Revert the Azureblight Nerf

BardInSolitude

It was fairly obvious that this discussion was going to devolve into "ball group bad". But here's the catch: the reason ZOS doesn't "nerf ball groups" is because ball groups were one of the intended optimal ways for Cyro to be played, which is obvious from the fact that so many mechanics clearly synergise so neatly to create this playstyle. You have sets that affect 12 players, heals that stack, shields that stack, delayed burst damage that stacks, offensive synergies that stack. One could argue that ball groups take advantage of mechanics that were meant just for trials, but the reality is that so many of these mechanics are utterly useless in trials (e.g. offensive synergies, or delayed AoE burst). Ergo, Cyro was intended - in part - for ball groups to thrive.

That all being said, after giving it some more thought, I've come to believe that this nerf is way, way too harsh. It's ok that AB can be used as a way to interfere with ball groups, it was just way overtuned; yet now it's practically useless. ZOS, as usual, ends up going from one extreme to another, rather than making incremental changes. This has often been their way: they take a set that's fairly balanced and has its niche, way overtune it, and then nerf it to oblivion.

This leads me to my final point: why was AB buffed to begin with? My ball group used to run AB from mid 2021 to mid 2022 - back when it wasn't anywhere near as powerful as it is now. At one point I recall receiving a DM from a top ball group lead who was amazed by how much damage we were able to dish out with that - at the time - entirely unknown and niche set. That's to say, AB was already a fairly strong set for PvP, but not broken - we weren't able to use it to kill a group better than us, but we still put a ton of pressure on them. So, I ask again, why was AB buffed? And now it's in the gutter.

Alas, only the Divines themselves might know...

acastanza_ESO

BardInSolitude wrote: »

It was fairly obvious that this discussion was going to devolve into "ball group bad". But here's the catch: the reason ZOS doesn't "nerf ball groups" is because ball groups were one of the intended optimal ways for Cyro to be played, which is obvious from the fact that so many mechanics clearly synergise so neatly to create this playstyle. You have sets that affect 12 players, heals that stack, shields that stack, delayed burst damage that stacks, offensive synergies that stack. One could argue that ball groups take advantage of mechanics that were meant just for trials, but the reality is that so many of these mechanics are utterly useless in trials (e.g. offensive synergies, or delayed AoE burst). Ergo, Cyro was intended - in part - for ball groups to thrive.

That all being said, after giving it some more thought, I've come to believe that this nerf is way, way too harsh. It's ok that AB can be used as a way to interfere with ball groups, it was just way overtuned; yet now it's practically useless. ZOS, as usual, ends up going from one extreme to another, rather than making incremental changes. This has often been their way: they take a set that's fairly balanced and has its niche, way overtune it, and then nerf it to oblivion.

This leads me to my final point: why was AB buffed to begin with? My ball group used to run AB from mid 2021 to mid 2022 - back when it wasn't anywhere near as powerful as it is now. At one point I recall receiving a DM from a top ball group lead who was amazed by how much damage we were able to dish out with that - at the time - entirely unknown and niche set. That's to say, AB was already a fairly strong set for PvP, but not broken - we weren't able to use it to kill a group better than us, but we still put a ton of pressure on them. So, I ask again, why was AB buffed? And now it's in the gutter.

Alas, only the Divines themselves might know...

it was absolutely never the intent that groups run with 6-8 healers. Never.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

BardInSolitude wrote: »

So, I ask again, why was AB buffed?

It was buffed for PVE, there's no coincidence that Arc beam proc's it really fast.

I've recently returned to playing NA and its kinda interesting to see the extent to which the set performs when you have dedicated groups of 6+ running it with a mission to zerg. It highlights that the explosion scaling and proc rate issues previously mentioned on other posts are quite a challenge to overcome and very punishing for bad play. (mainly due to the speed of the explosion procs when multiple players contribute to them which imo isn't intended behaviour).

That being said, whilst I think a change was needed, I am quite sad that this change is being made in this manner. imo the scaling should be adjusted (as they are doing) and the proc rate should be adjusted when multiple players are contributing to it to lessen the 'zerging' side of the set. Similar to how sets like Plaguebreak, Snake in Stars and Nocturnal's Ploy were adjusted to prevent abuse from multiple players running the sets.

Additionally changes to other pvp related mechanics need to be enacted. The majority of those complaining about AB's nerf is because there are other overperforming sets and skills which haven't been addressed.
Mainly:
1) Group Sets not 'downscaling' the more players they affect (i.e. give everything the rallying cry treatment in pvp)
2) Rushing Agony CC mechanics in PVP
3) HoT and DoT stacking mechanics
4) Increase group size and campaign population size.

Hopefully these areas will be adjusted also along with this AB change.

oh and in case this post is actually seen, please also finally implement campaign evaluation ratio based timer adjustments (low pop with one faction zerging should = long score evaluation timers for each tick, max pop should be an eval every 5-10m).

IncultaWolf

Wikter_Bravo wrote: »

The only people that wanted the nerf is ball group players. I've never seen azureblight used against zergs or for bombing. It's funny how it's ok for these people to ruin cyrodiil for others, cause lag, be annoying, but when the tables turn on them, it's a problem.

Ball groups used to be impressive when they would actually fight each other or fight off a faction. But now they are just cringe.

They are cringe now because they just sit at keeps and farm pvers and casuals for hours and avoid other ball groups. I've seen a lot of them chase down solo players also. They must be bored 🥱

Iriidius

MidniteOwl1913 wrote: »

baconaura wrote: »

The damage scaling only applying to monsters would have been good enough, and addressed the battleground concerns. why nerf the base damage so much?

The damage scaling needs to be reverted, its too heavy of a nerf across the board, and even at capped targets, there is no "slight buff", it merely matches what the old set's damage was doing with 1 less target. Its from 69% to 14% damage reduction when matching the 6 target cap currently. and at 7 target, it only matches current set.

Here are the calculations on damage based on targets hit with the blight.



Noone was complaining about this set in pve. if anything, maybe buff other aoe sets like aegis caller, or the other hundreds of dead sets that arent being used today..

I've used this set for years, it's a good set for general PVE play. All of sudden PVP starts complaining and now it get a nerf! To be clear this high reduction in base damage will hurt it's utility in most situations. Why do I have to have adjust my builds because somebody somewhere in PVP decides a set that been around this long is suddenly OP?

Not PvP complains about azureblight but only the ballgroup part of it who are a small minority of PvP hated by almost everyone not playing in one and would be even smaller if they did not get buffed by ZoS all the time and terrorize other playstiles until they leave the game. Most non ballgroup pvpers are against azureblight nerf as they want counter to ballgroups, most „solo“/„smallscaler“ complaining about azureblight are false flag ballgrouplers.

BardInSolitude

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

it was absolutely never the intent that groups run with 6-8 healers. Never.

No ball group runs anywhere near 6-8 "healers", unless casting Vigor (or Regen, prior to the stats hybridisation) makes you a "healer". Not that your ad hoc claim in any way addresses the bulk of my argumentation, of course.

Rkindaleft

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

Amazing change - preserves its utility in PvE while reigning-in the most overperforming set in the history of Cyrodiil.

Honestly, the change in PvE is horrible.

Azureblight was simply a tool to be used because ZOS keeps designing fights that have overtuned levels of adds. Running phase in Lucent Citadel, Bahsei and Reef Guardian HM, Ansuul... These 4 trials even today with all the power creep still have fairly low clear rates. It wasn't some always set that was used everywhere at all times like people like to claim.

With the current changes on the PTS, the vast majority of the time in these encounters the set won't reach it's cap which renders the set unviable and we've just made the fights even less accessible - and probably pushed some prog groups out of the scope of them.

Udrath

They should nerf snowtreaders, AOE shield stacking, and echoing vigor stacking too.

haleysarahw

Rkindaleft wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

Amazing change - preserves its utility in PvE while reigning-in the most overperforming set in the history of Cyrodiil.

Honestly, the change in PvE is horrible.

Azureblight was simply a tool to be used because ZOS keeps designing fights that have overtuned levels of adds. Running phase in Lucent Citadel, Bahsei and Reef Guardian HM, Ansuul... These 4 trials even today with all the power creep still have fairly low clear rates. It wasn't some always set that was used everywhere at all times like people like to claim.

With the current changes on the PTS, the vast majority of the time in these encounters the set won't reach it's cap which renders the set unviable and we've just made the fights even less accessible - and probably pushed some prog groups out of the scope of them.

This exactly. My group is close to clearing the LC trifecta (had a death at 3.8% today) and we use azure in every fight but the mini in that trial. Morale has been high, but now it's looking like we have exactly 8 days to get it or go through significant reprog.

haleysarahw

Adding to my above, we'd be farther along by now if not for the server lag that lost us multiple days of real progress - my core literally went out and got VPNs to skirt the issue so we could play and now the primary set we use for our strats is being disproportionately nerfed because of ball groups (an issue that could be solved with PvP specific tweaks). Not a good feeling.

ForumSavant

Thank you ZOS for fixing azure in PvP, lag will feel better and play will be much more balanced!

Wuuffyy

ForumSavant wrote: »

Thank you ZOS for fixing azure in PvP, lag will feel better and play will be much more balanced!

I actually cannot tell if this is /s or not.

If it is not; groups (who already didn't die for the most part), especially ball groups, now NO LONGER die as NOTHING is sufficient to kill them AT ALL anymore. More people constantly spamming=more or at-least same lag.

notsojuicy

Can't really speak for PVP / Ballgroups relating to Azure and how big of an issue (if even...) azure is on live atm.

But from a PVE Perspective in its current State on PTS, it will be another Dead Set if the Scaling together with the 1s Shadow-Nerf cooldown stays as is.
You barely will get to cap of 7 in a trash pull and if, only for 1-2s as the small stuff dies quick and the 2-3 elites are remaining, that's the point where the dmg will crumble so I don't see it worth running.

As stated before, there are a lot of encounters in the game from more recent Trials which are around AOE and its not azure was used everywhere, it was still situational....

And there doesnt seem to be a replacement for azure in those specific fights which means a lot of reprog for groups or even getting locked out completely, while some of those harder Trifecta clear rates are not really high anyway....

So I really don't get the re-balancing - it's almost a bit too nice to call it balancing, because it's just butchering the set into a dead set at this stage.... Balancing would mean tone it down a bit and maybe BUFF other stuff along to give options / diversity for these encounters....

It wouldn't be so bad, if there are other sets which were a tiny bit behind and then adjusting/balancing, but this...

i don't know, just out of touch... hope we'll see adjustments over the upcoming weeks...
e.g. only works against monsters, leave the base dmg reduction as is, revert the cooldown, work on the scaling and enemy cap... maybe at some point we can call it "balancing" then....

I'm speechless all the time with some of these nerf-hammers out-of-the-blue which seem out-of-touch what's going on in the actual game.... if its just blind spreadsheet running leading to this or some screamers on forums which leads to this.... IDK....

madmufffin

notsojuicy wrote: »

Can't really speak for PVP / Ballgroups relating to Azure and how big of an issue (if even...) azure is on live atm.

But from a PVE Perspective in its current State on PTS, it will be another Dead Set if the Scaling together with the 1s Shadow-Nerf cooldown stays as is.
You barely will get to cap of 7 in a trash pull and if, only for 1-2s as the small stuff dies quick and the 2-3 elites are remaining, that's the point where the dmg will crumble so I don't see it worth running.

As stated before, there are a lot of encounters in the game from more recent Trials which are around AOE and its not azure was used everywhere, it was still situational....

And there doesnt seem to be a replacement for azure in those specific fights which means a lot of reprog for groups or even getting locked out completely, while some of those harder Trifecta clear rates are not really high anyway....

So I really don't get the re-balancing - it's almost a bit too nice to call it balancing, because it's just butchering the set into a dead set at this stage.... Balancing would mean tone it down a bit and maybe BUFF other stuff along to give options / diversity for these encounters....

It wouldn't be so bad, if there are other sets which were a tiny bit behind and then adjusting/balancing, but this...

i don't know, just out of touch... hope we'll see adjustments over the upcoming weeks...
e.g. only works against monsters, leave the base dmg reduction as is, revert the cooldown, work on the scaling and enemy cap... maybe at some point we can call it "balancing" then....

I'm speechless all the time with some of these nerf-hammers out-of-the-blue which seem out-of-touch what's going on in the actual game.... if its just blind spreadsheet running leading to this or some screamers on forums which leads to this.... IDK....

They designed most of the newest content in PVE to require cleave for at least one boss fight (or all 3 in the case of Lucent Citadel) and then took away the only usable cleave set in the game. Some pretty top tier design choices going around. Wouldn't be an issue if they just went back to designing hard single or situational aoe encounters like Olms, Xalvakka, Taleria, etc., but everything is just artificial difficulty with more adds and clutter on your screen.

boi_anachronism_

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

Amazing change - preserves its utility in PvE while reigning-in the most overperforming set in the history of Cyrodiil.

Funny. All the trifecta progs im in will be dropping it if it goes live like this. Might still be worth it for some fights on pc with dressing room but its gonna become really niche.

Syrusthevirus187

Idinuse wrote: »

Antrox41 wrote: »

Wikter_Bravo wrote: »

The only people that wanted the nerf is ball group players. I've never seen azureblight used against zergs or for bombing. It's funny how it's ok for these people to ruin cyrodiil for others, cause lag, be annoying, but when the tables turn on them, it's a problem.

Ball groups used to be impressive when they would actually fight each other or fight off a faction. But now they are just cringe.

So in other words "Oh no! They are better then me, that makes me mad, so I will go on the forums and moan and complain constantly about how cringe and abusive it is because now the one "turn your brain off" set where you can spam 1 ability to be effective is now nerfed to the ground."

This is partly ZoS fault with the way the handle things, which is essentially putting everything under the rug and introducing something so utterly broken

it has literally zero counterplay

even with a fully coordinated group. People are sitting here blaming ball groups for everything imaginable rather then blame the underlining issues that everyone seems to forget, which is heal stacking.

Whats extremely cringe imo is the people here complaining about group play in Cyrodiil as if thats not what Cyrodiil is supposed to be.

Interesting choice of words.... tell me, what exactly is the counter to the mass shield stacking, mass healing and mass buffing ball groups? Not playing at all?

That's literally what people say. "Leave them alone they will get bored, don't play pvp, leave and go take an empty keep somewhere else"

Long live ball zergs!!

gronoxvx

BardInSolitude wrote: »

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

it was absolutely never the intent that groups run with 6-8 healers. Never.

No ball group runs anywhere near 6-8 "healers", unless casting Vigor (or Regen, prior to the stats hybridisation) makes you a "healer". Not that your ad hoc claim in any way addresses the bulk of my argumentation, of course.

This. No ball group in their right mind runs that many healers or even supports as you wont kill anything at all.

Sounds like theyre mistaking zergs or random groups for actual ball groups.

Renato90085

boi_anachronism_ wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

Amazing change - preserves its utility in PvE while reigning-in the most overperforming set in the history of Cyrodiil.

Funny. All the trifecta progs im in will be dropping it if it goes live like this. Might still be worth it for some fights on pc with dressing room but its gonna become really niche.

new scribing skill have aoe/dot dmg buff
and we don’t have much aoe set choice

ApoAlaia

boi_anachronism_ wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

Amazing change - preserves its utility in PvE while reigning-in the most overperforming set in the history of Cyrodiil.

Funny. All the trifecta progs im in will be dropping it if it goes live like this. Might still be worth it for some fights on pc with dressing room but its gonna become really niche.

Nah, it won't.

Might have been if they had kept the 0.5s cooldown, but with the 1s cooldown (which master of the obvious moment already halves the DPS before the new tooltip scaling kicks in) is useless.

The devs will just chalk down the cooldown increase to 'performance issues', which seems to me coded language like when couples divorce over 'irreconcilable differences' or artists exit projects due to 'creative differences'; in other words they have made the change, it ain't getting reverted, and that's all we are likely to get as far as justification goes, assuming it gets acknowledged at all.

TaintedKurse

I really think ZOS is going about this wrong. I get why they think it might a problem but, it provides counter play and is an essential set to PVE. I am not a pvp expert. However, what will stop people from running an 8 man ball group in BGs? Now with no counter what so ever.

It is an essential set for PVE cleave right now. Please reconsider. Or reduce the nerf so it's still worth running in PVE. Or plan for a better source that is more PVE focused next update.

Aldoss

BardInSolitude wrote: »

It was fairly obvious that this discussion was going to devolve into "ball group bad". But here's the catch: the reason ZOS doesn't "nerf ball groups" is because ball groups were one of the intended optimal ways for Cyro to be played, which is obvious from the fact that so many mechanics clearly synergise so neatly to create this playstyle. You have sets that affect 12 players, heals that stack, shields that stack, delayed burst damage that stacks, offensive synergies that stack. One could argue that ball groups take advantage of mechanics that were meant just for trials, but the reality is that so many of these mechanics are utterly useless in trials (e.g. offensive synergies, or delayed AoE burst). Ergo, Cyro was intended - in part - for ball groups to thrive.

PvP sets that affect a group of 12:
- Almalexia (slept on set, very powerful)
- Beckoning Steel (useless)
- Rallying Cry (useless in a group of 12)
- Robes of Transmutation


I don't know how many of these sets existed in the beginning since I didn't start playing until 2019.

However, Powerful Assault and Meritorious Service only affect 5 people.

The original group cap in Cyro used to be 24 people.

Most of the sets in the game that affect you and 11 group members are PvE sets literally designed for the PvE framework of this game.

Ergo, your argument is propaganda, which makes sense since you're a ballgrouper.

Ball groups exist because they've taken skills, sets, and structures designed around the PvE framework of this game and applied it into the PvP framework, knowing that ZOS hasn't cared to ever attempt to control the power creep that's been caused over the years.

Scribing is the most recent and most egregious example of this. There's 0 reason why it should be allowed for a group of 12 to shield stack to an effective HP of 80k-100k in PvP.

You're arguing for it because you find joy in the exploit, all the while having 0 empathy for the fun that you're depriving of the other players in this game. It's selfish.

So yes, players are here asking ZOS to finally do something they've never done to salvage what is left of Cyro. Your play style isn't healthy and it certainly wasn't "intended".

Neglect =/= Intention.

I sort of agree with the rest of your post. AB was fine before the nerf, but, given everything else related to the very real fact that ballgroups can achieve unimaginable effective HPs, its current state is the only real option to even begin to chip away at them.

Tweaking it is fine to make sure that it remains effective against large stacks while being ineffective against small groups, but the complete removal is beyond stupid.

Vulkunne

It doesn't surprise me how they want to tweak the set, which if truth be told this is one of many sets that's overdue for some attention. However, I think cutting it out of PvP altogether sets the wrong precedent and I think the fact this set is sometimes effective against ball groups warrants another look at this change. For one thing, if this does go away from PvP, what do we get in its place? The answer can't be nothing at all because all you'll be doing then is making PvP more comfortable for Ball Groups and less and less comfortable for the casual player(s) (or counter groups that stand between the Ball Groups and the regular players). So, when someone comes here and posts why PvP continues to decline in a couple months... this is one reason why.

BardInSolitude

Aldoss wrote: »

PvP sets that affect a group of 12:

Ebon, Sanc, Pillager, the two sets that used to give mag/stam recovery (their names evade me right now), and so on.

Aldoss wrote: »

The original group cap in Cyro used to be 24 people.

I know, I was there for it. It just so happens that 12 x 2 = 24. Feel free to draw any conclusions from that.

Aldoss wrote: »

There's 0 reason why it should be allowed for a group of 12 to shield stack to an effective HP of 80k-100k in PvP.

Sure thing, scribing shields are truly broken in this meta. We really didn't need them to survive, as NB healers did an excellent job prior to that. Not to mention that these shields are an excellent source of buffs, too. Yet AB was so broken that even scribing shields weren't enough to counter it, though they've greatly eased our pain.

Aldoss wrote: »

Neglect =/= Intention.

You neglected to address all other PvP-specific mechanics I mentioned that corroborate to ball groups being the optimal and intended playstyle - most notably delayed AoE burst (Proxy, Sub, etc) and synergies (along with pre-nerf Harmony). Ball groups have existed since the first couple of years of ESO. I joined my first ball group in 2019, and that group had existed for like 2 years at the time, and it was a splinter of an even older group.

Hate the game, not the player.

Edit: just to be fair, perhaps I shouldn't claim that ball groups were truly intended by ZOS. I feel like a lot of things ended up being happy (or sad) accidents, but too many things line up with how ESO was designed as a whole for ball groups not to be a means of optimal PvP play. Regardless, groups that share buffs and debuffs and play in a coordinated manner instead of relying on blind individuality will always thrive in any MMO.

Aldoss

BardInSolitude wrote: »

Ebon, Sanc, Pillager, the two sets that used to give mag/stam recovery (their names evade me right now), and so on.

Not PvP sourced which means it's circumstantial at best that they were intendend to help create the pariah behavior that we know as a ballgroup. PvP sets are created with PvP in mind. Trial sets are created with PvE in mind. People absolutely use PvE trial sets for PvP and vice versa, but that doesn't make them evidential of dev intention.

BardInSolitude wrote: »

I know, I was there for it. It just so happens that 12 x 2 = 24. Feel free to draw any conclusions from that.

This doesn't seem relevant.

BardInSolitude wrote: »

Sure thing, scribing shields are truly broken in this meta. We really didn't need them to survive, as NB healers did an excellent job prior to that. Not to mention that these shields are an excellent source of buffs, too. Yet AB was so broken that even scribing shields weren't enough to counter it, though they've greatly eased our pain.

So you agree. You are defending this nerf because AB is the ONE thing that actually scares you as a ballgroup. Thanks.

BardInSolitude wrote: »

You neglected to address all other PvP-specific mechanics I mentioned that corroborate to ball groups being the optimal and intended playstyle - most notably delayed AoE burst (Proxy, Sub, etc) and synergies (along with pre-nerf Harmony). Ball groups have existed since the first couple of years of ESO. I joined my first ball group in 2019, and that group had existed for like 2 years at the time, and it was a splinter of an even older group.

Proxy is the closest thing you can mention that gets you anywhere close to providing evidence that the devs designed Cyro with ballgroups in mind - except for the fact that it's just as powerful when wielded by a solo player against a ballgroup. The only reason why that power never means anything is because the hot stacking, shield stacking, and speed stacking + snow treaders has completely empowered ballgroups to be completely insulated from the type of successful bomb that would take out 20+ players sitting on a resource.

BardInSolitude wrote: »

Hate the game, not the player.

And there they are. The true sentiments of an online troll. Someone who derives joy by sucking it from others. You found an exploit that allows you to be almost invincible, and now are rejoicing that the devs, in their grand ignorance, accidentally fixed the set and then deleted it in the same paragraph, taking away the one thing that actually provides counterplay against you.

There are people here who hate the state of Cyro PvP and are trying to get it back, and you're in here gaslighting them by claiming that their wishes are void because the devs designed Cyro with ballgroups in mind. The facts don't pan out with that claim and you finally concede that point in your next paragraph:

BardInSolitude wrote: »

Edit: just to be fair, perhaps I shouldn't claim that ball groups were truly intended by ZOS. I feel like a lot of things ended up being happy (or sad) accidents, but too many things line up with how ESO was designed as a whole for ball groups not to be a means of optimal PvP play. Regardless, groups that share buffs and debuffs and play in a coordinated manner instead of relying on blind individuality will always thrive in any MMO.

No one is saying that a single person or small group of uncoordinated people should be able to take out a large coordinated group. However, everything needs a counter and AB is the one thing that does anything against the state of current ballgroups. Without AB, what's left?

Imagine this is a game of soccer/futbol and everyone else is playing by doing what we all know of as soccer moves like dribbling, passing, and striking the ball to try and get it past the goalie. But then, a team comes along and realizes that they can just pin the ball between two player's chests, the rest of the team rallies around them in a tight formation, dare I say it... a ball? The group then runs into the goal and pushes all the opponents away from them. They win every match. People complain, only for some people (mostly those who are on teams that use this tactic) to tell them, "hey, you don't like what they're doing, just go play somewhere else!".

"Hey, we're not using our hands!" you cry as people around you boo. The opponents feel cheated. The fans are disappointed. They complain to the league and demand that they do something about it, but for years, the league just ignores the feedback and spends time focusing their efforts on merch sales.

Now in reality, you can't do this in the game of soccer because there are rules against it. ZOS has yet to ascend to this level of 5Head thinking.

You play in a ballgroup. You know the inner workings. It seems like you want to participate in this thread, so please, answer the OP: What is the counterplay to ballgroups now that AB is dead (unless it's corrected on Monday)?

My gut tells me your only answer will be to be in a ballgroup. That doesn't strike me as a marker of a healthy gaming environment. It strikes me as an exploit, created by the accidental neglect of a combat team that doesn't have enough resources to manage both the PvE and PvP side of this game.

If I'm mistaken about all of this, and you know of something that does scare you besides another ball or AB spam, I'm all ears.

ForumSavant

Aldoss wrote: »

BardInSolitude wrote: »

Ebon, Sanc, Pillager, the two sets that used to give mag/stam recovery (their names evade me right now), and so on.

Not PvP sourced which means it's circumstantial at best that they were intendend to help create the pariah behavior that we know as a ballgroup. PvP sets are created with PvP in mind. Trial sets are created with PvE in mind. People absolutely use PvE trial sets for PvP and vice versa, but that doesn't make them evidential of dev intention.

BardInSolitude wrote: »

I know, I was there for it. It just so happens that 12 x 2 = 24. Feel free to draw any conclusions from that.

This doesn't seem relevant.

BardInSolitude wrote: »

Sure thing, scribing shields are truly broken in this meta. We really didn't need them to survive, as NB healers did an excellent job prior to that. Not to mention that these shields are an excellent source of buffs, too. Yet AB was so broken that even scribing shields weren't enough to counter it, though they've greatly eased our pain.

So you agree. You are defending this nerf because AB is the ONE thing that actually scares you as a ballgroup. Thanks.

BardInSolitude wrote: »

You neglected to address all other PvP-specific mechanics I mentioned that corroborate to ball groups being the optimal and intended playstyle - most notably delayed AoE burst (Proxy, Sub, etc) and synergies (along with pre-nerf Harmony). Ball groups have existed since the first couple of years of ESO. I joined my first ball group in 2019, and that group had existed for like 2 years at the time, and it was a splinter of an even older group.

Proxy is the closest thing you can mention that gets you anywhere close to providing evidence that the devs designed Cyro with ballgroups in mind - except for the fact that it's just as powerful when wielded by a solo player against a ballgroup. The only reason why that power never means anything is because the hot stacking, shield stacking, and speed stacking + snow treaders has completely empowered ballgroups to be completely insulated from the type of successful bomb that would take out 20+ players sitting on a resource.

BardInSolitude wrote: »

Hate the game, not the player.

And there they are. The true sentiments of an online troll. Someone who derives joy by sucking it from others. You found an exploit that allows you to be almost invincible, and now are rejoicing that the devs, in their grand ignorance, accidentally fixed the set and then deleted it in the same paragraph, taking away the one thing that actually provides counterplay against you.

There are people here who hate the state of Cyro PvP and are trying to get it back, and you're in here gaslighting them by claiming that their wishes are void because the devs designed Cyro with ballgroups in mind. The facts don't pan out with that claim and you finally concede that point in your next paragraph:

BardInSolitude wrote: »

Edit: just to be fair, perhaps I shouldn't claim that ball groups were truly intended by ZOS. I feel like a lot of things ended up being happy (or sad) accidents, but too many things line up with how ESO was designed as a whole for ball groups not to be a means of optimal PvP play. Regardless, groups that share buffs and debuffs and play in a coordinated manner instead of relying on blind individuality will always thrive in any MMO.

No one is saying that a single person or small group of uncoordinated people should be able to take out a large coordinated group. However, everything needs a counter and AB is the one thing that does anything against the state of current ballgroups. Without AB, what's left?

Imagine this is a game of soccer/futbol and everyone else is playing by doing what we all know of as soccer moves like dribbling, passing, and striking the ball to try and get it past the goalie. But then, a team comes along and realizes that they can just pin the ball between two player's chests, the rest of the team rallies around them in a tight formation, dare I say it... a ball? The group then runs into the goal and pushes all the opponents away from them. They win every match. People complain, only for some people (mostly those who are on teams that use this tactic) to tell them, "hey, you don't like what they're doing, just go play somewhere else!".

"Hey, we're not using our hands!" you cry as people around you boo. The opponents feel cheated. The fans are disappointed. They complain to the league and demand that they do something about it, but for years, the league just ignores the feedback and spends time focusing their efforts on merch sales.

Now in reality, you can't do this in the game of soccer because there are rules against it. ZOS has yet to ascend to this level of 5Head thinking.

You play in a ballgroup. You know the inner workings. It seems like you want to participate in this thread, so please, answer the OP: What is the counterplay to ballgroups now that AB is dead (unless it's corrected on Monday)?

My gut tells me your only answer will be to be in a ballgroup. That doesn't strike me as a marker of a healthy gaming environment. It strikes me as an exploit, created by the accidental neglect of a combat team that doesn't have enough resources to manage both the PvE and PvP side of this game.

If I'm mistaken about all of this, and you know of something that does scare you besides another ball or AB spam, I'm all ears.

Why are people so quick to say someone is exploiting when they are doing something they dislike. What exploit is making people almost invincible, or it it just an intended mechanic you don't like?

Aldoss

ForumSavant wrote: »

Aldoss wrote: »

BardInSolitude wrote: »

Ebon, Sanc, Pillager, the two sets that used to give mag/stam recovery (their names evade me right now), and so on.

Not PvP sourced which means it's circumstantial at best that they were intendend to help create the pariah behavior that we know as a ballgroup. PvP sets are created with PvP in mind. Trial sets are created with PvE in mind. People absolutely use PvE trial sets for PvP and vice versa, but that doesn't make them evidential of dev intention.

BardInSolitude wrote: »

I know, I was there for it. It just so happens that 12 x 2 = 24. Feel free to draw any conclusions from that.

This doesn't seem relevant.

BardInSolitude wrote: »

Sure thing, scribing shields are truly broken in this meta. We really didn't need them to survive, as NB healers did an excellent job prior to that. Not to mention that these shields are an excellent source of buffs, too. Yet AB was so broken that even scribing shields weren't enough to counter it, though they've greatly eased our pain.

So you agree. You are defending this nerf because AB is the ONE thing that actually scares you as a ballgroup. Thanks.

BardInSolitude wrote: »

You neglected to address all other PvP-specific mechanics I mentioned that corroborate to ball groups being the optimal and intended playstyle - most notably delayed AoE burst (Proxy, Sub, etc) and synergies (along with pre-nerf Harmony). Ball groups have existed since the first couple of years of ESO. I joined my first ball group in 2019, and that group had existed for like 2 years at the time, and it was a splinter of an even older group.

Proxy is the closest thing you can mention that gets you anywhere close to providing evidence that the devs designed Cyro with ballgroups in mind - except for the fact that it's just as powerful when wielded by a solo player against a ballgroup. The only reason why that power never means anything is because the hot stacking, shield stacking, and speed stacking + snow treaders has completely empowered ballgroups to be completely insulated from the type of successful bomb that would take out 20+ players sitting on a resource.

BardInSolitude wrote: »

Hate the game, not the player.

And there they are. The true sentiments of an online troll. Someone who derives joy by sucking it from others. You found an exploit that allows you to be almost invincible, and now are rejoicing that the devs, in their grand ignorance, accidentally fixed the set and then deleted it in the same paragraph, taking away the one thing that actually provides counterplay against you.

There are people here who hate the state of Cyro PvP and are trying to get it back, and you're in here gaslighting them by claiming that their wishes are void because the devs designed Cyro with ballgroups in mind. The facts don't pan out with that claim and you finally concede that point in your next paragraph:

BardInSolitude wrote: »

Edit: just to be fair, perhaps I shouldn't claim that ball groups were truly intended by ZOS. I feel like a lot of things ended up being happy (or sad) accidents, but too many things line up with how ESO was designed as a whole for ball groups not to be a means of optimal PvP play. Regardless, groups that share buffs and debuffs and play in a coordinated manner instead of relying on blind individuality will always thrive in any MMO.

No one is saying that a single person or small group of uncoordinated people should be able to take out a large coordinated group. However, everything needs a counter and AB is the one thing that does anything against the state of current ballgroups. Without AB, what's left?

Imagine this is a game of soccer/futbol and everyone else is playing by doing what we all know of as soccer moves like dribbling, passing, and striking the ball to try and get it past the goalie. But then, a team comes along and realizes that they can just pin the ball between two player's chests, the rest of the team rallies around them in a tight formation, dare I say it... a ball? The group then runs into the goal and pushes all the opponents away from them. They win every match. People complain, only for some people (mostly those who are on teams that use this tactic) to tell them, "hey, you don't like what they're doing, just go play somewhere else!".

"Hey, we're not using our hands!" you cry as people around you boo. The opponents feel cheated. The fans are disappointed. They complain to the league and demand that they do something about it, but for years, the league just ignores the feedback and spends time focusing their efforts on merch sales.

Now in reality, you can't do this in the game of soccer because there are rules against it. ZOS has yet to ascend to this level of 5Head thinking.

You play in a ballgroup. You know the inner workings. It seems like you want to participate in this thread, so please, answer the OP: What is the counterplay to ballgroups now that AB is dead (unless it's corrected on Monday)?

My gut tells me your only answer will be to be in a ballgroup. That doesn't strike me as a marker of a healthy gaming environment. It strikes me as an exploit, created by the accidental neglect of a combat team that doesn't have enough resources to manage both the PvE and PvP side of this game.

If I'm mistaken about all of this, and you know of something that does scare you besides another ball or AB spam, I'm all ears.

Why are people so quick to say someone is exploiting when they are doing something they dislike. What exploit is making people almost invincible, or it it just an intended mechanic you don't like?

Because there's no good argument to support that ballgroup behavior is intended by the devs. It's vastly more likely that they're just unwilling to do something about it because the risk of whatever unintended consequences might befall the PvE mechs which are overwhelmingly more popular than cyro.

If you want to take a stab at proving it as intended behavior, then be my guest, and I'll stop calling it an exploit. Until then, when someone takes advantage of a situation or a circumstance that wasn't deliberately intended, we call that an exploit. It's not cheating. They're not doing anything but using mechs already in the game.

None of that changes the fact that ballgroup behavior is overwhelmingly seen as a net negative for gameplay enjoyment for the majority of cyro players as well as for server performance, which is directly tied to the presence of ballgroups and their behavior.

If it's the word that you care about, insert something else like "taking advantage of". The sentiment is still the same though.

Soccer has a rule to stop the "exploit" that I outlined. ZOS has yet to do that. We (the people on this board arguing to keep AB usable in PvP) believe that ZOS should do something that helps to level the playing field.

Or, keep AB out of PvP, but do something else that takes shield stacking to 80-100k hp away. One of those two things can help.

Azrael001

"No clear counterplay" is such a joke. I seriously doubt whoever wrote that comment has ever stepped foot into the game they're charged with balancing. The radius is incredibly small, literally just don't stack on crown directly. You'd still be in range of radiating regen, echoing vigor, barrier, and gibbering if you spread out with healers in the middle (although having 7-9 healers out of a group of 12 would put you out of range of a few of them and limit your ability to abuse that composition).

But of course, that would take skill and most (not all) ball groups are completely and utterly lacking in that department. That's the reason they play like that and stack 6+ ball groups when they can't kill a single 12-man group. No one else plays with 80% of their group being healers, with more than enough hps and shields to prevent Nahviintaas from dying to a top end godslayer score pushing group.

Currently, it takes 6-8 people in azureblight to kill 1 tower ***, focusing them down, over 30+ seconds with ultimates. Compare that to literally any other set in the game. Even if people removed their proc sets and weapons they could still beat a solo player with that ratio of people in around the same time unless they were a tank.

Notice how it's ALWAYS ball group players (including ones who claim they're not in a ball group) that are complaining about this set. No tower humpers, no small scalers, no one who runs in a zerg are actually complaining because many other sets do far more against them. A spread out zerg is a great way to counter an azureblight group as focusing one person down at a time with this set is a very slow method (compared to a ball group ulti-dump), especially with many ranged people attacking the edges of the group with high single target burst damage.

While holding a single breach is a strong point of this set, only ball groups tend to rush through 30 siege weapons and 50+ defenders because zergs could never survive this. But 12 people with 7-9 healers and shield rotations can with ease. Zergs tend to open a second breach against numerous defenders, which massively reduces the effectiveness of this set as wall breaches are much wider (about 5-6 azureblight procs wide).

And this set isn't even an "auto-win" set even against tightly stacked ball groups at the moment. A full 8-12 people in Azureblight plus 2-3 healers against an actually good ball group of 12 people tends to win about half the time when on even footing. One azureblight burst is *never* enough to kill any ball group, you have to push into them and risk them turning with a full ultidump on all of you who are now nicely in range of rush of agony and unable to block due to your channeled skills.

Azureblight is the first set in several years that we've had that actually counters the extremely abusive ball group playstyle where the only counterplay otherwise is to either walk away and let them take the map or bring 5-6x their numbers in an organized ultidump of 60-70 people to actually kill them once. With current pop caps and the fact that DC ballgroups on NA love to stack an entire faction worth of ball groups the latter is impossible. And even a full 3-4 groups of azureblight from various guilds aren't enough to directly counter their entire pop cap stacking with ball groups and simply walking over everything.

Personally, I love the skirmish style we had in old Ravenwatch before the proc sets were removed and even for the long time after proc sets were removed. Where individual skill could really shine, almost no one was tanky enough that you couldn't 1v1 them and come to a conclusion within 30 seconds solely based on skill and not their OP rng proc proccing before yours. Plus, a major thing that kept the game from dying, is we could pick up random pugs! No VD or PB to worry about if they weren't good and died a lot and we could teach them how to play better and start beating people which kept them engaged. My hope is that azureblight or another set will provide a stronger counter to ball groups. Be that punishing stacking or adding the condition of stacking to hot and shield stacking with rapid shield rotations (some of these ball groups are literally adding 100k hps and going person a barrier, person b gibbering, person c barrier, person d gibbering every single second and never running out of OP shields on very short cooldowns due to ultigen sets).

If the ball group playstyles die off, I truly think that PvP in this game can recover from the trend of rapidly dying out that it's been going through. Without their ability to be unkillable, sets like rush of agony and vicious death become the tool of bombers and bombing groups that even if they kill you, skill can still kill them. No more demoralizing 4 hour long farms at your tri-keeps every night by an unkillable group or two. No more shunning new players so you don't get hit by vicious death when fighting enemy groups that take a great deal of people, skill, time, and luck to take down. For that to happen though, I think azureblight's base damage can be nerfed for ~4 players and buffed to stack up to 24 players within a decreasing radius. Such that against 4-6 players is less than it is now, 12 is the same, and 24 is double to punish ball groups stacking even harder with more groups. Additionally, a new set should be introduced to punish shield rotations and ridiculously high hot stacks. For example an effect where if you get hit with barrier twice within 2 seconds, the second one does half of it's strength in damage instead of shielding or if you have more than your max health in heals per second all of your hots get removed and can't be reapplied for 1 second.

o_Primate_o

What if Plaguebreak wasn't enemy-proc'd, damage halved but procs every five seconds for 20 seconds. Would that stress the healers and force ballgroups to spread out without doing too much damage due to multiple procs?

Aldoss

ForumSavant wrote: »

You'll help me stay on topic after you were the one who changed topic to begin with? Hilarious. Not here to argue semantics yet that's what your entire earlier comment was, funny when things get pointed out and the argument falls apart. Maybe don't make things up in an attempt to get your point across?

False. Perhaps you missed it? @BardInSolitude made a bold claim saying that ballgroups were an intended behavior by the devs when they designed Cyro. I disagreed and produced an argument with evidence to support the argument.

If you don't think my evidence backs up my argument, then by all means, argue against it and provide evidence of your own to support it. It's just that you have yet to do that. You're focused on me saying a word that you don't like. That's fine. Arguing over what "exploit" means doesn't seem like a beneficial use of time because ultimately, it's not that big of a deal. I'm not married to the word and I gave you an alternate interpretation of it. It seems like it triggered you. That wasn't my intention.

ForumSavant wrote: »

Since you still want to be passive aggressive for zero reason, aside from the fact that you got called out for making stuff up, here, I will help you get up to speed and stay on topic. Just because a group of people kill you, that does not make that inherently unbalance. This is an MMO, it is intended for people to play together if they want. The nerf was warranted, it was over performing.

This is a strawman. That's not my stance here and I haven't said that. I don't get killed by ballgroups because I choose to ignore them. However, that choice doesn't mean there's some inherent right for ballgroup behavior to continue. People are here asking the devs to reconsider their choices in removing a tool that is proven to be effective against ballgroups. You clearly disagree and that's fine. They're not here to change your mind. They're here to change the dev's mind.

I'm not arguing for there to not be grouping in this game. I'm arguing against the claim that the devs designed Cyro with current ballgroup behavior in mind.

My comments here are pretty plainly directed to @BardInSolitude, since I quoted them. You wanted to join in, as you're welcome to, since this is a public forum. However, do stay on topic, otherwise I'll just ignore you. This will be my last reply to you, so as to not derail the topic. I'd be happy to continue debating the argument at hand if you'd like to participate in it, however.

ZOS_Icy

Greetings,

We have recently removed some unnecessary back and forth from this thread. This is a reminder to keep the discussion civil and constructive. Please keep our Community Rules in mind moving forward.

Thank you for your understanding.