Changes are amazing!

doesurmindglow

The fact PVP isn't very well-balanced isn't a good argument for why it shouldn't be.

Further, you're assuming the "12 man zerg" will not be running these unkillable, high damage set ups. They absolutely will. And we'll hear about it a lot, and it will be nerfed, as the developers have already stated their intentions with these changes, which is to make damage come at the expense of survivability and tankiness.

Your issue is you disagree with the developers' intentions -- you want tanking sets that also put up huge damage. Which is fine I guess, but the rest of us are mostly speaking to whether or not the proposed changes deliver on the intentions, such that they will avoid the need for future changes aligned with their intentions.

As it is, their intentions either need to change to match yours (frankly not likely), or they'll just be nerfing these sets dramatically in a future patch.

XvarleyX

regime211 wrote: »

as a pvp player if you choose to fight a 55k tank instead of ignoring them, and you get nuked by them then its your fault.

Amottica

regime211 wrote: »

People are looking at numbers, and videos of other content creators and not actually testing stuff themselves. I think the scaling is just fine, with a few minor adjustments it will be what is needed. People coming about certain sets like crimson for the heal as if it doesn't have a cooldown or you can't just dodge roll the damage.

Have you tested these changes?

Merforum

regime211 wrote: »

People are looking at numbers, and videos of other content creators and not actually testing stuff themselves. I think the scaling is just fine, with a few minor adjustments it will be what is needed. People coming about certain sets like crimson for the heal as if it doesn't have a cooldown or you can't just dodge roll the damage.

I have been testing PTS for a week and even though at first I thought the proc set changes were really bad, mostly because I knew I would have to change all 13 toons setup because they are ALL hybrid, now that I tested some stuff it is not so bad. I'll just have to be more specialized and not as hybrid but everything will still work I think, maybe better.

The worst change was my pug random tank/DPS (YES that is a thing) with azureblight/leeching lost 50% of it's DPS capability and changed to more health/less stam. I find crimson/leeching to be not as good but OK on PTS. Not overpowered at all like some are saying. BTW I tested crimson in BGs for about 1 year and it was NEVER very good, unless you are against PVP players who are REALLY BAD.

We must STOP listening to 1vX/gankers, they are the cause of ALL these NERFing threads. There is NOTHING wrong with crimson, high health, high healing, high shielding or ball groups to anyone in the game EXCEPT 1vX/ganker players who can't kill them instantly. 1vX and ganking are the most toxic aspect of PVP and should have never been allowed to exist at such extreme level.

Why do 1vXers hate and make exxagerated vids about those builds/groups? Because their playstyle is to run around and around, then execute anyone with a well timed but cheesy combo, then run/hide/los around and around, until they can set up the exact combo on the next dude, rinse repeat. It does take a certain amount of skill to do this very well but not to the extent they try to claim. And these people never think about the REAL human beings on the other end who is just beginning to learn ESO PVP and completely discouraged from the game after it keeps happening.

My first 1 and half year I never did PVP, but by that time I had a group who could do most Vet dungeons. During an IC even we decided to all go into IC to see what it was all about, a full team tank, healer, 2 DD and we got wiped several times. We watched some vid, read some stuff and tried several times to do stuff but kept getting ganked with no hope. This was so disgusting (way more frustrating than even fighting the same vet boss 20 times just to figure out how to kill them) BUT also UNNECESSARY, for a couple telvars, that it made me stay away for 2 more years.

Some of the changes, new sets, etc should make it harder for griefer/gankers ruining the game for man people and overall that is a good thing.

doesurmindglow

I'm not a ganker. Or really a 1vXer, though I have done a good deal of small-scale PVP. My primary PVP is group vs group between organized guilds with optimized builds.

The changes will be no issue for us competitively. We'll all adopt unkillable, high damage tank builds and fight against other guilds running the same thing, in the process nuking solo players and less organized, less optimized or more casual groups no problem.

My issue is that I'd rather we NOT do that to be competitive. I'd like to see a variety of playstyles accommodated in PVP, with a large number of sets and builds being viable to growing and experienced players alike. The changes proposed on PTS will disproportionately advantage stacking health and resistances into a mere handful of sets, as it's pretty clear from actual testing in PTS that little else will be viable. It will also advantage organized groups over solo players and casual players, to be sure, which I dunno how big a problem that is particularly, but I like to think there is a way we can balance such that casual PVP remains viable while competitive PVP remains competitive.

Regardless, it's not really an issue of my philosophy to game balance anyway. It's an issue of Zenimax's, which is clearly stated in their initial post about the changes. They want, whether you agree with them or not, the damage and healing for proc sets to no longer be seen as "free damage" (their words here not mine) and instead be an intentional choice that require attention to be paid also to your primary stats. Simply put, the changes as currently exhibited on PTS do not do that. By making damage and healing scale from defensive stats in a handful of cases (it's like 6 sets maybe tbh), it's possible to realize a build exploiting that handful that's both highly defensive and highly offensive, which will be far and away the only viable choice at least in PVP. I think the weapon and spell damage scaling is also potentially an issue, but less immediately alarming as at least both of those stats do tend to represent an intentional choice like they've described.

I'm not opposed to the ideas others have put forward for separating PVE and PVP for the purposes of achieving that balance. I'm also aware of the problem that flat nerfs to the sets might be healthier for game balance in PVP at the expense of balance in PVE. But as far as the stated intentions and the stated results go, they are not currently in alignment in PVP testing on the PTS.

Merforum

doesurmindglow wrote: »

I'm not a ganker. Or really a 1vXer, though I have done a good deal of small-scale PVP. My primary PVP is group vs group between organized guilds with optimized builds.

The changes will be no issue for us competitively. We'll all adopt unkillable, high damage tank builds and fight against other guilds running the same thing, in the process nuking solo players and less organized, less optimized or more casual groups no problem.

My issue is that I'd rather we NOT do that to be competitive. I'd like to see a variety of playstyles accommodated in PVP, with a large number of sets and builds being viable to growing and experienced players alike. The changes proposed on PTS will disproportionately advantage stacking health and resistances into a mere handful of sets, as it's pretty clear from actual testing in PTS that little else will be viable. It will also advantage organized groups over solo players and casual players, to be sure, which I dunno how big a problem that is particularly, but I like to think there is a way we can balance such that casual PVP remains viable while competitive PVP remains competitive.

Regardless, it's not really an issue of my philosophy to game balance anyway. It's an issue of Zenimax's, which is clearly stated in their initial post about the changes. They want, whether you agree with them or not, the damage and healing for proc sets to no longer be seen as "free damage" (their words here not mine) and instead be an intentional choice that require attention to be paid also to your primary stats. Simply put, the changes as currently exhibited on PTS do not do that. By making damage and healing scale from defensive stats in a handful of cases (it's like 6 sets maybe tbh), it's possible to realize a build exploiting that handful that's both highly defensive and highly offensive, which will be far and away the only viable choice at least in PVP. I think the weapon and spell damage scaling is also potentially an issue, but less immediately alarming as at least both of those stats do tend to represent an intentional choice like they've described.

I'm not opposed to the ideas others have put forward for separating PVE and PVP for the purposes of achieving that balance. I'm also aware of the problem that flat nerfs to the sets might be healthier for game balance in PVP at the expense of balance in PVE. But as far as the stated intentions and the stated results go, they are not currently in alignment in PVP testing on the PTS.

'Free damage', that is a joke right? Them using a phrase repeated ad-nauseum on forums ONE TIME can hardly be considered company policy.

But I will give you an example of arguing in 'good faith', let's say I really think crimson was or is a problem for PVP (Which it is NOT), I would and have recommended raising the cast time delay to 3 or 4 seconds rendering it almost completely useless in PVP. Or if the burst is too high, split it in half and have it go off every 4 seconds instead of 8 seconds. Or just remove that 1 set from PVP. These options leave it alone for PVE which is much more important considering if PTS changes go through TANK/DPS like I like to run will have a grand total of TWO sets to use.

DonGodJoe

regime211 wrote: »

show previous quotes

DonGodJoe wrote: »

Just watch the vids posted here, before you speak...

Those videos don't provide group pvp, so they don't provide actual results regarding the statements being made.

Group pvp? you expect to have some downside results in group?

Anonx31st

I agree, changes are amazing. It seems like ZOS has found a way to help improve the tank shortage by making some of the sets damage now scale with health. This is a great and welcoming change. There is already too many DPS and the dungeon ques can take a long time. Hopefully this helps people out now. Good job ZOS!

Sluggy

Merforum wrote: »

'Free damage', that is a joke right? Them using a phrase repeated ad-nauseum on forums ONE TIME can hardly be considered company policy.

That was quoted from the official patch notes made by an official representative as an official public announcement. It's not some off-the-cuff casual remark made by a random person on the internet. It's the official intent being announced publicly after thought and deliberation not on just what to do but also precisely how to say it.

Anyway, I'm not against scaling proc damage/healing. Hell, I'm not even against proc damage and healing as it is on live. Personally, I found it laughable when a solo player would try to use Crimson or Venomous Smite on me. Easily avoidable circles that *might* hit for 3k once in a fight or a DoT that ticks for 1k or less a second are not problems I worry about. I was always worried about the stam Sorc coming down on my head with that 8-12k dswing multiple times. Well if this patch goes live it'll be that proc set coming down on my head for 12k-20k followed by some 8-12k dswings.

I've already said my piece but I'll say it again. A simple two-step scaling method would probably fix this. Let it scale as it is on the PTS up until the point it reaches the intended 'effective' max (i.e. 5.4k damage, 33k armor, 38k max stat, whatever) and then have a severely diminished scale after that.

doesurmindglow

Merforum wrote: »

'Free damage', that is a joke right? Them using a phrase repeated ad-nauseum on forums ONE TIME can hardly be considered company policy.

Here is the link to their stated intent, which was rather clear: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/569953/update-30-combat-preview

If this was their only post on the matter, perhaps I'd see your point. It is, regardless, an official statement of policy; one that has been carried out with both a fairly dramatic removal of the sets in question from open-world PVP and a significant set of changes to the set bonuses system-wide that we're now evaluating.

It's not up for debate what their position on this is, not really. It's clearly stated in their post: "These sets are seen as “free” sources of damage, healing and survivability, all of which come with minimal tradeoffs. We want these proc choices to mean something, rather than just the de facto method of building a character without paying for it in some way."

The question is merely whether or not the changes as currently being tested on PTS accomplish this intent. If they do, then it would make sense to push them live. If they do not, pushing them live will just mean a future nerf is all, and some headache and frustration for players enduring this shift and then the next one, which can be avoided by better aligning the intent with the results before the chapter is released.

regime211

doesurmindglow wrote: »

The fact PVP isn't very well-balanced isn't a good argument for why it shouldn't be.

Further, you're assuming the "12 man zerg" will not be running these unkillable, high damage set ups. They absolutely will. And we'll hear about it a lot, and it will be nerfed, as the developers have already stated their intentions with these changes, which is to make damage come at the expense of survivability and tankiness.

Your issue is you disagree with the developers' intentions -- you want tanking sets that also put up huge damage. Which is fine I guess, but the rest of us are mostly speaking to whether or not the proposed changes deliver on the intentions, such that they will avoid the need for future changes aligned with their intentions.

As it is, their intentions either need to change to match yours (frankly not likely), or they'll just be nerfing these sets dramatically in a future patch.

They won't nerf the sets I can tell you this much. You guys will once again reap what you sow.

regime211

Amottica wrote: »

show previous quotes

regime211 wrote: »

People are looking at numbers, and videos of other content creators and not actually testing stuff themselves. I think the scaling is just fine, with a few minor adjustments it will be what is needed. People coming about certain sets like crimson for the heal as if it doesn't have a cooldown or you can't just dodge roll the damage.

Have you tested these changes?

Yes I have. I'm heavily on pts.

doesurmindglow

Sluggy wrote: »

A simple two-step scaling method would probably fix this. Let it scale as it is on the PTS up until the point it reaches the intended 'effective' max (i.e. 5.4k damage, 33k armor, 38k max stat, whatever) and then have a severely diminished scale after that.

I also think this isn't a bad idea. Diminishing returns tend to work fairly well in game balance; another, less desirable but probably less complicated way this might be accomplished is by establishing a maximum value for all of the sets, which I suspect will be part of the solution at least in some cases as there is considerable precedent for it.

regime211

I'm going going to add. if they Do decide to tune down or nerf damage "Proc" sets then they also need to nerf stat bases proc sets that means any sets that help with survivability and resource management, if you want balance then those sets also need to be completely tuned down.

doesurmindglow

They will absolutely nerf the sets in a future patch if these changes go live. Their intentions are clearly stated, and if they are not accomplished by the changes, they will be accomplished by future changes.

There is no way around ZOS's intention here, as clever as you think you may be. It will be governing.

regime211

Merforum wrote: »

show previous quotes

regime211 wrote: »

People are looking at numbers, and videos of other content creators and not actually testing stuff themselves. I think the scaling is just fine, with a few minor adjustments it will be what is needed. People coming about certain sets like crimson for the heal as if it doesn't have a cooldown or you can't just dodge roll the damage.

I have been testing PTS for a week and even though at first I thought the proc set changes were really bad, mostly because I knew I would have to change all 13 toons setup because they are ALL hybrid, now that I tested some stuff it is not so bad. I'll just have to be more specialized and not as hybrid but everything will still work I think, maybe better.

The worst change was my pug random tank/DPS (YES that is a thing) with azureblight/leeching lost 50% of it's DPS capability and changed to more health/less stam. I find crimson/leeching to be not as good but OK on PTS. Not overpowered at all like some are saying. BTW I tested crimson in BGs for about 1 year and it was NEVER very good, unless you are against PVP players who are REALLY BAD.

We must STOP listening to 1vX/gankers, they are the cause of ALL these NERFing threads. There is NOTHING wrong with crimson, high health, high healing, high shielding or ball groups to anyone in the game EXCEPT 1vX/ganker players who can't kill them instantly. 1vX and ganking are the most toxic aspect of PVP and should have never been allowed to exist at such extreme level.

Why do 1vXers hate and make exxagerated vids about those builds/groups? Because their playstyle is to run around and around, then execute anyone with a well timed but cheesy combo, then run/hide/los around and around, until they can set up the exact combo on the next dude, rinse repeat. It does take a certain amount of skill to do this very well but not to the extent they try to claim. And these people never think about the REAL human beings on the other end who is just beginning to learn ESO PVP and completely discouraged from the game after it keeps happening.

My first 1 and half year I never did PVP, but by that time I had a group who could do most Vet dungeons. During an IC even we decided to all go into IC to see what it was all about, a full team tank, healer, 2 DD and we got wiped several times. We watched some vid, read some stuff and tried several times to do stuff but kept getting ganked with no hope. This was so disgusting (way more frustrating than even fighting the same vet boss 20 times just to figure out how to kill them) BUT also UNNECESSARY, for a couple telvars, that it made me stay away for 2 more years.

Some of the changes, new sets, etc should make it harder for griefer/gankers ruining the game for man people and overall that is a good thing.

This is exactly my sentiment and part of the reason why I stand on my statement, I am a solo player and a 1vX, and a lot of the time it is always the solo players complaining about proc damage sets, and they where also the same ones who complained when the stat based proc sets got disabled, they rather have this game cater to "THEIR" playstyle to be able to 1vX and kill people "Easier" that's why majority it's them making post and videos about how bad some of changes constantly made are. Crimson can be annoying but a good player just needs not to be within it's proximity. 1vX just want the game molded into their own world, and it also helps content creators to make video's to showcase this.

doesurmindglow

It will be fun to play though as a group in the meantime if it does not get nerfed tomorrow, I guess. We'll absolutely murder people, especially those who cannot adapt as quickly as those of us who have the sets on hand, golded out, and ready to go (like me).

Ranger209

XvarleyX wrote: »

show previous quotes

regime211 wrote: »

as a pvp player if you choose to fight a 55k tank instead of ignoring them, and you get nuked by them then its your fault.

doesurmindglow wrote: »

They will absolutely nerf the sets in a future patch if these changes go live. Their intentions are clearly stated, and if they are not accomplished by the changes, they will be accomplished by future changes.

There is no way around ZOS's intention here, as clever as you think you may be. It will be governing.

The number 1 issue being with these problematic sets that they are going against their own intentions by scaling damage and healing with health. This flies in the face of their stated intention to scale damage with wp/sp damage and healing with mg/stm.

regime211

doesurmindglow wrote: »

It will be fun to play though as a group in the meantime if it does not get nerfed tomorrow, I guess. We'll absolutely murder people, especially those who cannot adapt as quickly as those of us who have the sets on hand, golded out, and ready to go (like me).

I hope it goes live, and I also think the Spell Damage scaling Vs weapon damage scaling also needs to be addressed. Because you can gain high weapon damage, without the expense of survivability, unlike Magicka you would need to be a glass canon to have high spell damage.

Merforum

Sluggy wrote: »

show previous quotes

Merforum wrote: »

'Free damage', that is a joke right? Them using a phrase repeated ad-nauseum on forums ONE TIME can hardly be considered company policy.

That was quoted from the official patch notes made by an official representative as an official public announcement. It's not some off-the-cuff casual remark made by a random person on the internet. It's the official intent being announced publicly after thought and deliberation not on just what to do but also precisely how to say it.

Anyway, I'm not against scaling proc damage/healing. Hell, I'm not even against proc damage and healing as it is on live. Personally, I found it laughable when a solo player would try to use Crimson or Venomous Smite on me. Easily avoidable circles that *might* hit for 3k once in a fight or a DoT that ticks for 1k or less a second are not problems I worry about. I was always worried about the stam Sorc coming down on my head with that 8-12k dswing multiple times. Well if this patch goes live it'll be that proc set coming down on my head for 12k-20k followed by some 8-12k dswings.

I've already said my piece but I'll say it again. A simple two-step scaling method would probably fix this. Let it scale as it is on the PTS up until the point it reaches the intended 'effective' max (i.e. 5.4k damage, 33k armor, 38k max stat, whatever) and then have a severely diminished scale after that.

Yeah did you think when ZOS used the term 'Proc set' they meant all but 15 sets in the game. I try to not assume when people use terms that THEY mean the same as what I think they mean.

Thank you for being the only one honest enough to admit crimson SUCKS for PVP, venomous smite too. Only the worst of the worst PVPer is afraid of them or a 1vXer who thinks they are entitled to killing 4-10 people easily.

Yes, either they revert to no stat scaling or (I don't agree in 2 step scaling) keep it EVEN meaning if you don't want it to get too high then at the bottom end it should be less drastic too. Like I said on my TANK/DPS crimson in place of azureblight is 2-3K less DPS but pretty good health regen. Fair trade-off, BTW that's with 50+K health without current scaling it would not be worth it.

I actually don't like how these changes appear to be pigeon holing all my toons into one role but I think what they are doing on PTS to achieve that is correct and working and I will adapt. Just have less toons that can do many things and more that can do 1 thing even better.

BTW here's a good vid
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrdQYjImV4c

doesurmindglow

Ranger209 wrote: »

The number 1 issue being with these problematic sets that they are going against their own intentions by scaling damage and healing with health. This flies in the face of their stated intention to scale damage with wp/sp damage and healing with mg/stm.

Yeah, and though I do tend to agree with their stated intent, my biggest issue with a change poorly aligned with that intent is actually just that it'll simply generate another, future change.

If they stated somewhere that it was their intent to create a handful of high damage, high survivability setups where set bonuses can function as an alternative to effective and practiced use of combat abilities, then I could at least say that they have provided for that intent, and that future changes to set bonuses will likely be minimal.

karekiz

relentless_turnip wrote: »

I think it is a good idea currently executed badly. If they can't balance it so procs aren't meta, I think free damage and healing sets should be disabled until u31 when they can revisit this.

They should just remove dmg/healing sets from PvP all together. Half of the posts for years have been to remove them.

Just put back stat based procs and carry on.

doesurmindglow

Merforum wrote: »

Yeah did you think when ZOS used the term 'Proc set' they meant all but 15 sets in the game. I try to not assume when people use terms that THEY mean the same as what I think they mean.

I thought when they used the term, it meant what they said it meant, which is explained here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/561180/feb-15-cyrodiil-test-details/p1

This is their definition verbatim: "This means any item set which has a proc, or condition which is driven by an ability, will have that ability disabled. This includes Item Sets like Seducer, as that set reduces Magicka cost abilities by 10%. That reduction of cost is done via an ability, which has to check anytime you cast an ability if it’s cost should be reduced."

I actually don't agree with the definition, as I think of proc sets as less those that give temporary buffs and stat bonuses and more as those that deal damage or do healing on proc. But regardless, this is the definition they use, and it's the one I use also when evaluating their intent and whether or not the proposed changes accomplish them, I guess.

Merforum

doesurmindglow wrote: »

show previous quotes

Merforum wrote: »

'Free damage', that is a joke right? Them using a phrase repeated ad-nauseum on forums ONE TIME can hardly be considered company policy.

Here is the link to their stated intent, which was rather clear: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/569953/update-30-combat-preview

If this was their only post on the matter, perhaps I'd see your point. It is, regardless, an official statement of policy; one that has been carried out with both a fairly dramatic removal of the sets in question from open-world PVP and a significant set of changes to the set bonuses system-wide that we're now evaluating.

It's not up for debate what their position on this is, not really. It's clearly stated in their post: "These sets are seen as “free” sources of damage, healing and survivability, all of which come with minimal tradeoffs. We want these proc choices to mean something, rather than just the de facto method of building a character without paying for it in some way."

The question is merely whether or not the changes as currently being tested on PTS accomplish this intent. If they do, then it would make sense to push them live. If they do not, pushing them live will just mean a future nerf is all, and some headache and frustration for players enduring this shift and then the next one, which can be avoided by better aligning the intent with the results before the chapter is released.

Well by their actions and the changes I think 'free' might mean something different than what some people on this forum think. Just like 'proc sets' meant something very different. IMO when they say 'free' damage, they mean that you have to put more stats into it to make it better. When PVPer say 'free' damage I think they mean you didn't mash a button. We'll see but I like it so far.

Sluggy

I'm going to have to agree with doesyourmindglow on this (hello btw, haven't been in game for a while dunno if you are even still on my friends list lol). Regardless of how each of us might like it to be this is definitely not aligning with what ZoS stated it should be. So either we all need to get ZoS to commit to a different direction and actually iplement that or we need to get ZoS to understand that their changes are not accomplishing what they said it would.

Purereality

I disagree w/ OP.

DreadDaedroth

Leave Crimson as it is on PTS now. Always trying to ruin pve tanks.

jwellsub17_ESO2

TequilaFire wrote: »

There are heavy hitters yes, but bear in mind they are using CP3600 templates with the best gear they can take out of containers.
It would take a very long time to reach those levels on live.

You either don't play MMORPGs or you have never dealt with people who do. There were people on live who were at 3600CP within a week of FOA being released. There are entire guilds out there right now with top of the line gear. No, it will not take very long to reach those levels when Blackwood goes live.

Anonx31st

People were complaining that there was too many fake tanks in the game, and now ZOS is trying to fix this by making a health or resistance requirement to use gear. Additionally, people were complaining that there wasn't enough tanks in the game and they didn't want to play as a tank since they couldn't solo with one so ZOS added a couple sets for tanks so they can do some DPS without having to pay money to respec.

Seraphayel

First and foremost: reduce the effectiveness of every single proc set that heals or deals damage by 50%.

Second: set a cap for damage and healing potential that doesn’t change anymore after reaching a specific stat value.

Third: apply scaling that makes sense. If Weapon Damage can easily be 25% than Spell Damage, do not scale both the same way. Make it make sense.

The only problem are proc sets that directly deal damage or heal. Those are the problematic sets. I wish they would just bring back percentage based sets and keep all the others disabled until U31 and they had time for a proc set audit just with these sets. If the changes go live as they are now, U30 will be a worse proc meta than U27-29.

If you cannot do this: let only one damaging or healing proc set activate at a time and keep a 10 second CD between different proc sets active or whatever. Allowing this to go live would be fatal.