Vampire - Undeath rollback to v10.1.0 ZOS

TDVM

Ideally, this passive should be removed from Vampire at all, but since it will not be removed, why touch it, 5/10% was the best solution, why increase 7/15?
ZOS, you can leave 5/10% on stage 1, but on the condition that the player has a skill from the Vampire branch on any of the panels.
The first option of 5/10% on stage 1 was a good solution. If you want players to have an incentive to be on the 2nd-4th stage, then just reduce the utilization of skills and increase the damage from vampiric skills the higher the stage. @ZOS_Kevin

Afterip

Bringing it back but cutted by half was bad design.
To @ZOS_Kevin
What you think about swap %mitigation from Undeath to Major Resolve permanent buff at 3 vamp stage?
First of all it will reduced survivability power of pvp player. At second it will give player a choice: run with class skill for Major resolve or go to 3 vamp stage and free one bar slot for something good.

Soarora

The first option of it being on stage 1 with 5/10% was not a good solution. What was going to end up happening is everyone in PvP AND PvE would have to be a vampire for the "free" 10% reduction. That would've made the problem of "you have to be a vampire" worse. The only real point I see in Undeath is supporting the low health vampire playstyle, however the nerf to Frenzy made keeping low health very difficult. Any other bonuses to Undeath I do not think are intended uses.

CameraBeardThePirate

The latest 15% iteration at stage 3 is fine. 15% is still strong, but not overwhelmingly so, so stage 3 now becomes an actual choice where you have to weigh pros and cons, vs the live version where the pros greatly outweigh the cons.

Bushido2513

CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »

The latest 15% iteration at stage 3 is fine. 15% is still strong, but not overwhelmingly so, so stage 3 now becomes an actual choice where you have to weigh pros and cons, vs the live version where the pros greatly outweigh the cons.

I don't really see what anyone would weigh. Currently if you are a vamp you can already sustain it so why would I give up the mitigation?

To my it seems like to extra damage taken is still outweighed by the bonus. This is obviously still a nerf but I just don't see how you still don't stay a vamp.

propertyOfUndefined

30% was way too much. 15 is better. I liked 10 at stage 1 best, but hopefully this makes the "we get nothing at stage 3" camp happy.

the1andonlyskwex

I wanted 10% at stage 3, but 15% at stage 3 is better than 10% at stage 1 or 30% at stage 3.

bladenick

Range proc build will dominate if undeath nerfed too much

StihlReign

So nothing will change.

The dev's combat tuning cycle is sooo slow and cumbersome. All we're left with is poor combat experiences for extended periods.

monkiie

bladenick wrote: »

Range proc build will dominate if undeath nerfed too much

You are absolutely right. While undeath now has a much needed nerf, it must be matched with nerfs to these low effort but high damage "ranged ganking" builds.

Bushido2513

monkiie wrote: »

bladenick wrote: »

Range proc build will dominate if undeath nerfed too much

You are absolutely right. While undeath now has a much needed nerf, it must be matched with nerfs to these low effort but high damage "ranged ganking" builds.

Yeah 15 percent more damage on the burst from nowhere I'm already taking sounds daunting already

xylena_lazarow

As I mentioned in another thread where the burst concern came up:

Undeath never really saved you from massive burst in the first place, it saved you when you're being pressured down, you've probably seen someone spamming their burst heal 10 times in a row at 10% hp while eating dot stacks and ults and executes to the face, that's the kind of nonsense the Undeath nerf is gonna finally put a righteous end to.

The players smacking you with stacks of ranged procs, pull bombs, and 20k bows are still gonna do the same thing, it will feel no different. If you're dying then tank up, with defensive sets and cp, more hp and more pieces of heavy. Too many players are running 3 offense and sustain sets, leaning medium armor, and expecting to still face tank.

Cutting Undeath in half while enduring the same Stage 3 penalties sounds good to me.

TDVM

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Cutting Undeath in half while enduring the same Stage 3 penalties sounds good to me.

No

xylena_lazarow

TDVM wrote: »

No

Yes

I wouldn't actually mind if they deleted Undeath outright, but 15% at least isn't insane.

Jsmalls

Someone who knows whether this mitigation is additive or multiplicative please chime in.

But I'm under the impression Undeath scaled linearly based on lost health.

So there most common ranges of this passive was
20% health: 24% reduction
50% health: 15% reduction
80% health: 6% reduction

Which will now look like...
20% health: 12% reduction
50% health: 7.5% reduction
80% health: 3% reduction

So you're rarely seeing the full 15% increased damage and likely on average you're seeing 7.5% more damage against you.

Ultimately I would have liked to see the Strike from the Shadows to have gotten a rework (too exclusive to one class for regular play) and moved to stage 3. Undeath remain at 10% as stage 2, and give Stage 4 a better benefit. But this is a decent implementation.

TDVM

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

TDVM wrote: »

No

Yes

I wouldn't actually mind if they deleted Undeath outright, but 15% at least isn't insane.

No, removing this passive looks better than 15%, the less % the better, vampire should not be mandatory in pvp, then you need to give a similar passive to werewolf or balance vampire normally so that players think what to wear instead of wearing 3-4 sets for damage and not thinking about survivability.

xylena_lazarow

@TDVM the 15% isn't mandatory, it's comparable to the numbers in the red cp tree, where you have a fair tradeoff between tanking and sustain. The 30% number was obscene, there was no tradeoff a mortal could make that could match it, now a mortal should be able to move sustain around to get the same survival as a vamp, or push higher damage.

TDVM

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

@TDVM the 15% isn't mandatory, it's comparable to the numbers in the red cp tree, where you have a fair tradeoff between tanking and sustain. The 30% number was obscene, there was no tradeoff a mortal could make that could match it, now a mortal should be able to move sustain around to get the same survival as a vamp, or push higher damage.

15% are still strong for pvp it shouldn't be there at all by good logic and balance, now it will become weaker but still still give good survivability.

Bushido2513

I remember when being vamp was questionable then became the default. I'd like test fighting the same person with and without vamp to see the difference

Vulkunne

- Scale Undeath by Vampire Stage
- Vampire Stages are immersive yet you still a Vampire regardless
- Every Stage gets Undeath in a different strength
- More Stages means Undeath becomes stronger

Example: (1/5%, 2/10%, 3/15%, 4/20%)

Agree undeath should be part of Vampirism experience instead of just another buff. It also appears an issue was fixed with Undeath giving more value than intended so if that's the case then I would think there's no reason to just get rid of it now.

Bushido2513

Vulkunne wrote: »

- Scale Undeath by Vampire Stage
- Vampire Stages are immersive yet you still a Vampire regardless
- Every Stage gets Undeath in a different strength
- More Stages means Undeath becomes stronger

Example: (1/5%, 2/10%, 3/15%, 4/20%)

Agree undeath should be part of Vampirism experience instead of just another buff. It also appears an issue was fixed with Undeath giving more value than intended so if that's the case then I would think there's no reason to just get rid of it now.

Yeah I think of it as the stronger you become as a vampire the more undeath you enjoy.

But as it stands people will just stay stage 3. Fifteen percent is still worth it, even 10 would be because recoveries are high anyways. Eight percent isn't really that much.

I did just reread the fire penalty so I'm happy it's 13 percent vs 15 mitigation.

i11ionward

Jsmalls wrote: »

Someone who knows whether this mitigation is additive or multiplicative please chime in.

Maybe @Sparkrip can clear the situation? If I'm not mistaken, before the mitigation change in the previous patch, Undeath worked additively.
Sparkrip is the author of this topic - https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/8102647#Comment_8102647

silky_soft

There shouldn't be any % resistance execpt for damage reduction on block.

Make all these % reductions into a flat armor value or buff the armor value as their percent.

bladenick

The most positive meaning for undeath mitigation is, you get time to react when burst dmg coming, In contrast you dead just after you aware enemy coming is not good PVP, instead it is game of who get initial,

For melee burst, you need 8 meter close to dump your combo, at least it have chance evade and you will also see your opponent coming, and glass melee cannon is very punishable
but for range proc glass cannon, it will ruin the PVP if undeath nerf too much, you will dead soon right after you just aware there range ganker targeting you

Range proc need sync with change of undeath, range proc ganker already OP with current 30% undeath

Udrath

I’ve been playing without undeath for a long long time. The nerf to undeath means it will be harder for players who run builds without rallying cry or some kind of defensive set. For example a lot of people will run like tarnished nightmare with wretched or something. While yes it’s good, but undeath covered a huge lack in their mitigation. 30% is like up to 19k resistance or two pariah procs.

It should be 10% at stage 3 to make people decide if they want to be high damage with high healing, but lower mitigation - or good mitigation and healing, but decent burst damage. A max magicka sorcerer without undeath for example can be killed pretty easily to certain burst builds within a stun and shield down. Where as same build with undeath, they could survive to shield up and streak away.

Plus side is squishy gank builds will die much faster even while spamming their burst heals


Edit: Hopefully the undeath nerf makes a lot of people balance their builds, instead of being double damage sets and relying on undeath so much. Stay double damage but face the chance of being bursted down or add mitigation at the cost of some damage, which is how it should be.

Tommy_The_Gun

StihlReign wrote: »

So nothing will change.

Yep. It may seem like 50% nerf, but even 10% is very strong, let alone 15%. And keep in mind - major protection is easily available via flare (just for slotting) and you have other % mitigation via skill & sets. Vamps will still be dominant in PvP population.

I thought that the goal was kinda similar to what ZOS has done with Werewolves (but of course in a lighter version as Werewolves got pretty much removed from the game cuz one build was too strong in IC at some point).

Synapsis123

Require a vampire skill or make it major resolve.

Bushido2513

Should definitely require a skill on the bar.

YandereGirlfriend

I would still like to see this passive simply abolished.

However, scaling it by Vampire Stage is a good idea - though you would really need to amp the penalties in order to circumvent people defaulting the Stage 4 value.

At the VERY LEAST the Flame Damage penalty should equal the Undeath bonus at the same stage.

Also simply moving Undeath into Armor Rating would still be better than the current system.

That would move Undeath into a capped stat category and actually open up build choices for Vampire players in PvE. It would still be a desirable passive in PvP because player Pen exists but at least it wouldn't stack on top of Armor Rating and the suite of defensive % mods in the way that it does currently.

Likely the best implementation would even be to bring it within the named buff system and make it something like permanent Minor Resolve at Stage 1 and permanent Major Resolve at Stage 2 (or vice versa). That would also be similar in spirit to what Werewolf receives (speaking of which... remember when Werewolf got a ludicrously high unique Armor Rating modifier simply for existing... yes, that was very obviously problematic and was subsequently nerfed into Major Resolve... so it is truly astounding that Undeath has existed in its broken state for like 10x the patch cycles that Werewolves were allowed to be OP).

Treeshka

How about Undead passive giving you mitigation based on your Vampire stage? Stage one five percent etc etc. More at stage four.

spoqster

TDVM wrote: »

Ideally, this passive should be removed from Vampire at all, but since it will not be removed, why touch it, 5/10% was the best solution, why increase 7/15?
ZOS, you can leave 5/10% on stage 1, but on the condition that the player has a skill from the Vampire branch on any of the panels.
The first option of 5/10% on stage 1 was a good solution. If you want players to have an incentive to be on the 2nd-4th stage, then just reduce the utilization of skills and increase the damage from vampiric skills the higher the stage. @ZOS_Kevin

This is a much better solution than the latest PTS change as it would couple the passive to having at least one Vampire ability.

As it currently stands the Undeath passive offers very little connection to the idea of having a "vampire build". It's simply a passive you "have to" take in order to have a viable build in PvP. In my opinion it defeats the intention of making vampire a conscious choice and a distinct playstyle.

What is worse, the attempt at connecting the passive to a vampire experience by requiring feeding falls short of the intention as it provides no meaningful gameplay experience and instead just makes it a nuisance and puts you at a severe disadvantage if you forget to feed.