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:
• 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)

Cross healing just solved. So easy....

JerBearESO
JerBearESO
✭✭✭✭
Mutli targeted healing/shielding should be devided amongst all targets when battle spirit is active, as a new standard.

For example, an area heal of 10k would instead be 5k per person if affecting 2 players, and if 3 it would be 3.3k, and 2.5k if 4 players. This is soooooo easy to implement and fully solves the grievous issues within PvP stemming from how overperformin cross healing/shielding.

I know it seems that a flat reduction and cross healing is easier, or a cap on heal instances, but those present underlying issues. For example, how do we decide which heal would be in effect? Whichever is stronger? Longer duration? How do you know when your attempts at healing allies are disabled for you due to reached instance cap? And there are other issues with those approaches....

But this! I'm a genius 😎 It should be extremely easy to code in, minimal performance impact since it's a single simple calculation, and solves everything in a way that truly makes sense.

Right?
  • Dagoth_Rac
    Dagoth_Rac
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    Would work for ball groups where 12 players are all cross-healing. But what about traditional small group PvP? With a dedicated healer role? The current heals perform reasonably well as a single heal to cover a group of 3 or 4. But if the heals are cut to a fraction of what they are now? It will force every group, big or small, to engage in cross healing. If heals in a group of 4 are cut to 25% power, you can't have 1 traditional healer. All 4 players need to be healers or there will not be enough incoming healing for that group to survive all but the most trivial engagements.

    So, basically, it will hurt ball groups, but hurt other groups even more.
  • Jsmalls
    Jsmalls
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Dagoth_Rac wrote: »
    Would work for ball groups where 12 players are all cross-healing. But what about traditional small group PvP? With a dedicated healer role? The current heals perform reasonably well as a single heal to cover a group of 3 or 4. But if the heals are cut to a fraction of what they are now? It will force every group, big or small, to engage in cross healing. If heals in a group of 4 are cut to 25% power, you can't have 1 traditional healer. All 4 players need to be healers or there will not be enough incoming healing for that group to survive all but the most trivial engagements.

    So, basically, it will hurt ball groups, but hurt other groups even more.

    I disagree, every player has access to self healing, and a dedicated healer should supplement that not fully replace it. This would require each player to make the choice of staying offensive or shifting to one of the MANY defensive mechanics available in the game.

    I think this is a great solution to a serious problem in the game.
  • JerBearESO
    JerBearESO
    ✭✭✭✭
    Dagoth_Rac wrote: »
    Would work for ball groups where 12 players are all cross-healing. But what about traditional small group PvP? With a dedicated healer role? The current heals perform reasonably well as a single heal to cover a group of 3 or 4. But if the heals are cut to a fraction of what they are now? It will force every group, big or small, to engage in cross healing. If heals in a group of 4 are cut to 25% power, you can't have 1 traditional healer. All 4 players need to be healers or there will not be enough incoming healing for that group to survive all but the most trivial engagements.

    So, basically, it will hurt ball groups, but hurt other groups even more.

    I see your concern, but keep in mind we are only talking about splitting up multi target healing/shielding, so a dedicated healer role still gets full value out of single target heals they cast. I think that would be reasonable. Keeping multi target HoTs up for casual protection would still be worth while, but the healer would need to actively focus heal with some kind of single target heal as needed. Kinda sounds more engaging than just spreading multi target HoTs everywhere, which is what I usually see from this role. I never play the role though so let me know if I'm missing the plot here
  • CameraBeardThePirate
    CameraBeardThePirate
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    Seriously, just nix HoT stacking.

    ZOS already implemented a stack limit with Chakrams - if an Arcanist casts Chakrams on you, another Arcanist cannot stack nor refresh Chakrams on you. Make that a global change for HoTs but with a limit of 2 instead of 1.
    Edited by CameraBeardThePirate on January 27, 2024 4:30PM
  • Sluggy
    Sluggy
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    JerBearESO wrote: »
    Mutli targeted healing/shielding should be devided amongst all targets when battle spirit is active, as a new standard.

    For example, an area heal of 10k would instead be 5k per person if affecting 2 players, and if 3 it would be 3.3k, and 2.5k if 4 players. This is soooooo easy to implement and fully solves the grievous issues within PvP stemming from how overperformin cross healing/shielding.

    I know it seems that a flat reduction and cross healing is easier, or a cap on heal instances, but those present underlying issues. For example, how do we decide which heal would be in effect? Whichever is stronger? Longer duration? How do you know when your attempts at healing allies are disabled for you due to reached instance cap? And there are other issues with those approaches....

    But this! I'm a genius 😎 It should be extremely easy to code in, minimal performance impact since it's a single simple calculation, and solves everything in a way that truly makes sense.

    Right?

    This would only serve to make heal stacking more prevalent. Also, for the record if you are not allowing stacking then you *always* have to use the strongest hot in effect. Otherwise Timmy the Two-Timer comes in with his weak 150 vigors and regens to deliberately override his 'allies' and allow the other faction to wipe the floor.

    And as for the easy-to-code: only zos can say that but it would absolutely be worse for performance. The number of calculations would skyrocket. As it is they can at least early-out after doing some preliminary checks to see who should get the heal and then they only need to run the heal calculations on those targets. Doing it your way would completely negate the benefit of the early-out when reaching the target cap.
    Edited by Sluggy on January 27, 2024 4:47PM
  • JerBearESO
    JerBearESO
    ✭✭✭✭
    Seriously, just nix HoT stacking.

    ZOS already implemented a stack limit with Chakrams - if an Arcanist casts Chakrams on you, another Arcanist cannot stack nor refresh Chakrams on you. Make that a global change for HoTs but with a limit of 2 instead of 1.

    But then an organized ball group just spreads out what kind of HoTs and shields they stack. My suggestion accounts for all circumstances :)
  • JerBearESO
    JerBearESO
    ✭✭✭✭
    Sluggy wrote: »
    JerBearESO wrote: »
    Mutli targeted healing/shielding should be devided amongst all targets when battle spirit is active, as a new standard.

    For example, an area heal of 10k would instead be 5k per person if affecting 2 players, and if 3 it would be 3.3k, and 2.5k if 4 players. This is soooooo easy to implement and fully solves the grievous issues within PvP stemming from how overperformin cross healing/shielding.

    I know it seems that a flat reduction and cross healing is easier, or a cap on heal instances, but those present underlying issues. For example, how do we decide which heal would be in effect? Whichever is stronger? Longer duration? How do you know when your attempts at healing allies are disabled for you due to reached instance cap? And there are other issues with those approaches....

    But this! I'm a genius 😎 It should be extremely easy to code in, minimal performance impact since it's a single simple calculation, and solves everything in a way that truly makes sense.

    Right?

    This would only serve to make heal stacking more prevalent. Also, for the record if you are not allowing stacking then you *always* have to use the strongest hot in effect. Otherwise Timmy the Two-Timer comes in with his weak 150 vigors and regens to deliberately override his 'allies' and allow the other faction to wipe the floor.

    And as for the easy-to-code: only zos can say that but it would absolutely be worse for performance. The number of calculations would skyrocket. As it is they can at least early-out after doing some preliminary checks to see who should get the heal and then they only need to run the heal calculations on those targets. Doing it your way would completely negate the benefit of the early-out when reaching the target cap.

    I don't know ZoSs code obviously but I am a programmer and they already have full support for the slight code adjustments needed. They already track how many entities are being affected by an AoE of any kind I would assume, otherwise target capping would be accomplish through rather amateur code implementation, as in per circumstances rather than reusable support.

    All that's need from there is a simple value /= targetCount sort of thing.

    Should be easy to implement and cost very little, nearly nothing, on server performance
  • Sluggy
    Sluggy
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    JerBearESO wrote: »
    Sluggy wrote: »
    JerBearESO wrote: »
    Mutli targeted healing/shielding should be devided amongst all targets when battle spirit is active, as a new standard.

    For example, an area heal of 10k would instead be 5k per person if affecting 2 players, and if 3 it would be 3.3k, and 2.5k if 4 players. This is soooooo easy to implement and fully solves the grievous issues within PvP stemming from how overperformin cross healing/shielding.

    I know it seems that a flat reduction and cross healing is easier, or a cap on heal instances, but those present underlying issues. For example, how do we decide which heal would be in effect? Whichever is stronger? Longer duration? How do you know when your attempts at healing allies are disabled for you due to reached instance cap? And there are other issues with those approaches....

    But this! I'm a genius 😎 It should be extremely easy to code in, minimal performance impact since it's a single simple calculation, and solves everything in a way that truly makes sense.

    Right?

    This would only serve to make heal stacking more prevalent. Also, for the record if you are not allowing stacking then you *always* have to use the strongest hot in effect. Otherwise Timmy the Two-Timer comes in with his weak 150 vigors and regens to deliberately override his 'allies' and allow the other faction to wipe the floor.

    And as for the easy-to-code: only zos can say that but it would absolutely be worse for performance. The number of calculations would skyrocket. As it is they can at least early-out after doing some preliminary checks to see who should get the heal and then they only need to run the heal calculations on those targets. Doing it your way would completely negate the benefit of the early-out when reaching the target cap.

    I don't know ZoSs code obviously but I am a programmer and they already have full support for the slight code adjustments needed. They already track how many entities are being affected by an AoE of any kind I would assume, otherwise target capping would be accomplish through rather amateur code implementation, as in per circumstances rather than reusable support.

    All that's need from there is a simple value /= targetCount sort of thing.

    Should be easy to implement and cost very little, nearly nothing, on server performance

    I am also a programmer - specifically a game programmer. But you don't need to be one to understand that 12^2 is a larger number than 12*6. And it scales worse. n*6 is linear. n^2 is exponential. You change the game to allow a group of arbitrary size to cast heals on everyone in an AoE and I'll bring the server down within a minute of it going live. The game already can barely handle the heal stacking as it is.

    At the time you cast echoing vigor, yes, it needs to see who is affected and who isn't so that it can filter out the whitelist for the 'smart healing'. But at the end of the day you are left with 6 people who actually have a heal ticking on them per cast skill. If fifty people stand in a single spot and cast vigor at the same time you won't end up with 2,500 instances of vigor ticking under the current system. You'll end up with 300.
    Edited by Sluggy on January 28, 2024 12:11AM
  • OnGodiDoDis
    OnGodiDoDis
    ✭✭✭
    JerBearESO wrote: »
    Mutli targeted healing/shielding should be devided amongst all targets when battle spirit is active, as a new standard.

    For example, an area heal of 10k would instead be 5k per person if affecting 2 players, and if 3 it would be 3.3k, and 2.5k if 4 players. This is soooooo easy to implement and fully solves the grievous issues within PvP stemming from how overperformin cross healing/shielding.

    I know it seems that a flat reduction and cross healing is easier, or a cap on heal instances, but those present underlying issues. For example, how do we decide which heal would be in effect? Whichever is stronger? Longer duration? How do you know when your attempts at healing allies are disabled for you due to reached instance cap? And there are other issues with those approaches....

    But this! I'm a genius 😎 It should be extremely easy to code in, minimal performance impact since it's a single simple calculation, and solves everything in a way that truly makes sense.

    Right?

    This would effectively kill healing, which we don't want. There would be no way to outheal an ulti dump from a ball group. The groups still win in the end.
  • JerBearESO
    JerBearESO
    ✭✭✭✭
    Sluggy wrote: »
    JerBearESO wrote: »
    Sluggy wrote: »
    JerBearESO wrote: »
    Mutli targeted healing/shielding should be devided amongst all targets when battle spirit is active, as a new standard.

    For example, an area heal of 10k would instead be 5k per person if affecting 2 players, and if 3 it would be 3.3k, and 2.5k if 4 players. This is soooooo easy to implement and fully solves the grievous issues within PvP stemming from how overperformin cross healing/shielding.

    I know it seems that a flat reduction and cross healing is easier, or a cap on heal instances, but those present underlying issues. For example, how do we decide which heal would be in effect? Whichever is stronger? Longer duration? How do you know when your attempts at healing allies are disabled for you due to reached instance cap? And there are other issues with those approaches....

    But this! I'm a genius 😎 It should be extremely easy to code in, minimal performance impact since it's a single simple calculation, and solves everything in a way that truly makes sense.

    Right?

    This would only serve to make heal stacking more prevalent. Also, for the record if you are not allowing stacking then you *always* have to use the strongest hot in effect. Otherwise Timmy the Two-Timer comes in with his weak 150 vigors and regens to deliberately override his 'allies' and allow the other faction to wipe the floor.

    And as for the easy-to-code: only zos can say that but it would absolutely be worse for performance. The number of calculations would skyrocket. As it is they can at least early-out after doing some preliminary checks to see who should get the heal and then they only need to run the heal calculations on those targets. Doing it your way would completely negate the benefit of the early-out when reaching the target cap.

    I don't know ZoSs code obviously but I am a programmer and they already have full support for the slight code adjustments needed. They already track how many entities are being affected by an AoE of any kind I would assume, otherwise target capping would be accomplish through rather amateur code implementation, as in per circumstances rather than reusable support.

    All that's need from there is a simple value /= targetCount sort of thing.

    Should be easy to implement and cost very little, nearly nothing, on server performance

    I am also a programmer - specifically a game programmer. But you don't need to be one to understand that 12^2 is a larger number than 12*6. And it scales worse. n*6 is linear. n^2 is exponential. You change the game to allow a group of arbitrary size to cast heals on everyone in an AoE and I'll bring the server down within a minute of it going live. The game already can barely handle the heal stacking as it is.

    At the time you cast echoing vigor, yes, it needs to see who is affected and who isn't so that it can filter out the whitelist for the 'smart healing'. But at the end of the day you are left with 6 people who actually have a heal ticking on them per cast skill. If fifty people stand in a single spot and cast vigor at the same time you won't end up with 2,500 instances of vigor ticking under the current system. You'll end up with 300.

    I think you misunderstand. There's no reason to work outside the target caps for the suggested change. We are not removing those caps. They're there for a reason. We just need to devide healing based on AFFECTED targets.
  • JerBearESO
    JerBearESO
    ✭✭✭✭
    JerBearESO wrote: »
    Mutli targeted healing/shielding should be devided amongst all targets when battle spirit is active, as a new standard.

    For example, an area heal of 10k would instead be 5k per person if affecting 2 players, and if 3 it would be 3.3k, and 2.5k if 4 players. This is soooooo easy to implement and fully solves the grievous issues within PvP stemming from how overperformin cross healing/shielding.

    I know it seems that a flat reduction and cross healing is easier, or a cap on heal instances, but those present underlying issues. For example, how do we decide which heal would be in effect? Whichever is stronger? Longer duration? How do you know when your attempts at healing allies are disabled for you due to reached instance cap? And there are other issues with those approaches....

    But this! I'm a genius 😎 It should be extremely easy to code in, minimal performance impact since it's a single simple calculation, and solves everything in a way that truly makes sense.

    Right?

    This would effectively kill healing, which we don't want. There would be no way to outheal an ulti dump from a ball group. The groups still win in the end.

    This change would be the first to actually deal with ball groups overperforming nature. They would still be strong, as a coordinadet group should be, but finally reasonably killable. They would feel the impact of the change the most, as intended, as needed.

    And yes, everyone wants this. The forums are currently full of topics on wanting cross healing solved 😀
  • CameraBeardThePirate
    CameraBeardThePirate
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    JerBearESO wrote: »
    Seriously, just nix HoT stacking.

    ZOS already implemented a stack limit with Chakrams - if an Arcanist casts Chakrams on you, another Arcanist cannot stack nor refresh Chakrams on you. Make that a global change for HoTs but with a limit of 2 instead of 1.

    But then an organized ball group just spreads out what kind of HoTs and shields they stack. My suggestion accounts for all circumstances :)

    So? That's a good thing - it means more build and class diversity and more thought put in to how you build a group composition.
  • Sluggy
    Sluggy
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    JerBearESO wrote: »
    I think you misunderstand. There's no reason to work outside the target caps for the suggested change. We are not removing those caps. They're there for a reason. We just need to devide healing based on AFFECTED targets.
    You're right. I did misunderstand. In that case it's at least an interesting alternative to removal of stacking altogether and probably the best suggestion I've heard outside of that.
  • JerBearESO
    JerBearESO
    ✭✭✭✭
    JerBearESO wrote: »
    Seriously, just nix HoT stacking.

    ZOS already implemented a stack limit with Chakrams - if an Arcanist casts Chakrams on you, another Arcanist cannot stack nor refresh Chakrams on you. Make that a global change for HoTs but with a limit of 2 instead of 1.

    But then an organized ball group just spreads out what kind of HoTs and shields they stack. My suggestion accounts for all circumstances :)

    So? That's a good thing - it means more build and class diversity and more thought put in to how you build a group composition.

    Build diversity is my favorite part of this game! I only meant the impact of limiting HoT instances would not be a solution to ball groups unkillable nature, since they would just build to account for it. A lot of people suggest HoT instance limitation to solve the ball groups overperforming problem, but it actually wouldn't solve it, for said reason. My suggestion would in a thorough all inclusive and fair way finally solve it so that the over use of multi targeted healing/shielding would not have capacity to overperform
  • Quackery
    Quackery
    ✭✭✭✭
    Absolutely not! Stop with these threads about cross-healing, the randomers in Cyrodiil are alive because of me and other healers! And no, some of us don't want to be in groups, we prefer to just heal as we wish as long as we help. Having the heal shared is just trash!

    Leave cross-healing alone!
  • JerBearESO
    JerBearESO
    ✭✭✭✭
    Quackery wrote: »
    Absolutely not! Stop with these threads about cross-healing, the randomers in Cyrodiil are alive because of me and other healers! And no, some of us don't want to be in groups, we prefer to just heal as we wish as long as we help. Having the heal shared is just trash!

    Leave cross-healing alone!

    OK OK I hear what your saying. But also...oooooorrr we could push for ZoS to fix the cross healing problem, arguably the most laughably detrimental yet solvable problem to ever face the PvP side of this game. Can be solved overnight....

    And remember, if your multi heals are shared, so are those of the enemy groups, so it's not as though you would be getting nerfed comparatively. Just a maaaaajor joy kill of a problem getting solved. That's all 😀
  • RoseTheSnowElf
    RoseTheSnowElf
    ✭✭✭
    I'm no programmer, so admittedly I have no idea how the backend calculations work.

    But from my experiences fighting against these grps with crazy heals and having now played exclusively as a solo healer for a whole camp and planning to do so for the foreseeable future, heals that apply on the move are the ones we are all placing the blame on. So sticky heals, sticky HoTs.

    The ball grps and the small scale troll grps are always on the move. They don't rely on stationary aoe heals because staying still is a death sentence to that style of play. Not saying they don't use them, but they don't rely on them.

    In my personal experience, as a predominantly solo dps, and now a predominantly solo healer, I've never noticed more than 2 of a like sticky HoT on my bar at any given time.

    And the one time my faction's largest ball grp ran past me spamming vigor I had probably 6 of them on my buff bar. I had never seen that before. I imagine it's probably more than 6 for them who are running in the grp at any given time.

    So my input would be, the best solution that might tone down the cross healing without harming the solo or duos or pug grps, limit like sticky HoTs from identical sources to 2 or 3 per target. A system like this is already in the backend with same named buffs not stacking and some sets having stipulations on how many proccs per target.

    Leave ground aoe heals (including orbs here) alone. These type of aoe heals allows for army against army fights. And allows for solos, duos and pug grps to work together without having to expressly coordinate or unknowingly compete with each other to help keep each other alive.
    PS5 NA EP GH

    Wood Elf NB - 5 Star

    Dark Elf Arcanist (healer) - AR 37
Sign In or Register to comment.