidance on roles, so you might well not have a single healer on a 12-person team.
5. There's no vote kick feature. You stay in group at the sufferance of your Crown. If they drop you because you crashed, you were too slow, or you made too many mistakes, you get kicked instantly. (This is one reason there's no penalty for leaving group in Cyrodiil.)
Finally, how do we know that Cyrodiil groupfinder doesn't work?
We had one.
ZOS removed it when they did the Activity Finder rework because it was rarely used.
I suggest you take off the PVE lenses and look at Cyrodiil for what it is.
Here's the problem, I am. Hey, I could do a hell of a job solo PvPing in Aion, but I didn't show up for sieges solo. I joined the Alliance, or one of them, and did my job. What seems to be the real issue is that I'm not feeling sorry for a support class archetype complaining about not being able to solo. Maybe they're trying to keep them from breaking their arms trying to pat themselves on the back? Maybe they're trying to encourage group play in an MMO, as I said earlier, in regard to that, "the horror", right?
Make your own group? Join an existing group? Spam map chat looking for a group? Adjust your playstyle to continue solo PvP in a group setting? Just as I would recommend in a "PuGs suck thread" or a "dungeons should have a solo mode" thread. The irony of "group content should be group content, except where I don't want it to be", and that's what we're looking at now, since you have to be in a group to heal a group, isn't lost on me, and all the thrashing around looking for reasons that it shouldn't be that way doesn't convince me, it simply amuses me.
To be honest, when I talked about PVE lenses, I was referring more to the way you keep comparing PVP Cyrodiil to PVE group content. Like, if you want to suggest a groupfinder concept for Cyrodiil, you've got to demonstrate that it would work in Cyrodiil.
Also, I'd be more inclined to listen to you if you were giving me examples of your PVP experience joining sieges in Cyrodiil, not Aion. As a support player in Cyrodiil who used to be able to fully support a siege despite not joining up with a specific group, I'm not seeing the connection to your Aion experience except for a generic "Well, I did it in a different game, so clearly I'm an expert on how support classes are played in Cyrodiil."
While I end up disagreeing with some of the other posters in this thread, they at least debate using their experience of Cyrodiil PVP, before and after, to support their views of the benefits of the change. I appreciate those informed viewpoints even as I disagree with the weight we place on certain aspects of the changes. Shared experience in Cyrodiil pvp is a good way to carry on a discussion of the future of Cyrodiil PVP, you know?
Finally, since you are content to dismiss the answers that I and other experienced Cyrodiil healers provided to your litany of suggestions as mere "thrashing around", I confess that I'm losing interest in what appears to be a repetitive debate for your own amusement.4 -
robertthebard✭✭✭✭✭VaranisArano wrote: »robertthebard wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »roberthebard, Cyrodiil isn't a PVE dungeon where you can easily slap on a groupfinder.
1. There's no "normal" mode you can pick when you want an easy run or figure you can carry your teammates.
2. There's no 15-minute timeout when you leave. There's a queue that's based on how many players are in Cyrodiil. Once the population locks, you can't join until others leave. At primetime, think half-hour to hour long waits to rejoin Cyrodiil.
3. You don't get ported into the same instanced dungeon with your team. In Cyrodiil, you have to transit to the nearest connected keep and then ride to join them. Better hope you don't get repeatedly ganked on the way.
4. There's no guidance on roles, so you might well not have a single healer on a 12-person team.
5. There's no vote kick feature. You stay in group at the sufferance of your Crown. If they drop you because you crashed, you were too slow, or you made too many mistakes, you get kicked instantly. (This is one reason there's no penalty for leaving group in Cyrodiil.)
Finally, how do we know that Cyrodiil groupfinder doesn't work?
We had one.
ZOS removed it when they did the Activity Finder rework because it was rarely used.
I suggest you take off the PVE lenses and look at Cyrodiil for what it is.
Here's the problem, I am. Hey, I could do a hell of a job solo PvPing in Aion, but I didn't show up for sieges solo. I joined the Alliance, or one of them, and did my job. What seems to be the real issue is that I'm not feeling sorry for a support class archetype complaining about not being able to solo. Maybe they're trying to keep them from breaking their arms trying to pat themselves on the back? Maybe they're trying to encourage group play in an MMO, as I said earlier, in regard to that, "the horror", right?
Make your own group? Join an existing group? Spam map chat looking for a group? Adjust your playstyle to continue solo PvP in a group setting? Just as I would recommend in a "PuGs suck thread" or a "dungeons should have a solo mode" thread. The irony of "group content should be group content, except where I don't want it to be", and that's what we're looking at now, since you have to be in a group to heal a group, isn't lost on me, and all the thrashing around looking for reasons that it shouldn't be that way doesn't convince me, it simply amuses me.
To be honest, when I talked about PVE lenses, I was referring more to the way you keep comparing PVP Cyrodiil to PVE group content. Like, if you want to suggest a groupfinder concept for Cyrodiil, you've got to demonstrate that it would work in Cyrodiil.
Also, I'd be more inclined to listen to you if you were giving me examples of your PVP experience joining sieges in Cyrodiil, not Aion. As a support player in Cyrodiil who used to be able to fully support a siege despite not joining up with a specific group, I'm not seeing the connection to your Aion experience except for a generic "Well, I did it in a different game, so clearly I'm an expert on how support classes are played in Cyrodiil."
While I end up disagreeing with some of the other posters in this thread, they at least debate using their experience of Cyrodiil PVP, before and after, to support their views of the benefits of the change. I appreciate those informed viewpoints even as I disagree with the weight we place on certain aspects of the changes. Shared experience in Cyrodiil pvp is a good way to carry on a discussion of the future of Cyrodiil PVP, you know?
Finally, since you are content to dismiss the answers that I and other experienced Cyrodiil healers provided to your litany of suggestions as mere "thrashing around", I confess that I'm losing interest in what appears to be a repetitive debate for your own amusement.
I'm sure my experience as a DPS would do wonders for solo healers? I don't play healers, as a rule. The reason is quite simply two fold:
1. I'm not very good at them, preferring to knock things on the head;
2. I'm not down with the toxicity aimed at healers in MMOs in general.
"But that's from another game, it can't apply here"? Groups are groups, and as much as everyone likes to believe that their situation is unique, it's really not. We can see from some of the responses posted here that group dynamics play a role in why some would prefer to solo heal, and frankly, I get it, that's why "form your own group" is in my suggestions.
It gets even funnier when I'm reading about how organized groups are still outperforming PuGs. Pro Tip: That's working as intended. People that actually coordinate what's going on in their groups tend to outperform those that just have x number of solo stars in their group. 16 years worth of experience in MMOs is going to make that patently obvious, although I'm not sure why it's so surprising to people posting here? Perhaps the fact that this does seem to be some kind of revelation is why some would prefer to solo? They don't function well in a group setting, if they don't have the crown?0 -
Goregrinder✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭robertthebard wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »roberthebard, Cyrodiil isn't a PVE dungeon where you can easily slap on a groupfinder.
1. There's no "normal" mode you can pick when you want an easy run or figure you can carry your teammates.
2. There's no 15-minute timeout when you leave. There's a queue that's based on how many players are in Cyrodiil. Once the population locks, you can't join until others leave. At primetime, think half-hour to hour long waits to rejoin Cyrodiil.
3. You don't get ported into the same instanced dungeon with your team. In Cyrodiil, you have to transit to the nearest connected keep and then ride to join them. Better hope you don't get repeatedly ganked on the way.
4. There's no guidance on roles, so you might well not have a single healer on a 12-person team.
5. There's no vote kick feature. You stay in group at the sufferance of your Crown. If they drop you because you crashed, you were too slow, or you made too many mistakes, you get kicked instantly. (This is one reason there's no penalty for leaving group in Cyrodiil.)
Finally, how do we know that Cyrodiil groupfinder doesn't work?
We had one.
ZOS removed it when they did the Activity Finder rework because it was rarely used.
I suggest you take off the PVE lenses and look at Cyrodiil for what it is.
Here's the problem, I am. Hey, I could do a hell of a job solo PvPing in Aion, but I didn't show up for sieges solo. I joined the Alliance, or one of them, and did my job. What seems to be the real issue is that I'm not feeling sorry for a support class archetype complaining about not being able to solo. Maybe they're trying to keep them from breaking their arms trying to pat themselves on the back? Maybe they're trying to encourage group play in an MMO, as I said earlier, in regard to that, "the horror", right?
Make your own group? Join an existing group? Spam map chat looking for a group? Adjust your playstyle to continue solo PvP in a group setting? Just as I would recommend in a "PuGs suck thread" or a "dungeons should have a solo mode" thread. The irony of "group content should be group content, except where I don't want it to be", and that's what we're looking at now, since you have to be in a group to heal a group, isn't lost on me, and all the thrashing around looking for reasons that it shouldn't be that way doesn't convince me, it simply amuses me.
Yep. I think people want every aspect of the game split evenly down the middle into two categories: Solo version, and group version. So they see the group requirement for healing in Cryo as the devs "taking away" their playstyle from the game. That's up to them if they choose to see it that way.
But it is more like the devs correcting a part of the game that was not encouraging group play in an area that is supposed to encourage group play. This isn't SWTOR or CyberPunk 2077 after all....this is a Massively-Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game.
Yes you can do various tasks by yourself, and ESO is one of the MMORPG's that give you far more leeway in that regard. But people for some reason think that every single task in the game is supposed to have a solo counter part, but it's not....some thing are intended by the devs to be done in a group of other human beings. Now that ZOS is correcting a few of those things, certain people seem to be preparing for the sky to fall or doomsday or something lol.1