If there is one thing we learned about no-proc test - it's that people hate proc damage sets.

divnyi

Consider this:

1. Did the lag change in the uptime? No, it didn't.
2. Did no-proc test made the cyro less popular? No, it didn't.

People are sick tired of the damage proc sets that they would even play laggy cyro (compared to lag-free BGs). That's true outcome of the test.

When I play BGs and see kill logs, I seriously wonder why the hell the damage numbers coming from proc sets are higher than even ultis thrown at me, and much less dodgeable (if at all). Seriously, 13k+ damages from Zaan, and thats when I even teleport away. 5k damages in log from any proc set.

This should be revisited. If reducing damages in not an option because you want them be viable for PvE, increase the number of counterplays. Make Zaan and Vateshran staff be cleansed on roll dodge. All sets that put dot - blockable to negate the dot application.

SgtNuttzmeg

Really good point. The other tests were really unpopular, the length and severity of them even caused many pvp guilds to die. It pushed a lot of PVPers out and it took a long time for the community to recover. It still hasn't even fully recovered. With this test many PVPers that haven't played the game in years have returned and the reason is that this is the most balanced the game has been in years. It really showed overtuned core game play is currently. Mechanics like purge became less important and combat felt good.

The lesson to learn from this test isn't that proc sets don't contribute to lag but rather despite the lag the community significantly prefers a version of ESO combat without prominent proc sets.

rbfrgsp

I dunno. The proc-less play is much nicer. But cyro has felt very empty these last two weeks. I think a significant chunk of the player base has left temporarily, or thinned themselves out across the multiple servers.

NoSoup

Its a little myopic saying cyro has been so popular despite the lag because of no proc sets. That's a view only a proc set hater would make.

The honest answer is double AP. You get tier1 by just travelling to a keep under attack. For a lot of people this means a huge amount of crystals for very little work. I myself have got 10 characters to tier 1in only a few hours work, in the end I wasn't even bothering to change gear on the PVE characters I took in.

MrDenimChicken

I think proc healing sets are worse. People are more killable overall in no-proc gameplay.

Chilly-McFreeze

rbfrgsp wrote: »

I dunno. The proc-less play is much nicer. But cyro has felt very empty these last two weeks. I think a significant chunk of the player base has left temporarily, or thinned themselves out across the multiple servers.

Which server are you on? I play PC EU every afternoon/evening again and it doesn't feel particularly empty there.

On general, I enjoy the test very much but I find it very restrictive. I miss my briarheart, pelinal's etc. If they'd open a "no damage dealing proc set" campaign I'd home it in an instant. But probably I'd home it as it is now as well.

The forum has been filled with ideas about how to deal with proc sets for ages.
Make them stat dependend.
Lower their base damage but make them crittable.
Put limitations into battlespirit.
Make them less fool proof, unstackable, easier to counter, add diminishing retourns, a general dmg-proc cooldown etc.
Or, by god, make player skills a more attractive alternative to proc sets by putting power back into those skills.

Cyrdemaceb17_ESO

rbfrgsp wrote: »

I dunno. The proc-less play is much nicer. But cyro has felt very empty these last two weeks. I think a significant chunk of the player base has left temporarily, or thinned themselves out across the multiple servers.

Like me. I left and wait until the sorc-weeks are over.

And no, I do not hate proc sets, you can learn to deal with them. The diversity is just gone and made Cyro boring. Not to mention all those ppl getting lured in by the double AP and creating endless waiting times on servers at evening hours.

regime211

divnyi wrote: »

Consider this:

1. Did the lag change in the uptime? No, it didn't.
2. Did no-proc test made the cyro less popular? No, it didn't.

People are sick tired of the damage proc sets that they would even play laggy cyro (compared to lag-free BGs). That's true outcome of the test.

When I play BGs and see kill logs, I seriously wonder why the hell the damage numbers coming from proc sets are higher than even ultis thrown at me, and much less dodgeable (if at all). Seriously, 13k+ damages from Zaan, and thats when I even teleport away. 5k damages in log from any proc set.

This should be revisited. If reducing damages in not an option because you want them be viable for PvE, increase the number of counterplays. Make Zaan and Vateshran staff be cleansed on roll dodge. All sets that put dot - blockable to negate the dot application.

Lol you can't block a DOT that is absurd, I agree with most of what you said.

regime211

Proc Sets have been ok disabled, but truthfully zos handicapped a lot of classes to rely on proc sets, if you have played ALL of the classes then you know which ones need it more than others, disabling proc sets did nothing for performance besides. Making it worse, due to them enabling cross-healing again, as a lot of people keep mentioning. Once zos can bring balance to every class, then they can tune down proc sets.

relentless_turnip

I love playing without proc sets, but I miss playing with sets like briar, seventh etc... Proc damage and healing can be relegated to pve as far as I'm concerned.

fred4

Honestly, after playing the game for almost 6 years I feel numb to meta changes. It seems to me that the OP is jumping to conclusions. Long term players just get on with whatever crap is thrown at them. That's what I read into it. The main Cyro campaign on PC EU is full regardless of meta, lag, the weather or whatever else you could dream of. Double AP seems like a good objective reason, but I think it's most likely loyalty to guilds, to friends or simply to the game mode. I can't pretend to understand, because lag drives me to the low pop campaign or to Imperial City. I rarely do BGs, though. There is an allure to open world that BGs lack. It could simply be that for many people.

Now as to the OPs issues with Zaan, I say "meh". Zaan is nasty, but it's relatively easy to break. The Vasteshran destro, I must admit I find that oppressive due to it's longer range and the frequent failure of the engine to process line-of-sight properly. Also that it can be immediately reapplied. It doesn't do as much damage, but the counterplay is limited. As you can probably tell, I am not in favor of throwing procs out wholesale, though.

SHOW

@fred4

I'm sorry, but light attack + free cast (ele) should not cause over 10K damage (via zaan + vat) or force the opponent to disengage (or do anything for that matter, it's a freaking light attack + debuff)

We've been slowly brainwashed into thinking that's ok.

I get some classes are weak (I main MagBlade for gods sake) so please don't defend ESO's proc nightmare as a bandaid for their lack of "class balance". If a class has to use procs to compete, then the class needs rework.

Procs are just low effort, unhealthy, boring, and frustrating gameplay. Procs gotta go from PvP.

AvA should mean:

"Alliance vs Alliance"
not
"Armor vs Armor"

(sorry, I couldn't resist lol)

WaywardArgonian

I'm still on the fence about it. Some things are nicer during the current testing, but overall, it does feel a bit bland to have so many sets classified as 'procs' by the developers. If they plan to get rid of proc sets permanently, the first thing that needs to happen is properly defining them, as players talk about procs from a gameplay POV (automatic buffs/damage) while devs view it from a technical POV (any bonus that requires calculation).

The combat does seem to be a bit more fair at the moment, and even ballgroups are quite easily killed when enough people pressure them. On the other hand, it also highlighted that, in a procless environment, the classes are arguably even less balanced, so that would need to be looked at as well.

In the end, my problem with the proc meta has never been that they do high damage or whatever. It's rather that they allow for people to build tanky and still do insane burst damage. As someone who prefers playing glass cannon builds (high damage output/low defenses), I feel like my scope is limited when a player can have double my healthpool and still match my damage output. I feel like a lot of the frustration with procs will go away if ZOS find a way to make people choose more clearly between damage and survivability.

divnyi

fred4 wrote: »

Now as to the OPs issues with Zaan, I say "meh". Zaan is nasty, but it's relatively easy to break.

I like the idea of Zaan (damaging more each second), but I feel it takes very little time to start applying big damage. Like, 3 ticks already cause enormous damage, and that's bare minimum if you sucessfully run out (not stunned & rooted & opponent don't have more movespeed than you).

Might be easier for you in Cyro since you have group heals, but in BGs it is serious hit you might not recover from.

finehair

Ball groups are melting without proc heals and solo gear, even with purge spam.
People can't one shot you from stealth with multiple Procs whacking you from activation of 1 skill and nightblades use combos once again that obliterates you in mere seconds but if you able to block they just cloak and run away like they used to instead of being health sponges
I like this kind of game, people using their own skills instead of the sets they wear doing the heavy lifting.

SshadowSscale

Honestly proc damage and heal sets have to go...... or at least make it so that the players is only allowed to wear 1 proc set and the rest as to be stat based..... that alone would be so much better because then I don't have 3 to 4 procs hitting me from a single attack wich is beyond stupid

fred4

divnyi wrote: »

fred4 wrote: »

Now as to the OPs issues with Zaan, I say "meh". Zaan is nasty, but it's relatively easy to break.

I like the idea of Zaan (damaging more each second), but I feel it takes very little time to start applying big damage. Like, 3 ticks already cause enormous damage, and that's bare minimum if you sucessfully run out (not stunned & rooted & opponent don't have more movespeed than you).

Might be easier for you in Cyro since you have group heals, but in BGs it is serious hit you might not recover from.

I am rarely in BGs. The last time someone hit me with Zaan in a BG, though, I streaked through them, stunned them and it broke the beam immediately. Depending on class your solutions vary. I normally play in CP. I've been hit with Zaan + Vateshran, but if the opponent doesn't know how to play, e.g. they don't hit you with much else, that does exactly zilch. I normally go for LoS, but I have also outtanked Vateshran + Zaan to the end against otherwise weak opponents. I play alone. No healers.

A strong player is a strong player. I've duelled a good magsorc on my stat-based stam DK. Yes, there was a difference when the sorc used Maw + Vateshran destro versus just a stat-based sorc build. He was stronger, but the difference wasn't that pronounced.

SHOW wrote: »

@fred4
I'm sorry, but light attack + free cast (ele) should not cause over 10K damage (via zaan + vat) or force the opponent to disengage (or do anything for that matter, it's a freaking light attack + debuff)

We've been slowly brainwashed into thinking that's ok.

I get some classes are weak (I main MagBlade for gods sake) so please don't defend ESO's proc nightmare as a bandaid for their lack of "class balance". If a class has to use procs to compete, then the class needs rework.

Procs are just low effort, unhealthy, boring, and frustrating gameplay. Procs gotta go from PvP.

Those are your opinions. Personally I can get behind changing the meta from where we are now, where Malacath plus procs plus high health is too damn attractive, but I am not against procs on principle. More importantly, for the purpose of this thread, I don't think you can draw conclusions from Cyrodiil attendance statistics on how the population as a whole feels about procs.

The_Lex

I went back and forth from non-proc Cyro to proc-fest BGs/IC...and I just love PvP without the procs. Combat feels fluid (despite the horrifying performance) and more like pure PvP. Skill wins the day, not sets. I would rather PvP than Set v Set. I think proc sets should remain disabled in PvP, although loosening the list of sets to allow for sets like Seducer, NMA, Briarheart, etc.

However, I think this change should only be for PvP (maybe through Battle Spirit?). I know some people use procs in PvE for fun and thematic builds and I wouldn't want them to loose their enjoyment.

Nemeliom

I believe the main point of the test failed, but a discovery was made. People have more fun when they kill/get killed by skill rather than items.
Having a proc set that only requires to hit someone once to do tons of dmg is a no-skill roll-face game. It makes new players feel good for a while, until they realize everyone can do the same thing.

Keep Cyrodiil clean at least from damage proc sets and instant healing proc sets. If you want, from any kind of proc set, as long as the first mentioned are gone.

This is what players want.

Or simply make a poll by mail with 500 crowns reward, so that you make sure more people answer it, and ask lots of questions about pvp/pve. And let us see what people want.
Take into account the type of players, make a good segmentation to get real value.

UntouchableHunter

Nemeliom wrote: »

.

Or simply make a poll by mail with 500 crowns reward, so that you make sure more people answer it, and ask lots of questions about pvp/pve. And let us see what people want.
Take into account the type of players, make a good segmentation to get real value.

Great idea I support that.

NoSoup

Well it's obvious that the test hasn't shown a potential in performance improvement. That being said, they probably need to continue the test but disable double AP for a couple of weeks to see how "player behaviour" responds. Anyone that's been on the forums long enough would know that forum warrior's views don't provide an accurate sample of the actual playing population.

Dr_Ganknstein

I like proc sets and the other half of the game that wasn't on the list of sets to use, lol. Just fix the broken proc sets.

Vizirith

Disregard, misread

Vetixio

SHOW wrote: »

@fred4

I'm sorry, but light attack + free cast (ele) should not cause over 10K damage (via zaan + vat) or force the opponent to disengage (or do anything for that matter, it's a freaking light attack + debuff)

We've been slowly brainwashed into thinking that's ok.

I get some classes are weak (I main MagBlade for gods sake) so please don't defend ESO's proc nightmare as a bandaid for their lack of "class balance". If a class has to use procs to compete, then the class needs rework.

Procs are just low effort, unhealthy, boring, and frustrating gameplay. Procs gotta go from PvP.

AvA should mean:

"Alliance vs Alliance"
not
"Armor vs Armor"

(sorry, I couldn't resist lol)

100% agree they should remove all damage proc sets from PvP apart from Vicious Death as that actually requires you do something other than light attack for it to proc.

AuraNebula

No I left pve to play pvp. I'm leaving pvp and going back to pve. This changes are horrible and are only catering to casual players who want to spend no time working on a build. They except everything to be easy and for them to just be OP without putting any work in.

SshadowSscale

Princessrhaenyra wrote: »

No I left pve to play pvp. I'm leaving pvp and going back to pve. This changes are horrible and are only catering to casual players who want to spend no time working on a build. They except everything to be easy and for them to just be OP without putting any work in.

Honestly I think it is way easier to throw a la at someone and have your proc kill them than you actually have to kill them with your abilities.... but to each their own I guess

AuraNebula

SshadowSscale wrote: »

Princessrhaenyra wrote: »

No I left pve to play pvp. I'm leaving pvp and going back to pve. This changes are horrible and are only catering to casual players who want to spend no time working on a build. They except everything to be easy and for them to just be OP without putting any work in.

Honestly I think it is way easier to throw a la at someone and have your proc kill them than you actually have to kill them with your abilities.... but to each their own I guess

Not every proc set does that though. Instead of targeting certain sets, they remove basically every single set. Seducers a proc set? When has seducers ever been an issue? This is a lazy fix to cater to people who only want to have offensive builds with no defensive stats.

Sanctum74

Princessrhaenyra wrote: »

No I left pve to play pvp. I'm leaving pvp and going back to pve. This changes are horrible and are only catering to casual players who want to spend no time working on a build. They except everything to be easy and for them to just be OP without putting any work in.

You literally just explained the proc set meta, this is a good change.

AuraNebula

Sanctum74 wrote: »

Princessrhaenyra wrote: »

No I left pve to play pvp. I'm leaving pvp and going back to pve. This changes are horrible and are only catering to casual players who want to spend no time working on a build. They except everything to be easy and for them to just be OP without putting any work in.

You literally just explained the proc set meta, this is a good change.

This is a lazy fix. Certain proc sets are over preforming. Not every single proc set is an issue. When did you ever think "This dude is wearing seducers he's never going to die?"

So instead of fixing certain sets or at least leaving all the sets we can purchase only with AP only, everyone now has to run these same 19 sets? It's a lazy fix for lazy people who don't want to farm gear.

Sanctum74

Princessrhaenyra wrote: »

Sanctum74 wrote: »

Princessrhaenyra wrote: »

No I left pve to play pvp. I'm leaving pvp and going back to pve. This changes are horrible and are only catering to casual players who want to spend no time working on a build. They except everything to be easy and for them to just be OP without putting any work in.

You literally just explained the proc set meta, this is a good change.

This is a lazy fix. Certain proc sets are over preforming. Not every single proc set is an issue. When did you ever think "This dude is wearing seducers he's never going to die?"

So instead of fixing certain sets or at least leaving all the sets we can purchase only with AP only, everyone now has to run these same 19 sets? It's a lazy fix for lazy people who don't want to farm gear.

I agree to an extent, but it’s going to take time for them to fix the coding on sets. It sucks that it includes sets like seducers or nma, but it shows a flaw in their coding that they can hopefully address.

As far as complaining about only 19 sets, lets be real the majority of pvp players are probably only running the same 8-10 sets.

DrSlaughtr

Players: Proc sets are easy and require no skill!

Same players: spam dizzy, spam spin to win, run 12 pets to block attacks, make a 52k health tank a werewolf and still smacks targets, ball up and make the other team lag out, spam mist form to infinity, etc etc

If you can't counter proc sets with strategy then you're doing it wrong.