Maintenance for the week of June 23:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – June 23
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – June 25, 12:00AM EDT (4:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EDT (22:00 UTC) https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/679500
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – June 23
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – June 25, 12:00AM EDT (4:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EDT (22:00 UTC) https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/679500
The issue is resolved, and the PTS is now available. Thank you for your patience!
Rush of Agony break's ZOS's own standards and should be removed/nerfed from PvP
Joy_Division
✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
EDIT: Think some people misunderstand the old title. I disagree about Azureblight being taken away from PvP. I was very vocal in defending the set. What I meant was "ZOS should follow their own precedent and use the PTS cycle to remove a much complained about set from PvP (that being Rush of Agony)". Changed title for clarification.
The Rush of Agony (ROA) set, which drops in PvE content (The Dread Cellar dungeon) should have its current functionality restricted to PvE content. I argue this based on Zenimax Online Studio’s (ZOS) own numerous stated positions and standards it has used to administer and regulate combat in the Elder Scrolls Online (ESO).
ZOS’s commitment to standardization
Since 2019, ZOS has been committed to standardization. This means abilities, damage, heals, (de)buffs, and other associated combat effects would adhere to a common standard to ensure the various systems and classes were in-line with each other and to remove outliers that were potentially disruptive to game balance. They have, significantly, reasserted this commitment with respect to gear sets in October 2024’s Developer Deep Dive.
ROA does not follow this SBE. Let's not even talk about the 5 piece sets such as Hunding’s Rage. Even sets that have been released after ROA such as Abyssal Brace and Storm-Cursed’s Revenge do not compare.
More to the point, ROA does not follow the same SBE to a similar set that fulfills basically the same function, Dark Convergence. We know this because PvP organized groups, often derogatorily called “ball groups,” overwhelmingly, and pretty much exclusively, use ROA as a pull set.
Naturally, we understand and accept that the developers are not perfect. As committed as they are and as hard as they try, there have been and will be outliers that deviate from their desired standards.
Which brings us another stated position by ZOS, that of adjustments and balancing. We see this every update with classes, abilities, buffs, and gear sets.
We have ample evidence of this. Sload’s Semblance, Mara’s Balm, Dark Convergence, Troll King, Wizard’s Riposte, Hrothgar, et al., are all countless sets that I have used, spent gold mats on, that were deemed too powerful and have been received adjustments that lowered their power (what are usually referred to as “nerfs”)
Let’s examine ZOS’s statements. Does ROA have too high of an adoption rate? Unequivocally and unarguably, yes. Every large organized PvP group (as do many smaller ones ) uses this set as it is central to their entire offensive strategy (gap close, pull in everybody within 450 square meters, and instantly kill all targets with unavoidable area of effect damage).
In its current state of “spiking the charts,” is ROA healthy for the game? No. It has been often criticized and complained about for many reasons including: violating the game’s core crowd control (CC) mechanics, empowering “ball groups” to an oppressive level of potency, being the catalyst for too many instant-death scenarios, lacking meaningful counterplay, being “overloaded,” et al. That the set is also central to the most powerful and disruptive element in PvP, “ball groups,” makes a bad situation worse.
Has ZOS examined this set? Yes. During update 42, they did attempt to resolve the outstanding issues by introducing a delay before the pull to increase the reaction time before a target was, in their words, “yanked.”
Why has this not been successful? Why are its critic not silenced? Why has this adjustment failed to convince “ball groups” to use a different set or different tactics?
Mostly because ZOS did not address the most frustrating and controversial part of ROA: that it violates the game’s core combat mechanic of crowd control immunity. What makes this set so dangerous, and why organized groups exclusively use it instead of other pulls, is because the other pulls are (rightly) considered as a crowd control effect. For all crowd control effects, ESO has since the beginning given players (and even NPC mobs) what is known as “CC immunity,” whereby for seven seconds after being crowd controlled, targets would be immune from further disabling effects. This is necessary because without CC immunity, players (and NPCs) would potentially be subjected to continual crowd control effects, thus denying them the freedom/time/counterplay/capability to survive lethal situations or even play the game. It is generally recognized and understood that being stunned, charmed, “yanked,” or subject to any other condition that denies your ability to play the game and results in the death of your character is incredibly frustrating. This is the core complaint against ROA. Organized groups use this set precisely because players can be consecutively crowd controlled by being “yanked” and then hit with an undodgeable, unblockable, and unavoidable Fear effect. The subsequent mass pointblank area of effect (PBAOE) damage invariably kills them.
ZOS’s thinking with the delay between the set’s activation and getting “yanked” was that in that window of opportunity, players would be able to react and avoid getting pulled. However, this has proven to be impractical. The range ROA has is quite long (12 meters + 22 meters for gap closer of choice) so there are times you’re just not going to see what’s happening. You will also get “yanked” if you are within 12 meters of someone else getting targeted. It’s hard enough to avoid getting Incapped by a Nightblade who is literally in front of your face. Now we have to worry about people 12 meters away from us who are 22 meters away from a ROA user? That is a big ask. So, it’s still basically the same routine. People get yanked and then immediately die.
To be fair, let’s consider the perspective of the ROA user. There is a legitimate question to ask. If players fail to make the proper play, if they fail to heed the potential danger of this set, shouldn’t there be a penalty? Is their death deserved?
ZOS already told us. They have consistently said “No.” There needs to be counterplay.
For over a decade, ZOS has nerfed skills, abilities, passives, and gear sets which they have felt did not provide players with counterplay, even after these players put themselves in compromising and potentially lethal situations. A Dawnbreaker ultimate can only kill a player whose health has been whittled down because of their poor decisions and gameplay. Whether a bad build, not maintaining heals over time (HOTS), failing to block, dodge, or otherwise mitigate damage, a lack of pressure against their opponent to compel them to use their ultimate defensively, the point is this player had numerous opportunities and chances to avoid getting killed by that Dawnbreaker. Yet ZOS put cast-times on many ultimates to ensure that players, who probably deserve to lose, would still have counterplay options available.
ZOS has gone out of their way to remove what they call “overloaded” effects which combined multiple dangerous negative elements in a single action. They have been particularly sensitive to the combination of high damage and stuns. Crystal Fragments, Subterranean Assault, Templar Jabs are all skills that once stunned and hit for high damage. These have all been nerfed because ZOS does not want its players to be subjected to so many damaging and debilitating effects at the same time. Yet ROA does exactly this. In an AoE.
In this most recent patch notes, the Templar skill Radiant Destruction was made to be dodgeable because
I will be up front and say I hate the change to Radiant Destruction. I don’t just hate it because it’s a nerf or because we already went through this years ago by making it dodgeable, which made the ability useless in PvP such that even ZOS was convinced to change it back. I hate it mostly because ZOS is not adhering to its own standards. There is no consistency. It just feels arbitrary. As a Templar main, I have to abide by this nerf, accept it, and be told by everyone how it’s best for the game because it is unacceptable for a single player to be put in a situation that is a “complete death sentence.” But somehow it’s perfectly acceptable that multiple players at 100% health be subjected to a complete death sentence via the night after night pattern of ROA user pulling targets from 34 meters away, then the unblockable, undodgeable, unavoidable immediate Fear (so much for counterplay), and then instant death by mass PBAoE (also undodgeable) by their 11 buddies.
If a Templar is in a position to Radiant Destruction an opponent to death, then the opponent has been outplayed. They made numerous mistakes. Failed to capitalize on numerous opportunities. They will further play poorly in not availing themselves to the numerous options they have to avoid dying while getting beamed (block, heal, shield, bash, line of sight (LOS), stun, out-range, kill). Like the ROA user, they could argue their opponent deserves to lose.
But ZOS says “No.”
If that’s the standard, if that’s the expectation, if that’s how ZOS is going to balance the game, where is the consistency? With ROA, if I only make a single mistake and miss a block, I am put in a “complete death sentence.” It is not consistent. You are allowed to make numerous mistakes against a Templar and be bailed out with a special rule that breaks the core mechanics of the game (dodging a channeled attack). Meanwhile, you are not allowed to make a single mistake against a “ball group” because of a special rule the breaks the core mechanics of the game (denying CC immunity after being crowd controlled). That’s very frustrating.
Consistency is important because where it is lacking, that gives the appearance of favoritism, bias, lack of knowledge, apathy, etc., even if these are not true
How am I as a player supposed to gauge the different ways in ZOS has gone about adjusting the Azureblight set and Rush of Agony?
In update 44, ZOS completely removed Azureblight from PVP. This was their reasoning. The bolded text is my emphasis.
Everything I bolded applies more to Rush of Agony than Azureblight. Every “ball group” uses Rush of Agony. Where is all the concern about it standing ahead of the pack such that other sets are hardly used in organized group play? “Ball groups” love to use this set against solo players. Where is the concern about it being the de facto choice in each and every PvP situation? ROA’s not conferring CC immunity removes any counterplay once pulled. Why are we being told about the desire for sets like Plaguebreak that have actual counterplay? As soon as ROA was released, no set has been run more frequently in organized group play and had produced more boom shaking servers than Rush of Agony. Why hasn’t it been nuked from PvP like Azureblight?
It's not a good optic that many of the complaints about Azureblight came from organized group players whereas the many people who said this set was fine and served a needed function do not run in organized groups. Those in favor of Azureblight were in the majority. Here’s a recent thread, see for yourself. I am not making things up: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/666228/revert-the-azureblight-nerf/p1
It certainly does seem like organized groups got their way. Here we have the story of two sets that are abusive in the amount of power they allow the user to possess. The one that organized groups feared and was a threat to them was dropped permanently from PvP. No adjustments. No testing of an alternative. Just gone. And we got nothing.
Why the different standards? Does ZOS favor “ball groups”? Do the devs play in “ball groups”? Questions of this sort are the consequence of a lack of constancy. It endangers frustration and perceptions of favoritism.
If you want my advice as somehow who has run in a “ball group” (and knows perfectly well the ROA situation from both sides, that of a solo player and an organized group), this is why I think it should relegated to a pure PvE set.
I do not think ZOS appreciates why players dislike ROA so much. It’s not about having too short of a window to avoid being “yanked.” There are just going to be times when we cannot even see the threat or avoid getting yanked by this set. We do not have 360 degree vision. Sometimes we are fighting another player. Sometimes there are other immediate threats that we have to move from and just can’t stand there and block (such as siege or the “ball group” that is heading right at you at 180% speed cap). Sometimes you’re not just going to see some random 12 feet away get targeted. Let’s be real. We are not perfect. That’s the whole point of having counterplay.
People dislike this set because once they get “yanked” by a ball group, it is a “death sentence.” We literally go from full health to dead in snap of a finger. That is a terrible mechanic. The penalty for making one mistake is death. We are so used to having counterplay that the one time it Is denied to us, when we need it the most, it is both frustrating and obnoxiously surprising.
It's not about the frequency of getting pulled. Getting yanked to death every 16 seconds isn’t going to make me feel better than getting yanked every 8 seconds. It’s not even really about the “bad” state of getting pulled through a thing like a wall. I mean, I’ve found myself being pulled, pushed, and thrown through all sorts of impassable terrain playing ESO since 2014. As long as I survive, I’m OK with it. It is getting yanked through a wall and then dying that is so frustrating. (It is disheartening to read in ZOS’s latest commentary about ROA. They say that even with the best efforts to avoid being yanked through wall, “it could still happen.” If it’s just not possible to avoid being pulled through a wall, then the set is by definition broken, bugged, and does not belong in a competitive environment. Why is it so essential to the functioning of Cyrodiil or the AvAvA format to give these “ball groups” an AOE pull set that empowers them to an oppressive level that we are willing to accept players getting pulled through walls? This makes no sense to me).
In general, I don’t think ZOS comprehends how much more dangerous being pulled is than being stunned. Both of these actions deprive a player from controlling their character. The similarities end there. Being pulled is a far greater danger because a player is also being deprived of their position. Invariably, the change of positions (under oils, away from allies/heals, in a kill-zone of coordinated damage, away from favorable terrain with line of sight, etc.) is what kills the target. Not the stun. Go ahead, ask the PvE tank. Would an endgame PvE group seeking a trifecta prefer a Templar tank who stunned mobs with Javelins or a Dragonknight tank that chained them? It is incomprehensible to me that getting pulled isn’t seen as dangerous or worthy to count as being crowd controlled.
Once we comprehend just how potentially lethal a pull is, and see this set is an AoE pull that also does high damage, has a trivial proc condition, and denies a core combat mechanic, we ought to ask ourselves the very question ZOS told us they ask, “Is this healthy for the game?” If we are really committed to concepts such as counterplay, standards, avoiding “death sentences,” other sets being used, diversity of tactics, not having “overloaded” effects, etc., then the answer is unequivocally, “No.”
That is why I would rather see ROA banished to PvE land than the theoretical “fix” of respecting CC immunity. It is true that experienced players with quick twitch reflexes will probably be able to avoid getting killed. I escape most Dark Convergence solo bombs. But the very act of an AOE pull is insanely strong. Not just for its effect, but also for its versatility in allowing groups to utterly ignore terrain features and create a choke point wherever they wish. ROA’s effect is at the level of an ultimate, and a powerful one at that. Less experienced players, “casuals,” curious visitors, etc., will still get consistently destroyed by ROA even it if given CC immunity. It would thus keep Cyrodiil as the uninviting, intimidating, and high barrier of entry place that it unfortunately has been for years.
Organized groups love to tout that their power really derives from the brilliance in making a comp, their high level of organization, and the collective skill their players and Crown. Let them prove it. For too long, they have been gifted an abusive set (among numerous other broken mechanics) that violates many of ZOS’s publicly stated standards and expectations they have told us is supposed to govern and adjudicate PvP combat. ROA is so powerful that a ball group’s entire offensive repertoire is predicated on this set’s singular ability to create a choke point on demand and then “yank” players from as far away as 34 meters to be deleted by synchronous PBAOE damage which cannot be avoided because of consecutive CC effects. That is all they ever do because that is all they have to do. It is that brutally effective. This is not compelling gameplay. It’s not healthy. Not indicative of the high level of skill that is being claimed. There is no variation. No alternative strategy. Just the same thing night after night, update after update, year after year.
The balance is totally out of whack. And it has gotten worse. I am not just saying that. Here is an example. In 2017, all one had to do to avoid a “choo choo pain train” (what we used to call organized groups) was simply move to the side. That’s it. Literally move 3 meters to the left and just watch them choo choo by. It was possible to be within melee distance of an organized group of 24 players without holding block and be perfectly fine. They didn’t have Rush of Agony or any pull set (nor a dozen stacking HOTs, snow treaders, spammable AoE shields that absorb millions of damage that never touch their health bars, but I digress). Now being anywhere with 34 meters of an organized group of just 12 players is a death sentence waiting to happen. That is the difference a single set with a broken mechanic makes. It completely changes the game. Consider in 2017, it was possible for a melee player to attack a healer in the back row without the fear of a proc set yanking them to certain death from halfway across the screen. Organized groups and the mechanics they use have become so strong, just about everything ungrouped players do to try and stop them is futile. If your abilities don’t have any impact on the game, at that point are you even really playing it?
I certainly feel that way. No matter how well I play, I just don’t stand a chance. I’m not good enough to compete with broken mechanics that violate ZOS’s standards in how the rest of the game is supposed to be balanced. Just last night, I saw this futility and ZOS’s kill-feed proved to all of us how overmatched we were trying to compete against two organized groups that showed up at Fort Glademist. We had at least 41 unique names (I know because I took screenshots of all the names who were defeated in the kill-feed). People did the best they could. Zone generals tried to give advice in chat. Some players dutifully set up siege. Bow users sniped away. Tanks went out to burn siege. I saw one intrepid soul try to spam the Scribing Destruction staff skill (of course, because it has a two second cast time, they always missed and because they weren’t blocking, they got yanked and killed). We even had one of the best “bombers” on the server. I knew we weren’t going to win, but, hey, at least give me a fight with some moments. I mean, there were more than 40 of us.
You know what the score was? 56 consecutive DC dead. Then 1 AD was defeated. Then 18 more consecutive DC dead. I have the screenshots if you want to see them. Then I couldn’t tell you because I logged out in disgust.
That is not competitive, not balanced, not compelling, not interesting, and certainly not fun. It is the consequence of ignoring the continuous and growing power of organized groups for years, doing nothing to reign in that power despite the repeated calls on these forums. Of not being consistent with the standards set in the game. Of opting to remove one abusive set in the game that is detrimental to organized groups, while allowing a different abusive set that is fundamental to the only tactic organized groups bother using.
This is why Vengeance generated legitimate excitement.
Live Cyrodiil gives us a siege fight dominated by organized groups in which ordinary players get destroyed, suffering 74 defeats for 1 single victory.
Vengeance gives us a siege in which the defenders (the Daggerfall Covenant) actually had the advantage of a fortified position, whereas the two attackers were reasonably balanced with respect to each other. Oh, and 3000 kills!
One experience was fun despite its flaws. The other was not fun because of its flaws.
So, the plan for update 46 is to allow these organize groups to cherry pick class lines and let them use a broken set that violates just about every standard of combat balance in the Elder Scrolls Online? Why? 74-1 is a huge red flag. Please send me an email when Vengeance is back online.
Just add the line “only against monsters” to the 5th piece set bonus.
Since the PvE sourced Azureblight set was totally removed from PvP, the PvE sourced Rush of Agony should be adjusted in the same way. As Azureblight was just nuked in the middle of a PTS cycle, so should ROA. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. We have a PvP sourced pull set (also highly dubious, but at least it follows the rules). ROA is not and was never needed.
Just do it. Then spend your time and efforts trying to make subclassing as best as it can be.
Just follow your own standards.
Edited by Joy_Division on April 17, 2025 10:30PM The Rush of Agony (ROA) set, which drops in PvE content (The Dread Cellar dungeon) should have its current functionality restricted to PvE content. I argue this based on Zenimax Online Studio’s (ZOS) own numerous stated positions and standards it has used to administer and regulate combat in the Elder Scrolls Online (ESO).
ZOS’s commitment to standardization
Since 2019, ZOS has been committed to standardization. This means abilities, damage, heals, (de)buffs, and other associated combat effects would adhere to a common standard to ensure the various systems and classes were in-line with each other and to remove outliers that were potentially disruptive to game balance. They have, significantly, reasserted this commitment with respect to gear sets in October 2024’s Developer Deep Dive.
”ZOS” wrote:Item sets follow a standard called Set Bonus Efficiency, or SBE for short. SBE means that the average power of an item set per slot is roughly the same. The two-piece bonus on a five-piece set might be weaker than the two-piece bonus on a two-piece set, but if taken as a whole, both sets will give you almost the same amount of power per item slot.
We use a set of mathematical formulas to determine the SBE with positives that increase and negatives that decrease the value. Giving stats and increasing damage or duration are some examples of things that can increase SBE, while complex proc conditions, cooldowns, and "curse" aspects are examples of things that lower SBE.
ROA does not follow this SBE. Let's not even talk about the 5 piece sets such as Hunding’s Rage. Even sets that have been released after ROA such as Abyssal Brace and Storm-Cursed’s Revenge do not compare.
More to the point, ROA does not follow the same SBE to a similar set that fulfills basically the same function, Dark Convergence. We know this because PvP organized groups, often derogatorily called “ball groups,” overwhelmingly, and pretty much exclusively, use ROA as a pull set.
Naturally, we understand and accept that the developers are not perfect. As committed as they are and as hard as they try, there have been and will be outliers that deviate from their desired standards.
Which brings us another stated position by ZOS, that of adjustments and balancing. We see this every update with classes, abilities, buffs, and gear sets.
”ZOS” wrote:If at any point we see an item set with too low or too high of an adoption rate, we examine it right away.
”ZOS” wrote:If we see an item set spike to the top of the charts while everything else is declining like that, that's when we take a harder look and ask, “Is this healthy for the game?”
We have ample evidence of this. Sload’s Semblance, Mara’s Balm, Dark Convergence, Troll King, Wizard’s Riposte, Hrothgar, et al., are all countless sets that I have used, spent gold mats on, that were deemed too powerful and have been received adjustments that lowered their power (what are usually referred to as “nerfs”)
Let’s examine ZOS’s statements. Does ROA have too high of an adoption rate? Unequivocally and unarguably, yes. Every large organized PvP group (as do many smaller ones ) uses this set as it is central to their entire offensive strategy (gap close, pull in everybody within 450 square meters, and instantly kill all targets with unavoidable area of effect damage).
In its current state of “spiking the charts,” is ROA healthy for the game? No. It has been often criticized and complained about for many reasons including: violating the game’s core crowd control (CC) mechanics, empowering “ball groups” to an oppressive level of potency, being the catalyst for too many instant-death scenarios, lacking meaningful counterplay, being “overloaded,” et al. That the set is also central to the most powerful and disruptive element in PvP, “ball groups,” makes a bad situation worse.
Has ZOS examined this set? Yes. During update 42, they did attempt to resolve the outstanding issues by introducing a delay before the pull to increase the reaction time before a target was, in their words, “yanked.”
Why has this not been successful? Why are its critic not silenced? Why has this adjustment failed to convince “ball groups” to use a different set or different tactics?
Mostly because ZOS did not address the most frustrating and controversial part of ROA: that it violates the game’s core combat mechanic of crowd control immunity. What makes this set so dangerous, and why organized groups exclusively use it instead of other pulls, is because the other pulls are (rightly) considered as a crowd control effect. For all crowd control effects, ESO has since the beginning given players (and even NPC mobs) what is known as “CC immunity,” whereby for seven seconds after being crowd controlled, targets would be immune from further disabling effects. This is necessary because without CC immunity, players (and NPCs) would potentially be subjected to continual crowd control effects, thus denying them the freedom/time/counterplay/capability to survive lethal situations or even play the game. It is generally recognized and understood that being stunned, charmed, “yanked,” or subject to any other condition that denies your ability to play the game and results in the death of your character is incredibly frustrating. This is the core complaint against ROA. Organized groups use this set precisely because players can be consecutively crowd controlled by being “yanked” and then hit with an undodgeable, unblockable, and unavoidable Fear effect. The subsequent mass pointblank area of effect (PBAOE) damage invariably kills them.
ZOS’s thinking with the delay between the set’s activation and getting “yanked” was that in that window of opportunity, players would be able to react and avoid getting pulled. However, this has proven to be impractical. The range ROA has is quite long (12 meters + 22 meters for gap closer of choice) so there are times you’re just not going to see what’s happening. You will also get “yanked” if you are within 12 meters of someone else getting targeted. It’s hard enough to avoid getting Incapped by a Nightblade who is literally in front of your face. Now we have to worry about people 12 meters away from us who are 22 meters away from a ROA user? That is a big ask. So, it’s still basically the same routine. People get yanked and then immediately die.
To be fair, let’s consider the perspective of the ROA user. There is a legitimate question to ask. If players fail to make the proper play, if they fail to heed the potential danger of this set, shouldn’t there be a penalty? Is their death deserved?
ZOS already told us. They have consistently said “No.” There needs to be counterplay.
For over a decade, ZOS has nerfed skills, abilities, passives, and gear sets which they have felt did not provide players with counterplay, even after these players put themselves in compromising and potentially lethal situations. A Dawnbreaker ultimate can only kill a player whose health has been whittled down because of their poor decisions and gameplay. Whether a bad build, not maintaining heals over time (HOTS), failing to block, dodge, or otherwise mitigate damage, a lack of pressure against their opponent to compel them to use their ultimate defensively, the point is this player had numerous opportunities and chances to avoid getting killed by that Dawnbreaker. Yet ZOS put cast-times on many ultimates to ensure that players, who probably deserve to lose, would still have counterplay options available.
ZOS has gone out of their way to remove what they call “overloaded” effects which combined multiple dangerous negative elements in a single action. They have been particularly sensitive to the combination of high damage and stuns. Crystal Fragments, Subterranean Assault, Templar Jabs are all skills that once stunned and hit for high damage. These have all been nerfed because ZOS does not want its players to be subjected to so many damaging and debilitating effects at the same time. Yet ROA does exactly this. In an AoE.
In this most recent patch notes, the Templar skill Radiant Destruction was made to be dodgeable because
ZOS wrote:to help prevent it from being a complete death sentence … to improve some of the counterplay in PvP
I will be up front and say I hate the change to Radiant Destruction. I don’t just hate it because it’s a nerf or because we already went through this years ago by making it dodgeable, which made the ability useless in PvP such that even ZOS was convinced to change it back. I hate it mostly because ZOS is not adhering to its own standards. There is no consistency. It just feels arbitrary. As a Templar main, I have to abide by this nerf, accept it, and be told by everyone how it’s best for the game because it is unacceptable for a single player to be put in a situation that is a “complete death sentence.” But somehow it’s perfectly acceptable that multiple players at 100% health be subjected to a complete death sentence via the night after night pattern of ROA user pulling targets from 34 meters away, then the unblockable, undodgeable, unavoidable immediate Fear (so much for counterplay), and then instant death by mass PBAoE (also undodgeable) by their 11 buddies.
If a Templar is in a position to Radiant Destruction an opponent to death, then the opponent has been outplayed. They made numerous mistakes. Failed to capitalize on numerous opportunities. They will further play poorly in not availing themselves to the numerous options they have to avoid dying while getting beamed (block, heal, shield, bash, line of sight (LOS), stun, out-range, kill). Like the ROA user, they could argue their opponent deserves to lose.
But ZOS says “No.”
If that’s the standard, if that’s the expectation, if that’s how ZOS is going to balance the game, where is the consistency? With ROA, if I only make a single mistake and miss a block, I am put in a “complete death sentence.” It is not consistent. You are allowed to make numerous mistakes against a Templar and be bailed out with a special rule that breaks the core mechanics of the game (dodging a channeled attack). Meanwhile, you are not allowed to make a single mistake against a “ball group” because of a special rule the breaks the core mechanics of the game (denying CC immunity after being crowd controlled). That’s very frustrating.
Consistency is important because where it is lacking, that gives the appearance of favoritism, bias, lack of knowledge, apathy, etc., even if these are not true
How am I as a player supposed to gauge the different ways in ZOS has gone about adjusting the Azureblight set and Rush of Agony?
In update 44, ZOS completely removed Azureblight from PVP. This was their reasoning. The bolded text is my emphasis.
”ZOS” wrote:Azureblight has been standing ahead of the pack of many item sets since its rework in 2023, dominating areas where there are only a handful of targets stacked up and became increasingly stronger against larger groups. In addition to this, the rework significantly increased its efficiency in larger group counts, where multiple wearers could benefit each other by expediting the stack generation process – creating a lot of problematic cases in PvP particularly, where large groups can roam around and bombard both other groups and the servers with little to no recourse. As such, we've made some larger adjustments to take the set's oppressive nature out of PvP, since Plaguebreak already fits a similar function for those situations with a much healthier amount of counterplay. [Joy: Note the continued ZOS desire for counterplay!] Additionally, we've imposed some number adjustments that will shift Azureblight's power closer to where it was always intended to be - shining against bigger packs of enemies. Previously Azure become the defacto set to run when only hitting 3 targets and increasingly became more powerful up to 6, and had little drop off even against 2 enemies. The newer values ensure Azure is less powerful against 1 to 2 enemies, slightly weaker against 3, but really starts to shine at 4 or more enemies – so it remains the best set for huge packs, while other sets start to compare better in cleave scenarios. In addition to this, we're also increasing the cooldown on the explosions in hopes to reduce its effectiveness with multiple wearers, so that other sets can be ran more frequently in organized group play, and less booms shake the servers to their core. Lastly, we're adjusting the 2-4 piece bonuses to grant stats that actually impact the outcome of the set as well, as the previous stat lines had no impact on helping activate or enhance the set's outcome.
Everything I bolded applies more to Rush of Agony than Azureblight. Every “ball group” uses Rush of Agony. Where is all the concern about it standing ahead of the pack such that other sets are hardly used in organized group play? “Ball groups” love to use this set against solo players. Where is the concern about it being the de facto choice in each and every PvP situation? ROA’s not conferring CC immunity removes any counterplay once pulled. Why are we being told about the desire for sets like Plaguebreak that have actual counterplay? As soon as ROA was released, no set has been run more frequently in organized group play and had produced more boom shaking servers than Rush of Agony. Why hasn’t it been nuked from PvP like Azureblight?
It's not a good optic that many of the complaints about Azureblight came from organized group players whereas the many people who said this set was fine and served a needed function do not run in organized groups. Those in favor of Azureblight were in the majority. Here’s a recent thread, see for yourself. I am not making things up: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/666228/revert-the-azureblight-nerf/p1
It certainly does seem like organized groups got their way. Here we have the story of two sets that are abusive in the amount of power they allow the user to possess. The one that organized groups feared and was a threat to them was dropped permanently from PvP. No adjustments. No testing of an alternative. Just gone. And we got nothing.
Why the different standards? Does ZOS favor “ball groups”? Do the devs play in “ball groups”? Questions of this sort are the consequence of a lack of constancy. It endangers frustration and perceptions of favoritism.
If you want my advice as somehow who has run in a “ball group” (and knows perfectly well the ROA situation from both sides, that of a solo player and an organized group), this is why I think it should relegated to a pure PvE set.
I do not think ZOS appreciates why players dislike ROA so much. It’s not about having too short of a window to avoid being “yanked.” There are just going to be times when we cannot even see the threat or avoid getting yanked by this set. We do not have 360 degree vision. Sometimes we are fighting another player. Sometimes there are other immediate threats that we have to move from and just can’t stand there and block (such as siege or the “ball group” that is heading right at you at 180% speed cap). Sometimes you’re not just going to see some random 12 feet away get targeted. Let’s be real. We are not perfect. That’s the whole point of having counterplay.
People dislike this set because once they get “yanked” by a ball group, it is a “death sentence.” We literally go from full health to dead in snap of a finger. That is a terrible mechanic. The penalty for making one mistake is death. We are so used to having counterplay that the one time it Is denied to us, when we need it the most, it is both frustrating and obnoxiously surprising.
It's not about the frequency of getting pulled. Getting yanked to death every 16 seconds isn’t going to make me feel better than getting yanked every 8 seconds. It’s not even really about the “bad” state of getting pulled through a thing like a wall. I mean, I’ve found myself being pulled, pushed, and thrown through all sorts of impassable terrain playing ESO since 2014. As long as I survive, I’m OK with it. It is getting yanked through a wall and then dying that is so frustrating. (It is disheartening to read in ZOS’s latest commentary about ROA. They say that even with the best efforts to avoid being yanked through wall, “it could still happen.” If it’s just not possible to avoid being pulled through a wall, then the set is by definition broken, bugged, and does not belong in a competitive environment. Why is it so essential to the functioning of Cyrodiil or the AvAvA format to give these “ball groups” an AOE pull set that empowers them to an oppressive level that we are willing to accept players getting pulled through walls? This makes no sense to me).
In general, I don’t think ZOS comprehends how much more dangerous being pulled is than being stunned. Both of these actions deprive a player from controlling their character. The similarities end there. Being pulled is a far greater danger because a player is also being deprived of their position. Invariably, the change of positions (under oils, away from allies/heals, in a kill-zone of coordinated damage, away from favorable terrain with line of sight, etc.) is what kills the target. Not the stun. Go ahead, ask the PvE tank. Would an endgame PvE group seeking a trifecta prefer a Templar tank who stunned mobs with Javelins or a Dragonknight tank that chained them? It is incomprehensible to me that getting pulled isn’t seen as dangerous or worthy to count as being crowd controlled.
Once we comprehend just how potentially lethal a pull is, and see this set is an AoE pull that also does high damage, has a trivial proc condition, and denies a core combat mechanic, we ought to ask ourselves the very question ZOS told us they ask, “Is this healthy for the game?” If we are really committed to concepts such as counterplay, standards, avoiding “death sentences,” other sets being used, diversity of tactics, not having “overloaded” effects, etc., then the answer is unequivocally, “No.”
That is why I would rather see ROA banished to PvE land than the theoretical “fix” of respecting CC immunity. It is true that experienced players with quick twitch reflexes will probably be able to avoid getting killed. I escape most Dark Convergence solo bombs. But the very act of an AOE pull is insanely strong. Not just for its effect, but also for its versatility in allowing groups to utterly ignore terrain features and create a choke point wherever they wish. ROA’s effect is at the level of an ultimate, and a powerful one at that. Less experienced players, “casuals,” curious visitors, etc., will still get consistently destroyed by ROA even it if given CC immunity. It would thus keep Cyrodiil as the uninviting, intimidating, and high barrier of entry place that it unfortunately has been for years.
Organized groups love to tout that their power really derives from the brilliance in making a comp, their high level of organization, and the collective skill their players and Crown. Let them prove it. For too long, they have been gifted an abusive set (among numerous other broken mechanics) that violates many of ZOS’s publicly stated standards and expectations they have told us is supposed to govern and adjudicate PvP combat. ROA is so powerful that a ball group’s entire offensive repertoire is predicated on this set’s singular ability to create a choke point on demand and then “yank” players from as far away as 34 meters to be deleted by synchronous PBAOE damage which cannot be avoided because of consecutive CC effects. That is all they ever do because that is all they have to do. It is that brutally effective. This is not compelling gameplay. It’s not healthy. Not indicative of the high level of skill that is being claimed. There is no variation. No alternative strategy. Just the same thing night after night, update after update, year after year.
The balance is totally out of whack. And it has gotten worse. I am not just saying that. Here is an example. In 2017, all one had to do to avoid a “choo choo pain train” (what we used to call organized groups) was simply move to the side. That’s it. Literally move 3 meters to the left and just watch them choo choo by. It was possible to be within melee distance of an organized group of 24 players without holding block and be perfectly fine. They didn’t have Rush of Agony or any pull set (nor a dozen stacking HOTs, snow treaders, spammable AoE shields that absorb millions of damage that never touch their health bars, but I digress). Now being anywhere with 34 meters of an organized group of just 12 players is a death sentence waiting to happen. That is the difference a single set with a broken mechanic makes. It completely changes the game. Consider in 2017, it was possible for a melee player to attack a healer in the back row without the fear of a proc set yanking them to certain death from halfway across the screen. Organized groups and the mechanics they use have become so strong, just about everything ungrouped players do to try and stop them is futile. If your abilities don’t have any impact on the game, at that point are you even really playing it?
I certainly feel that way. No matter how well I play, I just don’t stand a chance. I’m not good enough to compete with broken mechanics that violate ZOS’s standards in how the rest of the game is supposed to be balanced. Just last night, I saw this futility and ZOS’s kill-feed proved to all of us how overmatched we were trying to compete against two organized groups that showed up at Fort Glademist. We had at least 41 unique names (I know because I took screenshots of all the names who were defeated in the kill-feed). People did the best they could. Zone generals tried to give advice in chat. Some players dutifully set up siege. Bow users sniped away. Tanks went out to burn siege. I saw one intrepid soul try to spam the Scribing Destruction staff skill (of course, because it has a two second cast time, they always missed and because they weren’t blocking, they got yanked and killed). We even had one of the best “bombers” on the server. I knew we weren’t going to win, but, hey, at least give me a fight with some moments. I mean, there were more than 40 of us.
You know what the score was? 56 consecutive DC dead. Then 1 AD was defeated. Then 18 more consecutive DC dead. I have the screenshots if you want to see them. Then I couldn’t tell you because I logged out in disgust.
That is not competitive, not balanced, not compelling, not interesting, and certainly not fun. It is the consequence of ignoring the continuous and growing power of organized groups for years, doing nothing to reign in that power despite the repeated calls on these forums. Of not being consistent with the standards set in the game. Of opting to remove one abusive set in the game that is detrimental to organized groups, while allowing a different abusive set that is fundamental to the only tactic organized groups bother using.
This is why Vengeance generated legitimate excitement.
Live Cyrodiil gives us a siege fight dominated by organized groups in which ordinary players get destroyed, suffering 74 defeats for 1 single victory.
Vengeance gives us a siege in which the defenders (the Daggerfall Covenant) actually had the advantage of a fortified position, whereas the two attackers were reasonably balanced with respect to each other. Oh, and 3000 kills!
One experience was fun despite its flaws. The other was not fun because of its flaws.
So, the plan for update 46 is to allow these organize groups to cherry pick class lines and let them use a broken set that violates just about every standard of combat balance in the Elder Scrolls Online? Why? 74-1 is a huge red flag. Please send me an email when Vengeance is back online.
Just add the line “only against monsters” to the 5th piece set bonus.
Since the PvE sourced Azureblight set was totally removed from PvP, the PvE sourced Rush of Agony should be adjusted in the same way. As Azureblight was just nuked in the middle of a PTS cycle, so should ROA. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. We have a PvP sourced pull set (also highly dubious, but at least it follows the rules). ROA is not and was never needed.
Just do it. Then spend your time and efforts trying to make subclassing as best as it can be.
Just follow your own standards.
”ZOS” wrote:The growing concerns over the “proc set meta” for the past few updates has not fallen on deaf ears. We understand the frustration of feeling required to run these types of sets and fighting against them in PVP. We want these proc choices to mean something, rather than just the de facto method of building a character without paying for it in some way.
”ZOS” wrote:This set is currently seeing a lot of success in its original target area of killing large groups and players who don't respect the Area of Effect. However, it's doing its job a little too well and being run in situations of low target counts, which has led to situations where the set feels too good at a general purpose rather than something more niche like Vicious Death.
”zos” wrote:we hope to introduce more counterplay to the set by giving a window of safety
”ZOS” wrote:Of course, we always need to consider PvP when balancing sets, too. We don't want to create item sets that have the potential to be abused in PvP and make the game less fun, and we don't want item sets that will encourage a limited number of viable playstyles.
Make Rush of Agony "Monsters only." People should not be consecutively crowd controlled in a PvP setting. Period.
17
-
The_Meathead✭✭✭✭✭I'm almost always in full agreement when you post, JoyDivision, but on this? Abundantly so.
/signed
/stamped
/voted
Whichever you like. Yes, and yes please. RoA is a detriment to PvP and a noticeable part (of many, unforuntately) for why Ballgroups are so out of hand atm.5 -
Major_Toughness✭✭✭✭✭No, in fact make it work in PvP again and remove the current PTS change.
Ruined the most fun set in the game, which was literally only bad in PvP against ball groups, and it was removed.
The ONLY good counter to ball groups removed. Yet the forums are filled with complaints about ball groups.PC EU > You1 -
CameraBeardThePirate✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭PvE doesn't use this set. So you're actually asking for it to be a dead set.
Honestly? So what. Pull sets are so unhealthy for the game, and Rush of Agony is doubly unhealthy because it violates the golden rule of PvP balance.
The fact that it is the only thing in the game that can CC someone without applying CC immunity is ludicrous. The fact this has been unchanged since the set released is bonkers. It is unfun to fight against, formulaic to fight with, and causes so many bad interactions from a technical standpoint (getting pulled through/into walls, pulled off ledges, pulled into hazards, etc).
The worst part is the only change the set has ever received was a buff poorly disguised as a nerf. The one second delay was a BUFF because now you can pop a Contingency before people get pulled in, adding more damage, an immobilize, preloading a stun, etc. Not to mention the delay allows you to line up the exact spot you want people pulled to.
Oh, and on top of that buff, they increased the radius by 50%. Why??? It is absolutely inexcusable how powerful this set is, and points to a fundamental lack of understanding of the set. Oh wait, the devs in fact didn't even know what the set was called during the BG stream5 -
Thumbless_Bot✭✭✭✭✭CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »PvE doesn't use this set. So you're actually asking for it to be a dead set.
Honestly? So what. Pull sets are so unhealthy for the game, and Rush of Agony is doubly unhealthy because it violates the golden rule of PvP balance.
The fact that it is the only thing in the game that can CC someone without applying CC immunity is ludicrous. The fact this has been unchanged since the set released is bonkers. It is unfun to fight against, formulaic to fight with, and causes so many bad interactions from a technical standpoint (getting pulled through/into walls, pulled off ledges, pulled into hazards, etc).
The worst part is the only change the set has ever received was a buff poorly disguised as a nerf. The one second delay was a BUFF because now you can pop a Contingency before people get pulled in, adding more damage, an immobilize, preloading a stun, etc. Not to mention the delay allows you to line up the exact spot you want people pulled to.
Oh, and on top of that buff, they increased the radius by 50%. Why??? It is absolutely inexcusable how powerful this set is, and points to a fundamental lack of understanding of the set. Oh wait, the devs in fact didn't even know what the set was called during the BG stream
It's used mostly by bombing nbs. Given their blatantly obvious predilection towards nbs this makes perfect sense.1 -
Theignson✭✭✭✭✭Of course I agree
RoA has ruined PvP, worse set ever
It is pretty fun in Infinite Archive though3 GOs, a Warlord, and bunches of prefects etc-- all classes...I've wasted a lot of time in PVP0 -
Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Lets not forget this set is currently also exploitable in its current iteration which ZOS have acknowledged.@Solar_Breeze
NA ~ Izanerys: Dracarys (Videos | Dracast)
EU ~ Izanagi: Banana Squad (AOE Rats/ Zerg Squad / Roleplay Circle)1 -
J18696✭✭✭✭✭Pve dosnt use this at all like what was stated above it should either be given the same treatment dark convergence was given as in make it more telegraphed with a aoe warning before the pull and actually grant cc immunity after the pull or just reworked entirely todo something else0 -
Turtle_Bot✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭@ZOS_Kevin @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_MattFiror This is a very insightful post here by @Joy_Division hopefully the devs will actually listen to all of this as there are some very good points here that would do so much more to bring players back to Cyrodiil (and by extension ESO) than anything ZOS has put forward yet.7 -
Joy_Division✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭PvE doesn't use this set. So you're actually asking for it to be a dead set.
A few of things.
Just because your experience in the top-end endgame PvE content does not see use of this set, does not mean it isn't being used by other PvE players in PvE content. The person I do Infinite Archive with always uses this set when doing so and in the dungeons we run together.
There are over 650 sets in ESO. Hundreds of these are drop in PvE content and we are perfectly fine that they too are see hardly any use, even if they are capable of fulfilling a desired function (such as pull adds to a centralized location).
ESO's own statement regarding gear sets is that they follow a standard called Set Bonus Efficiency. They unequivocally said ensuring the gear sets conformed to that is their priority, in particularly for PvP (which they acknowledged the balance was "tricky").ZOS wrote:We don't want to create item sets that have the potential to be abused in PvP and make the game less fun, and we don't want item sets that will encourage a limited number of viable playstyles.
That is exactly what has happened since this set was introduced back in 2021. It' drops in PvE content, let PvE players decide if they want to use it. Some of them indeed do. If they don't, that's perfectly fine. There's in nothing special about this set that deserves special consideration to extend ongoing 4 year status as meta for a playstyle that everyone acknowledges is too strong.
Edited by Joy_Division on April 17, 2025 1:17PMMake Rush of Agony "Monsters only." People should not be consecutively crowd controlled in a PvP setting. Period.8