Vampires Online - 10 years later

p_tsakirisb16_ESO · January 9

For 10 years the PVP on this game is dominated by vampires.
On the first month of the release we had actually a counter using Fighters Guild skills, but those were nerfed to the ground after the vampire PVP crowd took the forums complaining that they were getting wrecked by them.

The majority joined the crowd to Undeath but there is a minority with refuses to follow and sticking to the Elder Scrolls Lore actually.

Dear Zos, why this issue hasn't been resolved all those years? Vampires get benefits and ZERO drawbacks when comes to PVP.
Their initial design was OK because there was a counter but not since May-June 2014 post nerf of FG skills.

Do you plan ever to bring balance? At least let their Stage 3 passive to be negated by Fire and FG abilities. Bring back the double damage against vampires the FG skills had when in Cyrodiil.
Block their access to the Fighters Guild tree when in Cyrodiil / Battlegrounds. Is against the Lore too.

Non Vampires are in true disadvantage here because not only they don't get such huge passive boosts, but there are no abilities to work around them.

Everyone says that PVP needs balancing and sorting out, start at least by fixing what effectively made PVP on this game "Vampires Online".

ArchMikem · January 10

Vampires would just come here and say "but It makes muh character UGLY!" as a drawback.

Woodenplank · January 10

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Dear Zos, why this issue hasn't been resolved all those years?...

"Dear devs, why haven't you fixed X" does not, contrary to popular belief, make the devs rush to your aid to fix the problem. Any how...

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Vampires get benefits and ZERO drawbacks when comes to PVP.

I wouldn't say "ZERO drawbacks" - A Stage3 Vamp's Regular abilities cost 8% more and they take 13% more Fire damage. Saying that has "ZERO" effect is like saying Armor of the Seducer's 5th bonus doesn't help magicka sustain, or the Battlefield Acrobat set doesn't really exist.

Does the benefit of the Undeath Passive (which is essentially all that's used) very much outweight the drawbacks? Yes. I agree on that part.

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Their initial design was OK because there was a counter but not since May-June 2014 post nerf of FG skills.

Are you referring to the *initial* design? Like waay back when everyone and their grandmother was a Stage 1 Vamp because it gave +20% free recoveries with like... 5% more Fire Damage taken at worst?
Oh, and Elusive Mist was busted back then.

Greymoor introduced the problematic Undeath passive, yes. And we did get a ****storm of perma-Bloodmist tomfoolery for a while, but they fixed that.
I'd say Vampires are better now than originally. The skills are more interesting, and you actually see people bothering with more than Stage 1.

Is it perfect? No; far from it. But I'd say ZOS has definitely improved on the Vampire experience since release.

p_tsakirisb16_ESO · January 10

Woodenplank wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Dear Zos, why this issue hasn't been resolved all those years?...

"Dear devs, why haven't you fixed X" does not, contrary to popular belief, make the devs rush to your aid to fix the problem. Any how...

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Vampires get benefits and ZERO drawbacks when comes to PVP.

I wouldn't say "ZERO drawbacks" - A Stage3 Vamp's Regular abilities cost 8% more and they take 13% more Fire damage. Saying that has "ZERO" effect is like saying Armor of the Seducer's 5th bonus doesn't help magicka sustain, or the Battlefield Acrobat set doesn't really exist.

Does the benefit of the Undeath Passive (which is essentially all that's used) very much outweight the drawbacks? Yes. I agree on that part.

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Their initial design was OK because there was a counter but not since May-June 2014 post nerf of FG skills.

Are you referring to the *initial* design? Like waay back when everyone and their grandmother was a Stage 1 Vamp because it gave +20% free recoveries with like... 5% more Fire Damage taken at worst?
Oh, and Elusive Mist was busted back then.

Greymoor introduced the problematic Undeath passive, yes. And we did get a ****storm of perma-Bloodmist tomfoolery for a while, but they fixed that.
I'd say Vampires are better now than originally. The skills are more interesting, and you actually see people bothering with more than Stage 1.

Is it perfect? No; far from it. But I'd say ZOS has definitely improved on the Vampire experience since release.

Ahh the Fire Damage argument, which is mitigated with CPs and glyph.

Spare us. Even vampire players on the guild agree that the 30% mitigation is TOO MUCH and there are NO REAL PENALTIES.

Vaqual · January 10

undeath being OP and the drawbacks being real are two different things though, no reason to be so dramatc about it

xMetalheartx · January 10

What do you mean this goes against lore? Shouldn't vampires be stronger than mortal humans?
The lore argument is an alternative way of saying: I play how I want, but I don't want to feel the consequences of my decisions.

CameraBeardThePirate · January 11

Woodenplank wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Dear Zos, why this issue hasn't been resolved all those years?...

"Dear devs, why haven't you fixed X" does not, contrary to popular belief, make the devs rush to your aid to fix the problem. Any how...

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Vampires get benefits and ZERO drawbacks when comes to PVP.

I wouldn't say "ZERO drawbacks" - A Stage3 Vamp's Regular abilities cost 8% more and they take 13% more Fire damage. Saying that has "ZERO" effect is like saying Armor of the Seducer's 5th bonus doesn't help magicka sustain, or the Battlefield Acrobat set doesn't really exist.

Does the benefit of the Undeath Passive (which is essentially all that's used) very much outweight the drawbacks? Yes. I agree on that part.

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Their initial design was OK because there was a counter but not since May-June 2014 post nerf of FG skills.

Are you referring to the *initial* design? Like waay back when everyone and their grandmother was a Stage 1 Vamp because it gave +20% free recoveries with like... 5% more Fire Damage taken at worst?
Oh, and Elusive Mist was busted back then.

Greymoor introduced the problematic Undeath passive, yes. And we did get a ****storm of perma-Bloodmist tomfoolery for a while, but they fixed that.
I'd say Vampires are better now than originally. The skills are more interesting, and you actually see people bothering with more than Stage 1.

Is it perfect? No; far from it. But I'd say ZOS has definitely improved on the Vampire experience since release.

To be honest, the vamp rework was only half successful. Yes, it added some cool skills for vamps to use, but part of the reasoning behind reworking vamp was to stop the majority of players from slotting vamp just for the passives (at the time, Recovery + Undeath)

Fast forward a bit, and we're back to square one. The vast majority of PvPers are using vamp for Undeath and nothing else. Yes, some people slot the ult, spammable, or mist, but the problem of people running Vamp just for the passives is still just as bad.

El_Borracho · January 11

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Woodenplank wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Dear Zos, why this issue hasn't been resolved all those years?...

"Dear devs, why haven't you fixed X" does not, contrary to popular belief, make the devs rush to your aid to fix the problem. Any how...

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Vampires get benefits and ZERO drawbacks when comes to PVP.

I wouldn't say "ZERO drawbacks" - A Stage3 Vamp's Regular abilities cost 8% more and they take 13% more Fire damage. Saying that has "ZERO" effect is like saying Armor of the Seducer's 5th bonus doesn't help magicka sustain, or the Battlefield Acrobat set doesn't really exist.

Does the benefit of the Undeath Passive (which is essentially all that's used) very much outweight the drawbacks? Yes. I agree on that part.

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Their initial design was OK because there was a counter but not since May-June 2014 post nerf of FG skills.

Are you referring to the *initial* design? Like waay back when everyone and their grandmother was a Stage 1 Vamp because it gave +20% free recoveries with like... 5% more Fire Damage taken at worst?
Oh, and Elusive Mist was busted back then.

Greymoor introduced the problematic Undeath passive, yes. And we did get a ****storm of perma-Bloodmist tomfoolery for a while, but they fixed that.
I'd say Vampires are better now than originally. The skills are more interesting, and you actually see people bothering with more than Stage 1.

Is it perfect? No; far from it. But I'd say ZOS has definitely improved on the Vampire experience since release.

Ahh the Fire Damage argument, which is mitigated with CPs and glyph.

Spare us. Even vampire players on the guild agree that the 30% mitigation is TOO MUCH and there are NO REAL PENALTIES.

If you remove Undeath, there is no reason to play vampire. ANYWHERE, PVP or PVE. That says everything players need to know about the usefulness of vampires in ESO. I would not consider that "dominating" by any definition. Especially compared to the brief moment in time when werewolves were actually dominating, to the point werewolves, Crimson Twilight, and Savage Werewolf were nerfed into oblivion.

CameraBeardThePirate · January 11

El_Borracho wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Woodenplank wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Dear Zos, why this issue hasn't been resolved all those years?...

"Dear devs, why haven't you fixed X" does not, contrary to popular belief, make the devs rush to your aid to fix the problem. Any how...

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Vampires get benefits and ZERO drawbacks when comes to PVP.

I wouldn't say "ZERO drawbacks" - A Stage3 Vamp's Regular abilities cost 8% more and they take 13% more Fire damage. Saying that has "ZERO" effect is like saying Armor of the Seducer's 5th bonus doesn't help magicka sustain, or the Battlefield Acrobat set doesn't really exist.

Does the benefit of the Undeath Passive (which is essentially all that's used) very much outweight the drawbacks? Yes. I agree on that part.

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Their initial design was OK because there was a counter but not since May-June 2014 post nerf of FG skills.

Are you referring to the *initial* design? Like waay back when everyone and their grandmother was a Stage 1 Vamp because it gave +20% free recoveries with like... 5% more Fire Damage taken at worst?
Oh, and Elusive Mist was busted back then.

Greymoor introduced the problematic Undeath passive, yes. And we did get a ****storm of perma-Bloodmist tomfoolery for a while, but they fixed that.
I'd say Vampires are better now than originally. The skills are more interesting, and you actually see people bothering with more than Stage 1.

Is it perfect? No; far from it. But I'd say ZOS has definitely improved on the Vampire experience since release.

Ahh the Fire Damage argument, which is mitigated with CPs and glyph.

Spare us. Even vampire players on the guild agree that the 30% mitigation is TOO MUCH and there are NO REAL PENALTIES.

If you remove Undeath, there is no reason to play vampire. ANYWHERE, PVP or PVE. That says everything players need to know about the usefulness of vampires in ESO. I would not consider that "dominating" by any definition. Especially compared to the brief moment in time when werewolves were actually dominating, to the point werewolves, Crimson Twilight, and Savage Werewolf were nerfed into oblivion.

Idk i think Vamp Slap and the ultimate are worth slotting on a number of builds.

However - Undeath is like 95% of why you'd run vamp

Necrotech_Master · January 11

El_Borracho wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Woodenplank wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Dear Zos, why this issue hasn't been resolved all those years?...

"Dear devs, why haven't you fixed X" does not, contrary to popular belief, make the devs rush to your aid to fix the problem. Any how...

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Vampires get benefits and ZERO drawbacks when comes to PVP.

I wouldn't say "ZERO drawbacks" - A Stage3 Vamp's Regular abilities cost 8% more and they take 13% more Fire damage. Saying that has "ZERO" effect is like saying Armor of the Seducer's 5th bonus doesn't help magicka sustain, or the Battlefield Acrobat set doesn't really exist.

Does the benefit of the Undeath Passive (which is essentially all that's used) very much outweight the drawbacks? Yes. I agree on that part.

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Their initial design was OK because there was a counter but not since May-June 2014 post nerf of FG skills.

Are you referring to the *initial* design? Like waay back when everyone and their grandmother was a Stage 1 Vamp because it gave +20% free recoveries with like... 5% more Fire Damage taken at worst?
Oh, and Elusive Mist was busted back then.

Greymoor introduced the problematic Undeath passive, yes. And we did get a ****storm of perma-Bloodmist tomfoolery for a while, but they fixed that.
I'd say Vampires are better now than originally. The skills are more interesting, and you actually see people bothering with more than Stage 1.

Is it perfect? No; far from it. But I'd say ZOS has definitely improved on the Vampire experience since release.

Ahh the Fire Damage argument, which is mitigated with CPs and glyph.

Spare us. Even vampire players on the guild agree that the 30% mitigation is TOO MUCH and there are NO REAL PENALTIES.

If you remove Undeath, there is no reason to play vampire. ANYWHERE, PVP or PVE. That says everything players need to know about the usefulness of vampires in ESO. I would not consider that "dominating" by any definition. Especially compared to the brief moment in time when werewolves were actually dominating, to the point werewolves, Crimson Twilight, and Savage Werewolf were nerfed into oblivion.

ive seen some successful vampire gankers running low health using the melee vamp spammable

its a risky build/playstyle, but can hit like a truck when it lands

DinoZavr · January 11

ii am sure, Zeni has comprehensive statistics and can easily tell Mortal / Vampire / Werewolf distribution.
the issue is not Vampires are OP, but that Werewolves became unpopular. You invest skillpoints to get more flexibility,
and while Vampirism more or less does the trick, being a Werewolf - does not. In my humble opinion.

TL/DR; there is no balance.

p_tsakirisb16_ESO · January 12

El_Borracho wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Woodenplank wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Dear Zos, why this issue hasn't been resolved all those years?...

"Dear devs, why haven't you fixed X" does not, contrary to popular belief, make the devs rush to your aid to fix the problem. Any how...

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Vampires get benefits and ZERO drawbacks when comes to PVP.

I wouldn't say "ZERO drawbacks" - A Stage3 Vamp's Regular abilities cost 8% more and they take 13% more Fire damage. Saying that has "ZERO" effect is like saying Armor of the Seducer's 5th bonus doesn't help magicka sustain, or the Battlefield Acrobat set doesn't really exist.

Does the benefit of the Undeath Passive (which is essentially all that's used) very much outweight the drawbacks? Yes. I agree on that part.

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Their initial design was OK because there was a counter but not since May-June 2014 post nerf of FG skills.

Are you referring to the *initial* design? Like waay back when everyone and their grandmother was a Stage 1 Vamp because it gave +20% free recoveries with like... 5% more Fire Damage taken at worst?
Oh, and Elusive Mist was busted back then.

Greymoor introduced the problematic Undeath passive, yes. And we did get a ****storm of perma-Bloodmist tomfoolery for a while, but they fixed that.
I'd say Vampires are better now than originally. The skills are more interesting, and you actually see people bothering with more than Stage 1.

Is it perfect? No; far from it. But I'd say ZOS has definitely improved on the Vampire experience since release.

Ahh the Fire Damage argument, which is mitigated with CPs and glyph.

Spare us. Even vampire players on the guild agree that the 30% mitigation is TOO MUCH and there are NO REAL PENALTIES.

If you remove Undeath, there is no reason to play vampire. ANYWHERE, PVP or PVE. That says everything players need to know about the usefulness of vampires in ESO. I would not consider that "dominating" by any definition. Especially compared to the brief moment in time when werewolves were actually dominating, to the point werewolves, Crimson Twilight, and Savage Werewolf were nerfed into oblivion.

Atm ALL and I mean ALL the builds propose Stage 3 Vampirism and 90% of the players are Vampires because the buffs outweigh by miles the pitiful negatives.

And is not only the Stage 3 resistance, but other benefits like bypassing the snare of the Sea-Serpent’s Coil in Vampire Mist Form while getting the buffs with no drawbacks. If a mortal tries to use it, is sitting duck against someone who's using effectively 2 extra 5 sets.

And the list is long.

I don't care about PVE, there is no competition there nor caring about leader boards. I care about PVP and Vampires are total unbalanced compared to someone who's not.

For 10 years seeing the Vampire players crying, writing pitiful excuses that everything is OK but is not.
ZOS needs to balanced it, bringing back the old Fighters Guild abilities with the big extra damage on undead and restricting the whole tree usage to Vampires in Cyrodiil. After all ZOS has done so with gear restrictions.

That will sort out a lot of the balance issues. I am not asking for Vampires to be nerfed but those who are not bring up to the same level. So been Vampire or Mortal would be a meaningful choice. Same applies to Werewolves.

I see post after post that Cyrodiil and PVP is dying without players when the elitists do what every they can to kick out even those who want to be in Cyrodiil but refuse to to become vampires. This is exactly the issue.

SandandStars · January 13

i dont vamp in pvp
i dont mdw vatesh maarselok in pvp
i dont nb in pvp
i dont engine guardian in pvp
i dont colorless pool spam in pvp
i dont always win in pvp

i really enjoy meeting other players who craft their own off meta builds and struggle but have obvious skill & knowledge of the game

vamp undeath could disappear and pvp would be more fun, imo

moo_2021 · January 13

Eh, it's a lot more susceptible to dk and silver shards. I can't remember a time when my warden won 1vs1 against any dk. The 20% difference in damage is just too much.

however, I just levelled up a dark elf vamp dk myself with flame reduction and held the ball for 300 or 400 scores straight today

----

if there is no drawback, why doesn't OP just become vampire? Unnatural Movement is really useful for overland

Muizer · January 13

Vampires generally are way too normalized in this game. At the very least they should bring that knock-down on silver shards back. Never understood why that got removed anyway. It was fun hunting vampires back then.

Baconlad · January 14

You can have undeath if you take away the fire damage and dawnbreaker debuff

IZZEFlameLash · January 15

Just a thought, doesn't WW make you take 25% more poison damage? Maybe fire damage taken increased should match that at all stages. As I've stated just a thought...

p_tsakirisb16_ESO · January 15

moo_2021 wrote: »

if there is no drawback, why doesn't OP just become vampire? Unnatural Movement is really useful for overland

Because I DO NOT WANT TO PLAY A VAMPIRE.

What you do not understand?

Urzigurumash · January 15

Humans take more Flame Damage than Vampires

p_tsakirisb16_ESO · January 18

IZZEFlameLash wrote: »

Just a thought, doesn't WW make you take 25% more poison damage? Maybe fire damage taken increased should match that at all stages. As I've stated just a thought...

WW takes 25% poison which can be mitigated with a glyph. And that's it.

Stage 3 Vampires take 12% extra fire damage. But this is absolute NOTHING. It doesn't even have to be mitigated by glyph, as they get extra resistances, which apply to fire damage also, while bypassing completely the Sea-Serpent’s Coil snare.

That is why almost everyone in Cyrodiil is Stage 3 vampire. Because they have NO drawbacks and only buffs that nobody else gets.

If they had real drawbacks, nobody would be pushing Stage 3 vampirism, and they would have been just a minority who just does it for flavour, not 95%+ of the player base in Cyrodiil.
That is why you see them crying about irrelevant things trying to pull the wool out of our and ZOS eyes.

And I am against nerfs, except in relation to Sea-Serpent’s Coil snare should apply to vampires also.

Just buff Fighters Skills abilities so everyone else has a fighting chance on PVP as they were in April-May 2014 before the huge nerf and remove access to the Fighter Skills abilities and passives from vampire in Cyrodiil and Fire damage cannot be mitigated by the Stage 3 resistance.

That will solve the balance problems we have.

olsborg · January 18

Undeath has been a part of pvp meta for years now, and its been a staple of said meta, its time they nerfed it. Tankmeta is boring.

Muizer · January 18

There should be a high risk / reward vampire hunter build. E.g.,
- add heavy damage and strong utility against undead in fighters guild
- allow access to fighters guild skills for mortals only
- penalize player for slotting fighters guild abilities when damaging mortals (perhaps a reverse resource siphon).

p_tsakirisb16_ESO · January 18

Muizer wrote: »

There should be a high risk / reward vampire hunter build. E.g.,
- add heavy damage and strong utility against undead in fighters guild
- allow access to fighters guild skills for mortals only
- penalize player for slotting fighters guild abilities when damaging mortals (perhaps a reverse resource siphon).

I am with you on this

And we had heavy damage abilities on FG line. Leash and Dawnwrath had a chance to outright one shoot a vampire and there was a spectacular puff leaving their glowing ashes on the ground

Turn Undead was funny as made them flee without having control on their character.

But Nord DK Vampire Emperors (meta combo) took at the forums crying, that shouldn't be possible a Templar (Templars were only for fodder back then) using Fighters Guild abilities, was able to kill them in 1 to 1 combat, while they (Nord DK Vampire Emperors and ex emperors) were able to fight in 1 vs 30 or more zerg coming out victorious. (plenty of videos from that Era)

So ZOS listened to them, nerfed the Fighters Guild to Oblivion....

So the few Mortals left in Cyrodiil just soldering along.

But I had enough.
People need to stand up and demand from ZOS to sort this out, as for almost 10 years PVP has been relegated to Vampires Online, killing the game motto "play as you like".

SandandStars · January 21

^^ Totally agree ^^

and yet, this request seems to vanish into a chasm of deep disregard…

OtarTheMad · January 22

FG just like MG have a spare slot, all other skill lines but these have 5 and an ult, these got 4.

So just give FG the TES spell Bane of the Undead. It does regular amount of damage to enemies unless a vamp or WW who gets hit for more.

Adernath · January 22

I've tested going vamp in PvP recently, since I refused to this for years. And yes I have to agree, it is quite easier now to survive in certain situations with no significant drawback.

The reason is that hp regen in PvP is extremely low anyways, so it doesn't make much difference if you have an additional penalty here. The hp gets back by heals anyways.

The resource increased cost in magicka and stamina is slightly noticable, but with properly adjusting the build a little, it just works as good as before.

Overall the undeath passive needs some adjustment, perhaps 15% damage mitigation would be the sweet spot.

Heals_With_Orbs · January 27

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

For 10 years the PVP on this game is dominated by vampires.
On the first month of the release we had actually a counter using Fighters Guild skills, but those were nerfed to the ground after the vampire PVP crowd took the forums complaining that they were getting wrecked by them.

The majority joined the crowd to Undeath but there is a minority with refuses to follow and sticking to the Elder Scrolls Lore actually.

Dear Zos, why this issue hasn't been resolved all those years? Vampires get benefits and ZERO drawbacks when comes to PVP.
Their initial design was OK because there was a counter but not since May-June 2014 post nerf of FG skills.

Do you plan ever to bring balance? At least let their Stage 3 passive to be negated by Fire and FG abilities. Bring back the double damage against vampires the FG skills had when in Cyrodiil.
Block their access to the Fighters Guild tree when in Cyrodiil / Battlegrounds. Is against the Lore too.

Non Vampires are in true disadvantage here because not only they don't get such huge passive boosts, but there are no abilities to work around them.

Everyone says that PVP needs balancing and sorting out, start at least by fixing what effectively made PVP on this game "Vampires Online".

Totally agree, so do dozens of others, so why do ZOS not listen and act?

What I would like to ask is who decided that vampires can run around in the day time with no penalty? They are creatures of the night, alongside werewolves, who transform under a full moon. There should be a severe penalty for players like this in PVP. Why has the lore of vampires changed in this game?

We have a rotten PVP environment full of vamps, and invisible players that are extremely difficult to counter - so what is the purpose of this? Does it appeal to cowards and people who dont like to get killed? well why player a PVP game?

What ZOS is saying is "unless you do this - you will be inferior", and that is simply a dreadful game design.

I have stopped playing PVP, because of the following reasons, the tank meta, awful ball groups that are on 24/7, undeath and practically unkillable vamps, arnie's invisible predator, I mean nightlblades, and awful lag.

Rubbish and garbage.

Sluggy · January 27

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Woodenplank wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Dear Zos, why this issue hasn't been resolved all those years?...

"Dear devs, why haven't you fixed X" does not, contrary to popular belief, make the devs rush to your aid to fix the problem. Any how...

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Vampires get benefits and ZERO drawbacks when comes to PVP.

I wouldn't say "ZERO drawbacks" - A Stage3 Vamp's Regular abilities cost 8% more and they take 13% more Fire damage. Saying that has "ZERO" effect is like saying Armor of the Seducer's 5th bonus doesn't help magicka sustain, or the Battlefield Acrobat set doesn't really exist.

Does the benefit of the Undeath Passive (which is essentially all that's used) very much outweight the drawbacks? Yes. I agree on that part.

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Their initial design was OK because there was a counter but not since May-June 2014 post nerf of FG skills.

Are you referring to the *initial* design? Like waay back when everyone and their grandmother was a Stage 1 Vamp because it gave +20% free recoveries with like... 5% more Fire Damage taken at worst?
Oh, and Elusive Mist was busted back then.

Greymoor introduced the problematic Undeath passive, yes. And we did get a ****storm of perma-Bloodmist tomfoolery for a while, but they fixed that.
I'd say Vampires are better now than originally. The skills are more interesting, and you actually see people bothering with more than Stage 1.

Is it perfect? No; far from it. But I'd say ZOS has definitely improved on the Vampire experience since release.

Ahh the Fire Damage argument, which is mitigated with CPs and glyph.

Spare us. Even vampire players on the guild agree that the 30% mitigation is TOO MUCH and there are NO REAL PENALTIES.

Methinks you didn't actually read their post. They were agreeing with you while trying to avoid hyperbole.

Oblivion_Protocol · January 27

Let’s be honest here. Even without Undeath, tanky players will find ways to survive. Undeath doesn’t account for people who can use los, heal themselves effectively, and wear powerful defensive sets. Besides, the mitigation isn’t even that strong. It’s a sliding scale to 30% as your health gets lower. But the time you get to the 30%, you’re scrambling not to die. I’ve seen a lot of vamp players try to walk that line and more of them fail than succeed. People just focus on the successes and say, “See, the passive is overpowered, so nerf it now!”

Trust me, for every uber-tank that can survive a nuke, there are ten players that melt like butter. You’re just more likely to run into the tanks because they’ve got the skill to survive long enough to eventually run into you.

The ESO PvP meta is what it is. If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em. Might as well accept it and either get that vamp bite and deal or go without and figure out another way to be effective in combat.

JanTanhide · January 27

Vampires are fine as is. Stop the nerf train.

Udrath · January 27

@Obilvion_Proctocol

I agree that players will find a way, but the problem is players people are stacking damage sets with high hp to get the most out of undeath. If you have 35-40k hp you’re going to get like 15-20% damage reduction at the 10k-15k range, which is huge. The 30% damage reduction scaling is similar to wearing a set of pariah that is twice as strong. Pariah mitigates like 18% once you are at the cap.