Hardened Ward heal making it to live is a mistake and needs to be changed

StaticWave

Galeriano2 wrote: »

StaticWave wrote: »

Oh and btw, there are many ppl on the forums who think they know what they’re talking about, until you find them in game and they turn out to be not that great.

I remember having an argument with someone about Sorc balance a few years ago, and he was getting a lot of “likes” for his comments. His style of arguing was like some ppl here, with lots of disproving ppl’s points while having zero essence in his arguments and didn’t bother to provide a constructive counter argument.

Long story short, I accidentally ran into him in game and he was a CP 350. I requested to duel him right there, and killed him in 10 seconds. His mechanics was what I would expect from a below-average player in Cyrodiil.

I love to argue constructively, but sometimes I run into ppl like him on the forums and I wonder if there should be a function to show who actually knows what they’re talking about or not. It’s fine to say the skill is helpful for casual players, and I completely agree with that, but to claim it’s “fine and not overperforming”, while many top tier players say otherwise, is either blatantly arguing in bad faith or a lack of understanding of combat balance.

Going by this logic only people who were the top sport players can be top sport coaches. We know it doesn't wortk like that in both real life so why it should work like that in gaming? You can have pretty new players that are pretty average at clicking but still provide some decent arguments and on the other hand You can have veterans that are pretty good at gameplay that have no idea what they're talking about. This is why it's better to focus on the arguments themselves rather than people that provided them.


Oh and btw it's been a month since U41 release. Where are all the shieldspamming sorcs dominating PvP? If to belive that thread earlier predictions we should see overflow of sorcs like that already.

Okay what exactly did RomanRex provide for his argument other than saying these things:

1) “Ward is fine and not overpowered”
2) “Only the same few ppl think it’s overpowered”
3) “I haven’t seen it overperforming”

Zero data. Zero clips of his gameplay. Zero clips of other Sorc gameplay. Zero K/D report. Not even an attempt at arguing why Ward is not broken.

All I’ve seen from him are non-constructive comments. For what amount of PvP experience that he claimed, I would expect he explain why Ward is not over performing, don’t you think? Or is it literally arguing in bad faith cause he wants the ward to stay but can’t think of a reason why it should?

StaticWave

The truth is it doesn’t matter how many CMX screenshots, BG clips, Cyrodiil clips I or @xylena_lazarow show. People who want Ward to stay as it is will refuse to acknowledge that it’s overperforming. It’s just like the NB mains saying Cloak doesn’t deserve an adjustment.

So I think it’s really simple. I’ll hop on my magsorc and I’ll mirror duel whoever argues that Ward is balanced. It doesn’t matter who wins or loses. What matters is the CMX data, and I’ll explain why:

We’ll do 4 duels. I’ll be using Ward for 4 duels. The other person will use Ward for 2 duels, and a burst heal for 2 duels. If Ward was truly not broken, then all 4 duels should last relatively the same amount of time, with 10-20 seconds of error margin. If Ward was broken, then the duels with Ward would last substantially longer than those with a burst heal.

Bushido2513

StaticWave wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

StaticWave wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

DaisyRay wrote: »

Maybe I'm just using it wrong, but hardened ward doesn't give me any significant advantage that the shield didn't already provide. I rely on other heals on my bar, so the small heal from the shield isn't noticeable outside of when I'm on my negate tank. It's no where near the amount of the dk or warden heal.

100%. This change helps most players. The issues being repeated here ad nauseum are for niche builds/situations that a majority of casual players don’t engage with. The skill is perfectly fine after the change. It makes sorcs competitive without being overpowered.

@RomanRex

You have zero arguments to prove the skill is fine lol. I’ve noticed that several of your comments in this thread follow the same pattern:

1) You claimed the issues I’ve raised are hypothetical
2) You claimed the skill is fine and not over powered
3) You claimed I’m just beating a dead horse

Yet you haven’t provided a single piece of evidence to prove me wrong other than your “personal experience”, which you never cared to elaborate either lol. Using your logic, my personal experience has been nothing but magsorcs dominating the majority of PvP fights. I’ve included several Youtube videos of well-known and experienced Sorc players, who quite frankly, are better PvPers than most people on this thread. They all say the same thing about Ward overperforming.

I’m sorry to say this, and I don’t mean to be toxic, but you are probably not playing at the level I’m playing at. All your comments have been pretty non constructive so far. And tbh, I’m quite tired of having to argue with people who clearly don’t understand the problem. If you happen to be on PCNA, let’s do a few duels in Stormhaven, then queue for BG yea? Show me how Ward isn’t overpowered, and I’ll show you why you’re wrong.

@StaticWave

But your comments are just as useful and just as useless.

Neither is right or wrong because you can't prove or disprove an opinion.

The only thing we know for certain is some feel ward is over performing and others don't. There's no way to really know who is in any way more correct than the other because we don't have that data. And to be clear I mean true data that only ZOS has.

It's perfectly fine to post clips and share cmx data but that is just one way of seeing it.

Just as you Static say someone isn't playing at your level remember that you too might not be playing at theirs.

Does the vote of a zergling count any less than that of the 1vx player? Nope it doesn't. Both players matter equally because they both play the same game even if they have different visions for what's ok or not in the game.


Without data from the whole population you or anyone else is just saying this is what I saw when I logged in for a free hours. It's interesting but not definitive.

What we actually need that we don't have is things like the following.

Full population metrics to understand the spike in sorc population and how it measures over time. Not just someone or a few someones saying I saw or didn't see sorcs everywhere.

Sorc shield size and usage metrics for the entire population. We can't rely on the one person or small group posting about cmx, duels, a video they clipped, etc. It's not true to the full picture.

TTK data on sorc encounters to understand if they truly are killing or getting killed more or less in encounters when the population is factored in.


Sensing a theme here on things we don't have that we can only guess at?


I'm not saying this to detract from any views shared here so far but just to remind everyone that nobody has a clear picture truly so all we can do is share opinions and views and respect others that are doing the same even if we don't agree.

It's totally fine to share thoughts and hope the devs read it. And it makes sense to present points and counter points. But unless you work in development for ZOS your opinion is just as valuable or not valuable as anyone else playing the game in this specific case.

@Bushido2513

1) Relying on data is useless. Look at NB lol. They constantly get PvP buffs despite them being intended for PvE. So either ZOS doesn’t care about PvP data, or they don’t have the same metrics as we do

2) My comments are definitely not useless. Idk why you would even say that lol. I’ve been showing cases of where Shield over performs. Compare that to RomanRex who hops in the thread once in a while to comment something useless like “only a few people are talking” or “sorc is fine and not OP” without showing any concrete evidence, even in the form of his personal gameplay. You’re arguing in bad faith here cmon man lol

3) The vote of a zergling only matters if he shows his own gameplay. If he doesn’t, then his vote holds no weight. What would be the point of testing then if ppl can just argue without needing to experience it themselves?

Anyone who buys the game is a stakeholder as much as anyone here. If you own the game, pay your monthly, etc then you and me are the same in the eyes of ZOS.

As an example when you join this forum to give input they don't ask how many hours you've played and there is no ongoing check there after. You are free to post here whether you play at a certain level or not. So to the makers of the game everyone is equally welcome here to give input regardless of any measures you or anyone else has regarding their worth to do so.

Your comments are indeed useless to someone that say just wants to run around with friends and doesn't care if they die and just prefers to zerg. They won't care one bit to duel or if a sorc blast them, or if they have to go 10 v1 to kill a sorc. They would look at all your data and clips and say yeah so?

Does that mean it's invalid no, just that it's also not to be taken as a universal truth or any more concrete than anyone else's opinion.

Bushido2513

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

This a wonderful necessary fix that helps make most sorcs more competitive without being overpowered.

This isn't the first time this argument has come up ITT but it's worth addressing again. Sure you can take any broken op game element you want, pair it with incoherent junk, and the resulting build won't be overpowered. So what? Bad builds and bad gameplay aren't a measure of anything, see post 184. Last patch I should've argued that flat scaling MDW was fine because you could pair it with Bahraha + Spelunker and the resulting build wouldn't be overpowered.

That just leads to the next question which we have no actual answer for. How many are or are not using the most optimal broken setup?

What if indeed most are using this in a less offensive way? No way to actually tell to be honest. Just a bunch of people sharing their individual isolated experiences
.

RomanRex

Galeriano2 wrote: »

Going by this logic only people who were the top sport players can be top sport coaches.

This is exactly correct.

Galeriano2 wrote: »

Oh and btw it's been a month since U41 release. Where are all the shieldspamming sorcs dominating PvP? If to belive that thread earlier predictions we should see overflow of sorcs like that already.

The most important aspect here. This is why the concerns expressed early on this thread are largely theoretical and much ado about nothing. Those making the biggest noise here are only viewing it through their limited play style and preferred in-game activities. Theory crafting and niche situations vs the lived experience of many other active players.

Bushido2513

StaticWave wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

StaticWave wrote: »

. It’s fine to say the skill is helpful for casual players, and I completely agree with that, but to claim it’s “fine and not overperforming”, while many top tier players say otherwise, is either blatantly arguing in bad faith or a lack of understanding of combat balance.

Both of those can be true if the person doesn't share your desires and experiences for combat. That doesn't mean they don't have a point or don't understand combat. They just don't see it the same as you.

Then don’t shut down other people’s view and provide nothing of essence to explain? You’re beating around the bush in the thread.

To claim that Ward isn’t overperforming requires just as much evidence as claiming it is, because like you said, it isn’t set in stone yet. The burden of proof is up to both you and me, not just me. I provided my side of the argument, and you must also provide your side. You and @RomanRex arguing without showing sources of evidence is arguing in bad faith. It’s just how it is.

But your evidence doesn't actually prove anything. I'm not even being silly or a jerk here.

But seriously what do your data points or videos really prove in the context of the full player base or the game?

Your data is from a fraction of a fraction of a grain of sand in regards to what the player base may or may not see or care about.

You're posting isolated data incidents of your experiences and asking us to extrapolate that across the entirety of the massive thing that is pvp and all that play in it.

You paint these very specific scenarios and ask us to match them but guess what this game isn't a very specific scenario and you trying to make it one doesn't make it so.

I posted my data requirements which as I mentioned only ZOS has. So I can't give you an accurate answer and neither can you. Posting bits of data about testing you conducted on your own doesn't really tell us a whole lot.


Look at Tarnished, that's an example where the majority agrees because there's just very little anyone can say from a combat view to say it's clearly not busted. This situation is not that by a mile. There's too much that can vary to get a consensus.


So if you have some actual back end data to backup your claims I'll be the first to agree. Otherwise all your evidence is just anecdotal for the most part.

RomanRex

@StaticWave I’m glad you enjoy dueling, but this isn’t Elder Duels Online. Many PvP and almost all PvE players never/seldom duel. I play tons and tons of Battlegrounds but have only dueled a few times. Hardened Ward may be particularly advantageous in duels, but even that can be addressed if you are prepared. Sorcs moving up the duelist tier ranking list is not a valid reason to negate or claw back this very important change.

Trying to make a skill appropriate for your play style while not addressing its impact on the rest of the community is myopic. People have long had complaints about skills in the DK or NB toolkit that seem OP in certain situations, but it isn’t just about those limited encounters. It is about the complete picture and gameplay across the board.

xylena_lazarow

Bushido2513 wrote: »

That just leads to the next question which we have no actual answer for. How many are or are not using the most optimal broken setup?

No, it doesn't lead to that. You didn't need the entire server landing 60k Tarnished procs to know something was broken, and no amount of potato builds hitting 1.2k on their Tarnished procs were gonna make its top end somehow not broken.

Bushido2513

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

That just leads to the next question which we have no actual answer for. How many are or are not using the most optimal broken setup?

No, it doesn't lead to that. You didn't need the entire server landing 60k Tarnished procs to know something was broken, and no amount of potato builds hitting 1.2k on their Tarnished procs were gonna make its top end somehow not broken.

Yes but Tarnished is easy to repeat, screencap, clip, etc and it can effect several players at one time. It's also a very specific one sided effect.

Now look at sorc and ward, you have a wide variety for build range, skill level, number of opponents, etc.

Let's say you make a sorc build like Static is saying. Then you have to know how to play it, then you have to not get zerged down, then you have to kill people that can't easily kill you, then were those people potatoes, or were they cloakblsdes or health wardens, or was it another sorc you faced, are we talking duels or 1vx or xv1, is there a healer around, and on and on and on variables.


Tarnished is very VERY straightforward by comparison as it mostly only cares if there is a group of players and you fire a skill or skills in the right order.

See how one is super easy to spot while the other depends on several variables that can easily change?

xylena_lazarow

Bushido2513 wrote: »

Tarnished is very VERY straightforward by comparison as it mostly only cares if there is a group of players and you fire a skill or skills in the right order. See how one is super easy to spot while the other depends on several variables that can easily change?

Ward doesn't care who is around or what order you press buttons (it's only 1 button), and an unconditionally spammable 15k+ healy shield is pretty hard to miss. The variable of "user fails to stack the proper stat" can be ignored.

Bushido2513

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

Tarnished is very VERY straightforward by comparison as it mostly only cares if there is a group of players and you fire a skill or skills in the right order. See how one is super easy to spot while the other depends on several variables that can easily change?

Ward doesn't care who is around or what order you press buttons (it's only 1 button), and an unconditionally spammable 15k+ healy shield is pretty hard to miss. The variable of "user fails to stack the proper stat" can be ignored.

I mean you sure about that because yeah I can see that guy but what about the two nbs I can't see that hit hard or the dk that is locking me down and hitting with hard whips or the Tarnished bomber or the hard to kill warden or templar or Arcanist?


Because yes while I maybe can't kill that sorc that sorc isn't the only hard to kill target or even possibly the most lethal damage in gvg combat.

Ward spam is definitely effective but the limits are easily made visible in some of the common pvp scenarios I'd say.

StaticWave

RomanRex wrote: »

Galeriano2 wrote: »

Going by this logic only people who were the top sport players can be top sport coaches.

This is exactly correct.

Galeriano2 wrote: »

Oh and btw it's been a month since U41 release. Where are all the shieldspamming sorcs dominating PvP? If to belive that thread earlier predictions we should see overflow of sorcs like that already.

The most important aspect here. This is why the concerns expressed early on this thread are largely theoretical and much ado about nothing. Those making the biggest noise here are only viewing it through their limited play style and preferred in-game activities. Theory crafting and niche situations vs the lived experience of many other active players.

Theoretical? We literally did in game tests lol…

StaticWave

RomanRex wrote: »

@StaticWave I’m glad you enjoy dueling, but this isn’t Elder Duels Online. Many PvP and almost all PvE players never/seldom duel. I play tons and tons of Battlegrounds but have only dueled a few times. Hardened Ward may be particularly advantageous in duels, but even that can be addressed if you are prepared. Sorcs moving up the duelist tier ranking list is not a valid reason to negate or claw back this very important change.

Trying to make a skill appropriate for your play style while not addressing its impact on the rest of the community is myopic. People have long had complaints about skills in the DK or NB toolkit that seem OP in certain situations, but it isn’t just about those limited encounters. It is about the complete picture and gameplay across the board.

I play tons of battlegrounds too. What’s your @name on PC NA?

StaticWave

Bushido2513 wrote: »

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

Tarnished is very VERY straightforward by comparison as it mostly only cares if there is a group of players and you fire a skill or skills in the right order. See how one is super easy to spot while the other depends on several variables that can easily change?

Ward doesn't care who is around or what order you press buttons (it's only 1 button), and an unconditionally spammable 15k+ healy shield is pretty hard to miss. The variable of "user fails to stack the proper stat" can be ignored.

I mean you sure about that because yeah I can see that guy but what about the two nbs I can't see that hit hard or the dk that is locking me down and hitting with hard whips or the Tarnished bomber or the hard to kill warden or templar or Arcanist?


Because yes while I maybe can't kill that sorc that sorc isn't the only hard to kill target or even possibly the most lethal damage in gvg combat.

Ward spam is definitely effective but the limits are easily made visible in some of the common pvp scenarios I'd say.

No burst heal is going to save you from the scenario you just described either lol. You think a burst heal gonna save you from a DK whipping u into oblivion and 2 NBs ganking u from stealth? I beg to differ

HowlKimchi

Galeriano2 wrote: »

Oh and btw it's been a month since U41 release. Where are all the shieldspamming sorcs dominating PvP? If to belive that thread earlier predictions we should see overflow of sorcs like that already.

I see them a lot in IC. Nigh-unkillable, very high dps, can streak away when he wants. It actually put me off from playing IC a bit, so I finally got around to levelling an arcanist and getting skill points for him.

This thread has been very interesting to follow. I want to add my thoughts as well, and I've actually done so a couple of pages ago. To be clear, my stance is that hardened ward is overtuned and should be nerfed. A lot of people seem to dismiss @StaticWave's thoughts and evidence just because he duels and uses CMX and can be considered "sweaty." He's also a bit spicy when he talks. But actually it's because he's so focused on duels that his opinions are the most grounded on a controlled environment.

A controlled environment is necessary in testing hypotheses because you can

• isolate confounding variables
• ensure reproducability
• facilitate comparisons.

Personally, I don't like dueling because my preferred game mode is roaming in IC or 1/2vX-ing. BUT, in duels, the effectiveness of the ward is magnified, which will translate to the real world. Now sure, the more casual players will have more success with magsorcs now in casual-level pvp, but an OP ward is actually bad for them too, when they run into a "sweaty" sorc who can hit like a truck, can take truck-like hits, and moves faster than a truck on steroids, and can 1vX without even needing LoS. All enabled by one disproportionately strong skill.

In other competitive games, the opinion of highly skilled players matter because their contribution to the balance of the game trickles down and helps the lower MMR playerbase. Unfortunately, ESO is very casual and high level opinions rarely matter. To be clear though, I am not claiming to be a skilled player, but I'd like to believe that at my sweatiest era, I was pretty good, and that I understand the balance of the game.

StaticWave

HowlKimchi wrote: »

Galeriano2 wrote: »

Oh and btw it's been a month since U41 release. Where are all the shieldspamming sorcs dominating PvP? If to belive that thread earlier predictions we should see overflow of sorcs like that already.

I see them a lot in IC. Nigh-unkillable, very high dps, can streak away when he wants. It actually put me off from playing IC a bit, so I finally got around to levelling an arcanist and getting skill points for him.

This thread has been very interesting to follow. I want to add my thoughts as well, and I've actually done so a couple of pages ago. To be clear, my stance is that hardened ward is overtuned and should be nerfed. A lot of people seem to dismiss @StaticWave's thoughts and evidence just because he duels and uses CMX and can be considered "sweaty." He's also a bit spicy when he talks. But actually it's because he's so focused on duels that his opinions are the most grounded on a controlled environment.

A controlled environment is necessary in testing hypotheses because you can

• isolate confounding variables
• ensure reproducability
• facilitate comparisons.

Personally, I don't like dueling because my preferred game mode is roaming in IC or 1/2vX-ing. BUT, in duels, the effectiveness of the ward is magnified, which will translate to the real world. Now sure, the more casual players will have more success with magsorcs now in casual-level pvp, but an OP ward is actually bad for them too, when they run into a "sweaty" sorc who can hit like a truck, can take truck-like hits, and moves faster than a truck on steroids, and can 1vX without even needing LoS.

In other competitive games, the opinion of highly skilled players matter because their contribution to the balance of the game trickles down and helps the lower MMR playerbase. Unfortunately, ESO is very casual and high level opinions rarely matter. To be clear though, I am not claiming to be a skilled player, but I'd like to believe that at my sweatiest era, I was pretty good, and that I understand the balance of the game.

I don’t just duel though that’s the hilarious part they seem to miss. I’m also a seasoned BG and Cyrodiil player. My youtube channel only shows 1vX/smallscale fights in Cyrodiil too lol.

Like you said, when it comes to combat balance, I specifically use dueling as a base metric because I can control and eliminate other variables. Once I’ve established my testing in dueling, I will continue adding more variables, and that’s when I will test in BG and finally Cyrodiil.

I thought my arguments have been pretty clear. Well at least @HowlKimchi gets it lol

StaticWave

Bushido2513 wrote: »

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

That just leads to the next question which we have no actual answer for. How many are or are not using the most optimal broken setup?

No, it doesn't lead to that. You didn't need the entire server landing 60k Tarnished procs to know something was broken, and no amount of potato builds hitting 1.2k on their Tarnished procs were gonna make its top end somehow not broken.

Yes but Tarnished is easy to repeat, screencap, clip, etc and it can effect several players at one time. It's also a very specific one sided effect.

Now look at sorc and ward, you have a wide variety for build range, skill level, number of opponents, etc.

Let's say you make a sorc build like Static is saying. Then you have to know how to play it, then you have to not get zerged down, then you have to kill people that can't easily kill you, then were those people potatoes, or were they cloakblsdes or health wardens, or was it another sorc you faced, are we talking duels or 1vx or xv1, is there a healer around, and on and on and on variables.


Tarnished is very VERY straightforward by comparison as it mostly only cares if there is a group of players and you fire a skill or skills in the right order.

See how one is super easy to spot while the other depends on several variables that can easily change?

You're using an extreme case of a bugged set as an example for your argument, when literally every other PvP abilities/sets overperforming still require proper PvP skills and knowledge to be competitive. Using your logic, no class balance is needed except for Necromancer. No need to buff Templar, nerf DK, nerf NB, etc. because like you said, somebody could run my build and still die because they have to know how to play it, then not get zerged down, etc. See where this logic fails?

Like what I've said many times, NB is widely accepted as an overperforming class, but I still kill the majority of NBs because they are simply bad. When you factor in skill level difference and noncontrollable environmental factors, things start to become grey and it's harder to pin point exactly what's causing the issue.

StaticWave

Bushido2513 wrote: »

But your evidence doesn't actually prove anything. I'm not even being silly or a jerk here.

But seriously what do your data points or videos really prove in the context of the full player base or the game?

Your data is from a fraction of a fraction of a grain of sand in regards to what the player base may or may not see or care about.

You're posting isolated data incidents of your experiences and asking us to extrapolate that across the entirety of the massive thing that is pvp and all that play in it.

It proves that when all else equals, Ward is overperforming. This has been the case for literally every other combat balance issues. When all else equals, a full proc player destroys a full stat player. When all else equals, a NB would beat U40 Sorc, etc.

To deny that is to deny how combat balance works. You can't just say "casual players are not finding it OP" and completely ignore the multiple variables that could skew that statement, like skill level difference.

My data, while a fraction of ESO PvP, still proves that Ward is overperforming at the higher end of the player base. Skill difference has been removed from the equation, which makes for a less skewed analysis of the ability.

And like I said, if we use your logic then no proc set should be nerfed. I could run a non-meta proc build and still destroy a meta proc user if he's a bad player. Same logic applies to class balance too. No class should be nerfed then because I still destroy a majority of overperforming classes I run into simply because they're bad players.

Bushido2513

StaticWave wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

Tarnished is very VERY straightforward by comparison as it mostly only cares if there is a group of players and you fire a skill or skills in the right order. See how one is super easy to spot while the other depends on several variables that can easily change?

Ward doesn't care who is around or what order you press buttons (it's only 1 button), and an unconditionally spammable 15k+ healy shield is pretty hard to miss. The variable of "user fails to stack the proper stat" can be ignored.

I mean you sure about that because yeah I can see that guy but what about the two nbs I can't see that hit hard or the dk that is locking me down and hitting with hard whips or the Tarnished bomber or the hard to kill warden or templar or Arcanist?


Because yes while I maybe can't kill that sorc that sorc isn't the only hard to kill target or even possibly the most lethal damage in gvg combat.

Ward spam is definitely effective but the limits are easily made visible in some of the common pvp scenarios I'd say.

No burst heal is going to save you from the scenario you just described either lol. You think a burst heal gonna save you from a DK whipping u into oblivion and 2 NBs ganking u from stealth? I beg to differ

My point was that ward spam is interesting but not the most straight forward thing when you take into account the many other variables of pvp. This is vs something like Tarnished which coud be spotted and replicated as a problem regardless of a lot of other factors.

Bushido2513

StaticWave wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

That just leads to the next question which we have no actual answer for. How many are or are not using the most optimal broken setup?

No, it doesn't lead to that. You didn't need the entire server landing 60k Tarnished procs to know something was broken, and no amount of potato builds hitting 1.2k on their Tarnished procs were gonna make its top end somehow not broken.

Yes but Tarnished is easy to repeat, screencap, clip, etc and it can effect several players at one time. It's also a very specific one sided effect.

Now look at sorc and ward, you have a wide variety for build range, skill level, number of opponents, etc.

Let's say you make a sorc build like Static is saying. Then you have to know how to play it, then you have to not get zerged down, then you have to kill people that can't easily kill you, then were those people potatoes, or were they cloakblsdes or health wardens, or was it another sorc you faced, are we talking duels or 1vx or xv1, is there a healer around, and on and on and on variables.


Tarnished is very VERY straightforward by comparison as it mostly only cares if there is a group of players and you fire a skill or skills in the right order.

See how one is super easy to spot while the other depends on several variables that can easily change?

You're using an extreme case of a bugged set as an example for your argument, when literally every other PvP abilities/sets overperforming still require proper PvP skills and knowledge to be competitive. Using your logic, no class balance is needed except for Necromancer. No need to buff Templar, nerf DK, nerf NB, etc. because like you said, somebody could run my build and still die because they have to know how to play it, then not get zerged down, etc. See where this logic fails?

Like what I've said many times, NB is widely accepted as an overperforming class, but I still kill the majority of NBs because they are simply bad. When you factor in skill level difference and noncontrollable environmental factors, things start to become grey and it's harder to pin point exactly what's causing the issue.

I'm not saying no balance is needed but rather that nobody here has the actual data to make a balancing choice in the game's intended target audience of gvg.

I'm not saying anything about dueling because that data is a lot more straight forward but it's also clearly not what ZOS uses for balance so there's no point in really talking about it other than just as an observation.

I'm also not saying don't share theories, thoughts, ideas, etc. Just putting it out there the the data ZOS uses for balance isn't data we have so there is only our opinion based on our experiences which shouldn't be taken as any kind of fact or absolute.

Bushido2513

StaticWave wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

But your evidence doesn't actually prove anything. I'm not even being silly or a jerk here.

But seriously what do your data points or videos really prove in the context of the full player base or the game?

Your data is from a fraction of a fraction of a grain of sand in regards to what the player base may or may not see or care about.

You're posting isolated data incidents of your experiences and asking us to extrapolate that across the entirety of the massive thing that is pvp and all that play in it.

It proves that when all else equals, Ward is overperforming. This has been the case for literally every other combat balance issues. When all else equals, a full proc player destroys a full stat player. When all else equals, a NB would beat U40 Sorc, etc.

To deny that is to deny how combat balance works. You can't just say "casual players are not finding it OP" and completely ignore the multiple variables that could skew that statement, like skill level difference.

My data, while a fraction of ESO PvP, still proves that Ward is overperforming at the higher end of the player base. Skill difference has been removed from the equation, which makes for a less skewed analysis of the ability.

And like I said, if we use your logic then no proc set should be nerfed. I could run a non-meta proc build and still destroy a meta proc user if he's a bad player. Same logic applies to class balance too. No class should be nerfed then because I still destroy a majority of overperforming classes I run into simply because they're bad players.

See my other statement, game clearly targets gvg encounters and that's what ZOS balances around. It's easier for them and what I'm guessing is limited development resources. I don't like it but it can't be ignored either when we have these talks about balance and the direction of the game.

I've said this before but I'll be more clear. Why does your 1v1 data have any weight when we can see that ZOS doesn't use it for balancing at all?

Your findings in 1v1 are correct, there's no way I can doubt that. They just aren't relevant since ZOS doesn't use that metric


Your findings in open world and the opinions you have gathered are anecdotal but are at least probably something ZOS should consider. But others have made findings contrary to yours so that should be considered also for gvg


My biggest point is that we don't have the data ZOS has or will use to balance this situation so we're all just sharing opinions that cannot be proven

So share all you want but none on what you say in regards to open world gvg is concrete of anything.

xylena_lazarow

Bushido2513 wrote: »

Why does your 1v1 data have any weight when we can see that ZOS doesn't use it for balancing at all?

It's the most controlled test environment available, and yes ZOS has made balance changes based on 1v1 before (the Draugrkin rework that added the healing debuff comes to mind). If you want evidence from open world zerg fights here's one, Ward alone provded 86.5% of my healing even though I was trying to run a bunch of dots to max Surge procs.


Here's what Arcanist looks like, Impervious doing 46.1% of my healing, notice how many different skills I'm using to obtain comparable HPS to my Sorc's one button spam.


Remember how many players were crying for Arc Impervious nerfs? Yea it does half of what Sorc Hardened does. Show me any other skill in any other context that does 86.5% of anything.

Bushido2513

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

Why does your 1v1 data have any weight when we can see that ZOS doesn't use it for balancing at all?

It's the most controlled test environment available, and yes ZOS has made balance changes based on 1v1 before (the Draugrkin rework that added the healing debuff comes to mind). If you want evidence from open world zerg fights here's one, Ward alone provded 86.5% of my healing even though I was trying to run a bunch of dots to max Surge procs.


Here's what Arcanist looks like, Impervious doing 46.1% of my healing, notice how many different skills I'm using to obtain comparable HPS to my Sorc's one button spam.


Remember how many players were crying for Arc Impervious nerfs? Yea it does half of what Sorc Hardened does. Show me any other skill in any other context that does 86.5% of anything.

How is doing controlled testing in a 1v1 relevant when pvp scenarios are wildly uncontrolled and varied?

Doesn't matter that it's controlled if it only incidentally applies. Yes there are 1v1s in pvp but generally speaking they usually quickly turn into xv1 or gvg.

The game straight up promotes a large scale war. If you want to duel they give you an option for that and that's the extent of support dueling has ever really been given and that hasn't ever been updated that I know of. To the point that for years now if you want to hold a dueling tournament you had to balance it yourself.

Things like Draugurkin get balanced not because duels were being ruined but because it shows up as an outlier in too many areas of pvp. They most certainly fix and introduce outliers but it's plain to see that they just look at the bigger outcome of gvg.


At the end of the day you can definitely say how you felt on both sides of ward and provide data but your data doesn't paint a clear picture of the whole situation.

So let's say someone attacks you and you ward spam and they say man it's unfair that sorcs are so tanky and can just run away. This should be nerfed and now I'm leaving.

Let's say they get away or they can't and you light them up.


Then I come along and attack you and say oh well he's tanky and I'm tanky, we can't kill each other and now I either wait till your faction comes, my faction comes, or just find another target, oh well.

My point is that it can go so many ways and people can have several types of feeling about how it goes that you can't just nail this down based on one interaction, a few interactions, etc. That's not good for achieving actual balance and is more just making one group or another feel better with no logical reason for the change when you look at better types of data we don't have access to that would help make s much more logical choice.

HowlKimchi

"Bushido2513 wrote: »

How is doing controlled testing in a 1v1 relevant when pvp scenarios are wildly uncontrolled and varied?

*sad researcher noises*

How does any controlled scientific experiment matter when reality is wildly uncontrolled and varied?

Bushido2513

HowlKimchi wrote: »

"Bushido2513 wrote: »

How is doing controlled testing in a 1v1 relevant when pvp scenarios are wildly uncontrolled and varied?

*sad researcher noises*

How does any controlled scientific experiment matter when reality is wildly uncontrolled and varied?

So normally your experiment needs to be relevant to the target is what I'm saying.

I'm not at all questioning why we do controlled testing but just saying the testing needs to be relevant to the objective.

Now here's the thing there's wayyyyy too much that would need to be tested to make decisions that ZOS can because they have all the back end data.


So that's why I'm saying nothing being shared here is more than random people saying I feel this way about the thing I just saw. Doesn't matter if you attach a video, cmx, etc because the actual answer to how this should or shouldn't be balanced is based on stats none of have access to.

StaticWave

Bushido2513 wrote: »

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

Why does your 1v1 data have any weight when we can see that ZOS doesn't use it for balancing at all?

It's the most controlled test environment available, and yes ZOS has made balance changes based on 1v1 before (the Draugrkin rework that added the healing debuff comes to mind). If you want evidence from open world zerg fights here's one, Ward alone provded 86.5% of my healing even though I was trying to run a bunch of dots to max Surge procs.


Here's what Arcanist looks like, Impervious doing 46.1% of my healing, notice how many different skills I'm using to obtain comparable HPS to my Sorc's one button spam.


Remember how many players were crying for Arc Impervious nerfs? Yea it does half of what Sorc Hardened does. Show me any other skill in any other context that does 86.5% of anything.

How is doing controlled testing in a 1v1 relevant when pvp scenarios are wildly uncontrolled and varied?

Doesn't matter that it's controlled if it only incidentally applies. Yes there are 1v1s in pvp but generally speaking they usually quickly turn into xv1 or gvg.

The game straight up promotes a large scale war. If you want to duel they give you an option for that and that's the extent of support dueling has ever really been given and that hasn't ever been updated that I know of. To the point that for years now if you want to hold a dueling tournament you had to balance it yourself.

Things like Draugurkin get balanced not because duels were being ruined but because it shows up as an outlier in too many areas of pvp. They most certainly fix and introduce outliers but it's plain to see that they just look at the bigger outcome of gvg.


At the end of the day you can definitely say how you felt on both sides of ward and provide data but your data doesn't paint a clear picture of the whole situation.

So let's say someone attacks you and you ward spam and they say man it's unfair that sorcs are so tanky and can just run away. This should be nerfed and now I'm leaving.

Let's say they get away or they can't and you light them up.


Then I come along and attack you and say oh well he's tanky and I'm tanky, we can't kill each other and now I either wait till your faction comes, my faction comes, or just find another target, oh well.

My point is that it can go so many ways and people can have several types of feeling about how it goes that you can't just nail this down based on one interaction, a few interactions, etc. That's not good for achieving actual balance and is more just making one group or another feel better with no logical reason for the change when you look at better types of data we don't have access to that would help make s much more logical choice.

And in a larger scaled war, HoT stacking alone negates the need for any burst heal, which makes your entire argument invalid because too many variables are skewing the analysis.

What matters is smaller sized fights where people actually have to rely more on their self healing. 1v1s, 1vXs, 2vXs, up to 4vXs are what matters. In those scenarios, we can clearly see the strength of healing abilities and can make an accurate comparison.

xylena_lazarow

Bushido2513 wrote: »

So normally your experiment needs to be relevant to the target is what I'm saying.

Oh but it is.

See, many large scale PvP engagements involving randoms in Cyro or BGs can be broken down into a series of 1v1s. It may not be your playstyle, but I make it a point to go after isolated opponents, such as the guy obviously separated from his group, the lone reinforcement riding in, or most relevantly in Cyro siege operators.

This skillset also translates well to burning enemy camps and dropping friendly ones, probably the top way a solo PvPer in Cyro can impact keep battles. Of course in the process I'm going to be alone making myself a target, so I need to be ready to 1v1 significantly threatening opponents, from two shot gankers to dot brawler mirrors.

One of these random engagements the other day, I did 5.3k dps to a 5 light damage Sorc (whose unpracticed rotations only did 2.3k dps posing zero threat to me). But after 4 minutes of the Sorc's hp bar barely moving, I walked away. Slowly. A fight that lopsided between two damage builds should not stalemate, this is purely Ward making PvP pointless.

Bushido2513

StaticWave wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

Why does your 1v1 data have any weight when we can see that ZOS doesn't use it for balancing at all?

It's the most controlled test environment available, and yes ZOS has made balance changes based on 1v1 before (the Draugrkin rework that added the healing debuff comes to mind). If you want evidence from open world zerg fights here's one, Ward alone provded 86.5% of my healing even though I was trying to run a bunch of dots to max Surge procs.


Here's what Arcanist looks like, Impervious doing 46.1% of my healing, notice how many different skills I'm using to obtain comparable HPS to my Sorc's one button spam.


Remember how many players were crying for Arc Impervious nerfs? Yea it does half of what Sorc Hardened does. Show me any other skill in any other context that does 86.5% of anything.

How is doing controlled testing in a 1v1 relevant when pvp scenarios are wildly uncontrolled and varied?

Doesn't matter that it's controlled if it only incidentally applies. Yes there are 1v1s in pvp but generally speaking they usually quickly turn into xv1 or gvg.

The game straight up promotes a large scale war. If you want to duel they give you an option for that and that's the extent of support dueling has ever really been given and that hasn't ever been updated that I know of. To the point that for years now if you want to hold a dueling tournament you had to balance it yourself.

Things like Draugurkin get balanced not because duels were being ruined but because it shows up as an outlier in too many areas of pvp. They most certainly fix and introduce outliers but it's plain to see that they just look at the bigger outcome of gvg.


At the end of the day you can definitely say how you felt on both sides of ward and provide data but your data doesn't paint a clear picture of the whole situation.

So let's say someone attacks you and you ward spam and they say man it's unfair that sorcs are so tanky and can just run away. This should be nerfed and now I'm leaving.

Let's say they get away or they can't and you light them up.


Then I come along and attack you and say oh well he's tanky and I'm tanky, we can't kill each other and now I either wait till your faction comes, my faction comes, or just find another target, oh well.

My point is that it can go so many ways and people can have several types of feeling about how it goes that you can't just nail this down based on one interaction, a few interactions, etc. That's not good for achieving actual balance and is more just making one group or another feel better with no logical reason for the change when you look at better types of data we don't have access to that would help make s much more logical choice.

And in a larger scaled war, HoT stacking alone negates the need for any burst heal, which makes your entire argument invalid because too many variables are skewing the analysis.

What matters is smaller sized fights where people actually have to rely more on their self healing. 1v1s, 1vXs, 2vXs, up to 4vXs are what matters. In those scenarios, we can clearly see the strength of healing abilities and can make an accurate comparison.

Lol matters to who? Notice I never talk about what matters and doesn't when it comes to players because different things matter to different players and so no one can say what "matters" to anyone other than themselves.

So yes in one way you see this change as a bad one, others like it, or just plain don't care. It's all opinion.

"We" don't see anything. The only group you can speak for is yourself and perhaps like minded individuals but even then that's not proof of specifically anything because you and people that agree with you don't make up the entire player base.


Again I'm not saying you're wrong but don't pass off your findings as if you somehow see deeper or on another level that others just can't because the truth is unless you work for ZOS development you only see just as much of the game as the rest of us general speaking. So your findings are no more authoritative than anyone else's except perhaps in dueling but that's not a metric ZOS uses so it's not saying much when we talk about balance that all players have to live with.

Bushido2513

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

So normally your experiment needs to be relevant to the target is what I'm saying.

Oh but it is.

See, many large scale PvP engagements involving randoms in Cyro or BGs can be broken down into a series of 1v1s. It may not be your playstyle, but I make it a point to go after isolated opponents, such as the guy obviously separated from his group, the lone reinforcement riding in, or most relevantly in Cyro siege operators.

This skillset also translates well to burning enemy camps and dropping friendly ones, probably the top way a solo PvPer in Cyro can impact keep battles. Of course in the process I'm going to be alone making myself a target, so I need to be ready to 1v1 significantly threatening opponents, from two shot gankers to dot brawler mirrors.

One of these random engagements the other day, I did 5.3k dps to a 5 light damage Sorc (whose unpracticed rotations only did 2.3k dps posing zero threat to me). But after 4 minutes of the Sorc's hp bar barely moving, I walked away. Slowly. A fight that lopsided between two damage builds should not stalemate, this is purely Ward making PvP pointless.

Ok so for example how does this translate to a player that just wants to zerg, get healed by someone else and attack whoever they see regardless of the outcome as long as they get a little ap here and there and get a killing blow now and then?


This player will just stay near the heals and zerg and not care about the sorc unless the group tries to kill the sorc. They won't care about why xyz class is living or how they heal through something, they will just zerg regardless.


My point is that Static's example and your example do of course matter but they are specific ways of looking at encounters and for balance you have to look at many different factors other than just pure damage, mitigation, healing, GCs, 1v1, viability, etc.

As has been said for better or worse ZOS uses spreadsheets to balance. I don't appreciate their balance but I can at least respect that they are trying to crunch massive data to create a direction going forward. Not just saying hey did you see that one clip that guy posted with a cmx, better get to nerfing.

StaticWave

Bushido2513 wrote: »

StaticWave wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Bushido2513 wrote: »

Why does your 1v1 data have any weight when we can see that ZOS doesn't use it for balancing at all?

It's the most controlled test environment available, and yes ZOS has made balance changes based on 1v1 before (the Draugrkin rework that added the healing debuff comes to mind). If you want evidence from open world zerg fights here's one, Ward alone provded 86.5% of my healing even though I was trying to run a bunch of dots to max Surge procs.


Here's what Arcanist looks like, Impervious doing 46.1% of my healing, notice how many different skills I'm using to obtain comparable HPS to my Sorc's one button spam.


Remember how many players were crying for Arc Impervious nerfs? Yea it does half of what Sorc Hardened does. Show me any other skill in any other context that does 86.5% of anything.

How is doing controlled testing in a 1v1 relevant when pvp scenarios are wildly uncontrolled and varied?

Doesn't matter that it's controlled if it only incidentally applies. Yes there are 1v1s in pvp but generally speaking they usually quickly turn into xv1 or gvg.

The game straight up promotes a large scale war. If you want to duel they give you an option for that and that's the extent of support dueling has ever really been given and that hasn't ever been updated that I know of. To the point that for years now if you want to hold a dueling tournament you had to balance it yourself.

Things like Draugurkin get balanced not because duels were being ruined but because it shows up as an outlier in too many areas of pvp. They most certainly fix and introduce outliers but it's plain to see that they just look at the bigger outcome of gvg.


At the end of the day you can definitely say how you felt on both sides of ward and provide data but your data doesn't paint a clear picture of the whole situation.

So let's say someone attacks you and you ward spam and they say man it's unfair that sorcs are so tanky and can just run away. This should be nerfed and now I'm leaving.

Let's say they get away or they can't and you light them up.


Then I come along and attack you and say oh well he's tanky and I'm tanky, we can't kill each other and now I either wait till your faction comes, my faction comes, or just find another target, oh well.

My point is that it can go so many ways and people can have several types of feeling about how it goes that you can't just nail this down based on one interaction, a few interactions, etc. That's not good for achieving actual balance and is more just making one group or another feel better with no logical reason for the change when you look at better types of data we don't have access to that would help make s much more logical choice.

And in a larger scaled war, HoT stacking alone negates the need for any burst heal, which makes your entire argument invalid because too many variables are skewing the analysis.

What matters is smaller sized fights where people actually have to rely more on their self healing. 1v1s, 1vXs, 2vXs, up to 4vXs are what matters. In those scenarios, we can clearly see the strength of healing abilities and can make an accurate comparison.

Lol matters to who? Notice I never talk about what matters and doesn't when it comes to players because different things matter to different players and so no one can say what "matters" to anyone other than themselves.

So yes in one way you see this change as a bad one, others like it, or just plain don't care. It's all opinion.

"We" don't see anything. The only group you can speak for is yourself and perhaps like minded individuals but even then that's not proof of specifically anything because you and people that agree with you don't make up the entire player base.


Again I'm not saying you're wrong but don't pass off your findings as if you somehow see deeper or on another level that others just can't because the truth is unless you work for ZOS development you only see just as much of the game as the rest of us general speaking. So your findings are no more authoritative than anyone else's except perhaps in dueling but that's not a metric ZOS uses so it's not saying much when we talk about balance that all players have to live with.

Lol. All I got from your post is "Don't make any combat balance suggestions because it doesn't matter".