Do you think there should be an AoE cap?

Inewbz

Yes

(TL;DR at the bottom if you want) I think there should be some form of cap to AoE abilities, I understand that hitting 40+ people with 1 ability with full damage can be considered way too much damage, the AoE cap of most abilities being 6 in PVP however, is a terrible idea as that is an absolutely pathetic amount of players that can be affected considering the size of large groups in pvp content. I bought this game thinking there was no cap, but seeing there is a cap isn't that much of a letdown for me (its more what the cap currently is). I read in a post before that some abilities should have a 'max damage' cap and/or a 'distance-from-center' cap instead of a 'max target cap', good ideas, but I don't think they will work unless they are done in a specific way.

An idea that I think would make, at least a few, anti AoE cap (and pro current AoE cap) 'voters' happy would be a AoE cap that would affect a minimum of 12 targets and a maximum of 24 (or more if needed), because if you come up against another 24 player group, you can affect them all with your AoE's and vice-versa. I do realize however, in large scale pvp this cap could be considered just as bad as the 6 target cap because a lot of people do not want an AoE cap. I don't think I would be happy with no AoE cap (especially for certain abilities and ultimate's, talons and batswarm are the most concerning and even some AoE healing abilities) as this could make a player maxed out with AoE abilities way too overpowered in group situations, especially if there is at least 10 of them. Think about it, 10 players all using an AoE ability with no cap that does at least 200 damage to ALL targets would kill most players very quickly. Now obviously, I understand that this will promote spreading out on the battlefield (as much as a 12-24 AoE cap in my opinion) but if it does promote spreading out... having no AoE cap would technically become pointless would it not?

Lets talk about no (or a 12-24) healing AoE cap in non pvp situations though, the cap makes healers so much more effective than they should be, i mean, one healer that uses only AoE healing, could heal an entire large group by them self if everyone was close enough and could regain 15 magika from the first restoration staff morph (infinite magika basically) and you could have 18 (or 17 with 2 healers) DPS's and 6 tanks as opposed to 6 healers, 6 tanks and 12 DPS's (based on normal 4 player group dungeon roles which is generally 1 tank, 1 healer and 2 DPS's even though target cap is 6, not 4). I'm sure you can understand the difference 5-6 more DPS's could do.

To summarize and explain everything (basically a TL;DR), damaging abilities need an AoE cap out of pvp no matter what, but it should be increased. Some healing abilities should stick with/get more than the current cap out of pvp, healing abilities should have a lower cap than damaging abilities. In pvp healing and damaging abilities should also have a cap but it needs to be increased, more so for damaging ones than healing one. They definitely need to affect more than 6 targets as this makes most AoE abilities pointless in quite a few situations of pvp.

popatiberiuoneb18_ESO

No

Inewbz wrote: »

(TL;DR at the bottom if you want) I think there should be some form of cap to AoE abilities, I understand that hitting 40+ people with 1 ability with full damage can be considered way too much damage, the AoE cap of most abilities being 6 in PVP however, is a terrible idea as that is an absolutely pathetic amount of players that can be affected considering the size of large groups in pvp content. I bought this game thinking there was no cap, but seeing there is a cap isn't that much of a letdown for me (its more what the cap currently is). I read in a post before that some abilities should have a 'max damage' cap and/or a 'distance-from-center' cap instead of a 'max target cap', good ideas, but I don't think they will work unless they are done in a specific way.

An idea that I think would make, at least a few, anti AoE cap (and pro current AoE cap) 'voters' happy would be a AoE cap that would affect a minimum of 12 targets and a maximum of 24 (or more if needed), because if you come up against another 24 player group, you can affect them all with your AoE's and vice-versa. I do realize however, in large scale pvp this cap could be considered just as bad as the 6 target cap because a lot of people do not want an AoE cap. I don't think I would be happy with no AoE cap (especially for certain abilities and ultimate's, talons and batswarm are the most concerning and even some AoE healing abilities) as this could make a player maxed out with AoE abilities way too overpowered in group situations, especially if there is at least 10 of them. Think about it, 10 players all using an AoE ability with no cap that does at least 200 damage to ALL targets would kill most players very quickly. Now obviously, I understand that this will promote spreading out on the battlefield (as much as a 12-24 AoE cap in my opinion) but if it does promote spreading out... having no AoE cap would technically become pointless would it not?

Lets talk about no (or a 12-24) healing AoE cap in non pvp situations though, the cap makes healers so much more effective than they should be, i mean, one healer that uses only AoE healing, could heal an entire large group by them self if everyone was close enough and could regain 15 magika from the first restoration staff morph (infinite magika basically) and you could have 18 (or 17 with 2 healers) DPS's and 6 tanks as opposed to 6 healers, 6 tanks and 12 DPS's (based on normal 4 player group dungeon roles which is generally 1 tank, 1 healer and 2 DPS's even though target cap is 6, not 4). I'm sure you can understand the difference 5-6 more DPS's could do.

To summarize and explain everything (basically a TL;DR), damaging abilities need an AoE cap out of pvp no matter what, but it should be increased. Some healing abilities should stick with/get more than the current cap out of pvp, healing abilities should have a lower cap than damaging abilities. In pvp healing and damaging abilities should also have a cap but it needs to be increased, more so for damaging ones than healing one. They definitely need to affect more than 6 targets as this makes most AoE abilities pointless in quite a few situations of pvp.

Yes, i totaly agree with you and that limit should be the number of friendlies in cyrodiil for heals and the sum of enemy players from both oposing factions for aoe damage. I dare you to bring 1 (one) reasonable argument to motivate hugging tightly against incoming damage versus avoiding it....

Seeing as ZOS is ignoring/dodging all questions about the aoe cap i can only hope this change, that is olready in implementation, will enrage enough people and hit their income hard enough for them to reconsider rolling the caps back to how they were in beta. I guess best way for everyone to realize the devastating effects this brings is to experience it...

popatiberiuoneb18_ESO

No

Shaun98ca2 wrote: »

...
I was thinking...zerg blobs CANT heal as well in this game as others. Healing is done over time with 90% of the abilities PLUS mana regen makes this VERY hard to maintain. MAYBE there is a chance the system even with caps still favors well designed groups over large zerg blobs due to how bad healing is in general in addition to how powerful AOEs are to begin with as well as spamable.

It seems you havent played around with ESO healing...Actually the healing will be at its peak in blobs since you get this autotarget sistem that ONLY EXISTS FOR HEALS. Some heals will find the target that needs it from 100 players while an aoe will simply hit a random...and i guess i dont have to remind you there are no cooldowns in this game to prevent someone from simply spamming autotargeted heals. If anything this works in the against cap crowd favour showing how little tought ZOS has put into balancing the skills.

RaZaddha

No

Inewbz wrote: »

(TL;DR at the bottom if you want) I think there should be some form of cap to AoE abilities, I understand that hitting 40+ people with 1 ability with full damage can be considered way too much damage, the AoE cap of most abilities being 6 in PVP however, is a terrible idea as that is an absolutely pathetic amount of players that can be affected considering the size of large groups in pvp content. I bought this game thinking there was no cap, but seeing there is a cap isn't that much of a letdown for me (its more what the cap currently is). I read in a post before that some abilities should have a 'max damage' cap and/or a 'distance-from-center' cap instead of a 'max target cap', good ideas, but I don't think they will work unless they are done in a specific way.

An idea that I think would make, at least a few, anti AoE cap (and pro current AoE cap) 'voters' happy would be a AoE cap that would affect a minimum of 12 targets and a maximum of 24 (or more if needed), because if you come up against another 24 player group, you can affect them all with your AoE's and vice-versa. I do realize however, in large scale pvp this cap could be considered just as bad as the 6 target cap because a lot of people do not want an AoE cap. I don't think I would be happy with no AoE cap (especially for certain abilities and ultimate's, talons and batswarm are the most concerning and even some AoE healing abilities) as this could make a player maxed out with AoE abilities way too overpowered in group situations, especially if there is at least 10 of them. Think about it, 10 players all using an AoE ability with no cap that does at least 200 damage to ALL targets would kill most players very quickly. Now obviously, I understand that this will promote spreading out on the battlefield (as much as a 12-24 AoE cap in my opinion) but if it does promote spreading out... having no AoE cap would technically become pointless would it not?

Lets talk about no (or a 12-24) healing AoE cap in non pvp situations though, the cap makes healers so much more effective than they should be, i mean, one healer that uses only AoE healing, could heal an entire large group by them self if everyone was close enough and could regain 15 magika from the first restoration staff morph (infinite magika basically) and you could have 18 (or 17 with 2 healers) DPS's and 6 tanks as opposed to 6 healers, 6 tanks and 12 DPS's (based on normal 4 player group dungeon roles which is generally 1 tank, 1 healer and 2 DPS's even though target cap is 6, not 4). I'm sure you can understand the difference 5-6 more DPS's could do.

To summarize and explain everything (basically a TL;DR), damaging abilities need an AoE cap out of pvp no matter what, but it should be increased. Some healing abilities should stick with/get more than the current cap out of pvp, healing abilities should have a lower cap than damaging abilities. In pvp healing and damaging abilities should also have a cap but it needs to be increased, more so for damaging ones than healing one. They definitely need to affect more than 6 targets as this makes most AoE abilities pointless in quite a few situations of pvp.

That sentence doesn't make sense, the whole point of having no AoE cap is to make people spread out, make the GW2 zerg blob an impossible feat and then a small group can take a bigger group if they are clumped up, it's not pointless.

AoE healing is smart targeting, it heals the lowest player, but it also heals for very little because they are mostly HoT unless you use the mana draining templar heals, it's basically impossible to outheal 20 people putting down AoE on you with no AoE cap. Because of the smart targetting it's very easy to heal and AoE damage hits randomly, so its really hard to burst down people individually, in the end its far more easy to just blob up, spam heals and walk over the enemy.
http://www.twitch.tv/prydatv/c/4091868

ChairGraveyard

No

AoE caps result in stacking exploits - that's enough reason to re-evaluate having them.

Shaun98ca2

No

So

popatiberiuoneb18_ESO wrote: »

Shaun98ca2 wrote: »

...
I was thinking...zerg blobs CANT heal as well in this game as others. Healing is done over time with 90% of the abilities PLUS mana regen makes this VERY hard to maintain. MAYBE there is a chance the system even with caps still favors well designed groups over large zerg blobs due to how bad healing is in general in addition to how powerful AOEs are to begin with as well as spamable.

It seems you havent played around with ESO healing...Actually the healing will be at its peak in blobs since you get this autotarget sistem that ONLY EXISTS FOR HEALS. Some heals will find the target that needs it from 100 players while an aoe will simply hit a random...and i guess i dont have to remind you there are no cooldowns in this game to prevent someone from simply spamming autotargeted heals. If anything this works in the against cap crowd favour showing how little tought ZOS has put into balancing the skills.

I know quite a bit about healing. IF a target already has the HOT on them they wouldn't get healed again even though they are taking damage the HOT would target somebody else that doesn't already have it. On top of which YES its spamable but Magicka is very limited and hard to get back unless your a Sorcerer outside of combat and a Sorcerer get a 3 second channel.

NordJitsu

No

3262 (88%) vs 440 (11%.)

People who want AoE caps are either niche or misinformed.

Bryan627842nub18_ESO

No.

Its an AoE, not an E6.

popatiberiuoneb18_ESO

No

Shaun98ca2 wrote: »

So

popatiberiuoneb18_ESO wrote: »

Shaun98ca2 wrote: »

...
I was thinking...zerg blobs CANT heal as well in this game as others. Healing is done over time with 90% of the abilities PLUS mana regen makes this VERY hard to maintain. MAYBE there is a chance the system even with caps still favors well designed groups over large zerg blobs due to how bad healing is in general in addition to how powerful AOEs are to begin with as well as spamable.

It seems you havent played around with ESO healing...Actually the healing will be at its peak in blobs since you get this autotarget sistem that ONLY EXISTS FOR HEALS. Some heals will find the target that needs it from 100 players while an aoe will simply hit a random...and i guess i dont have to remind you there are no cooldowns in this game to prevent someone from simply spamming autotargeted heals. If anything this works in the against cap crowd favour showing how little tought ZOS has put into balancing the skills.

I know quite a bit about healing. IF a target already has the HOT on them they wouldn't get healed again even though they are taking damage the HOT would target somebody else that doesn't already have it. On top of which YES its spamable but Magicka is very limited and hard to get back unless your a Sorcerer outside of combat and a Sorcerer get a 3 second channel.

Please look into the mutagen morph for that HoT that i can only guess you are reffering to, hope you are reffering to the resto staff HoT. There is also the shield morph that will heal the lowest target before/after expiration. Both of these are fairly mediocre in an environment where there is no aoe cap but with the 6 aoe cap into place they become very efective.

Also for magika please look into the mage guild tree for the equillibrium skill, you will find it superior for many pvp scenarios to the dark exchange from the sorcerer tree so "no magika" argument is invalid, a healer left alone is able to self sustain its magika and spam heal all day long. Also the sorcerer dark exchange can be used in combat just fine...the more if you're in the middle of a blob and people have no way of targeting/intrerupting you, thanks for bringing more arguments against aoe cap.

popatiberiuoneb18_ESO

No

NordJitsu wrote: »

3262 (88%) vs 440 (11%.)

People who want AoE caps are either niche or misinformed.

Altough im highly against the aoe cap and i'd like to think all ofem are misinformed sheep, some of them might actualy have good arguments favouring the cap...Only wish they would discuss it in this thread rather then simply throwing in a "No".

GeeYouWhy

No

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

DAOC had the best counter to PBAE and AOE effects....Spreading the hell out.

It worked for 12 Years just fine...AOE cap however in GW2, Not so much...the biggest failure in that game.

Actually DAOC implemented an explosion effect so the further you were away from the center of the AoE the less damage you took, but that came after launch and there was much grinding of teeth when they implemented it from the PBAE Enchanters.

RaZaddha

No

Hooray! We reached 1k comments, nearly 37k views, 3715 total votes and no word about why theres an AoE cap, way to go ZOS

GeeYouWhy

No

RaZaddha wrote: »

Hooray! We reached 1k comments, nearly 37k views, 3715 total votes and no word about why theres an AoE cap, way to go ZOS

Holy crap this is hot a topic. Although I feel removing the cap forces players to use better tactics and prevents the turtle mob I doubt they will remove it.

TheGrandAlliance

Yes

RaZaddha wrote: »

34.7K Views, 970 Comments and not a single word about why theres an AoE cap in place.

@RaZaddha‌

I guess you failed to read my posts.


It is there to add realism to the game. One attack by a mage or a warrior cannot hit unlimited targets. There is so much "strength" of a warrior, or a mage's attack has only so much "magical power", and thus can only hit so many targets. If a mage wanted to hit more targets they would need to use more magic. A warrior limited by his strength.


Whether the cap is 6 or not can be debated. Nonetheless; why this concept is so hard to understand, I would not expect one's who consider RP aspects of games to understand therefore.

RaZaddha

No

TheGrandAlliance wrote: »

RaZaddha wrote: »

34.7K Views, 970 Comments and not a single word about why theres an AoE cap in place.

@RaZaddha‌

I guess you failed to read my posts.


It is there to add realism to the game. One attack by a mage or a warrior cannot hit unlimited targets. There is so much "strength" of a warrior, or a mage's attack has only so much "magical power", and thus can only hit so many targets. If a mage wanted to hit more targets they would need to use more magic. A warrior limited by his strength.


Whether the cap is 6 or not can be debated. Nonetheless; why this concept is so hard to understand, I would not expect one's who consider RP aspects of games to understand therefore.

Uhhh... You really wanna bring the "realism" argument back? Didn't I say to you how stupid that is? Yeah I did, I guess you are too thick headed to understand your point is ridiculous and makes no sense, you never brought anything worthy of mentioning in any AoE cap discussion, all we want is to make sure the GW2 turtle zerg stays miles away from this game, but you? All you care about is how "realistic" AoE cap is ON A *** FANTASY GAME, WAKE THE *** UP, NO ONE *** CARES ABOUT *** REALISM ON A *** FANTASY GAME, I don't wanna hear your opinion about this anymore, the second we have forum ignore you are the first of my list.
All I wanted to hear is why ZOS put AoE caps, not you.

TheGrandAlliance

Yes

RaZaddha wrote: »

ON A *** FANTASY GAME, WAKE THE *** UP, NO ONE *** CARES ABOUT *** REALISM ON A *** FANTASY GAME

Uh....

1. Game Developer's Do
2. People who care about game's lore (RPer's) do

Just because the classic "first person shooter" players like yourself who generally disrespect the spirit of gaming and thus try to ruin it for everyone else doesn't mean loud peoples like yourself will win.

RaZaddha

No

TheGrandAlliance wrote: »

RaZaddha wrote: »

ON A *** FANTASY GAME, WAKE THE *** UP, NO ONE *** CARES ABOUT *** REALISM ON A *** FANTASY GAME

Uh....

1. Game Developer's Do
2. People who care about game's lore (RPer's) do

Just because the classic "first person shooter" players like yourself who generally disrespect the spirit of gaming and thus try to ruin it for everyone else doesn't mean loud peoples like yourself will win.

Where did you get "first person shooter" from? "Disrespect spirit of gaming", "ruin it for everyone else"? What... the... ***... are... you... talking... about... You literally makes no sense, could someone who understands this madmen logic come and explain it?

You know why AoE cap being "realistic" makes no sense? Because this game is based on fantasy, which means I can make a fire that burns forever and ever, which means I can make 100 soldiers fly with a single spell because this is a *** fantasy, laws of physics doesn't apply to this game.

"Realism" stays on simulators, they are not fun to apply on everything or else the top 10 best games ever made would be simulators.

Why can't I decapitate my enemies? Why can't I kill them with one thrust to their hearts? Why do I have to swing my sword 20 times at an enemy whos standing still and not defending himself instead of instantly killing him? Because of mechanics. Video game mechanics defies logic, but they are implace for improvement of gameplay, only simulators try to use as much realism as possible on a game because it isn't necessary neither it will improve the gameplay forcing kratos to take a nap from time to time, or making you press 20 buttons to turn on the tank you just entered in Battlefield.
AoE caps are in place for a gameplay reason, not for *** realism. But what reason is AoE caps in place? We don't know, more important, you have no *** idea why AoE caps are in place, stop saying otherwise.

Your concept that AoE caps are in place because of "energy" is... Worthy of a kindergarten, to say the best. AoE caps are game-changing, they are a big element of the massive battles of Cyrodiil, implementing an AoE cap just for "realism" is, unnecessary, ilogical, stupid, nonsensical, no dev would change such an important mechanic and implement such a ***-poor excuse of "realism", except in your own dream world. Again, AoE caps are in place for a gameplay mechanics reason, not for a "realism" reason. Please stop posting, you are quickly becoming the laughing stock of this community.

Larira

No

RaZaddha wrote: »

All you care about is how "realistic" AoE cap is ON A *** FANTASY GAME, WAKE THE *** UP, NO ONE *** CARES ABOUT *** REALISM ON A *** FANTASY GAME, I don't wanna hear your opinion about this anymore, the second we have forum ignore you are the first of my list.

An AoE-cap is not logical. And too many not logical things may lower the immersion of a game.

Greetings

RivenEsq

No

RPers already got sittable chairs. Any other concessions are too much.

Harakh

No

I say no cause i think they should copy the DAoC AOE concept, make AOE weak from the center of the AOE to the outer of the AOE.

Maybe a AOE has a 10 meter radius then make the first 5 meter 100% damage and then every meter minus 10% damage so the outer player only gets 50% damage.

TheGrandAlliance

Yes

Harakh wrote: »

I say no cause i think they should copy the DAoC AOE concept, make AOE weak from the center of the AOE to the outer of the AOE.

Maybe a AOE has a 10 meter radius then make the first 5 meter 100% damage and then every meter minus 10% damage so the outer player only gets 50% damage.

Problem with that is it doesn't work if players stack right near each other due to lack of a collision detection.

TheGrandAlliance

Yes

"RaZaddha wrote: »

Please stop posting, you are quickly becoming the laughing stock of this community.

Do you even read your own posts?

popatiberiuoneb18_ESO

No

GeeYouWhy wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

DAOC had the best counter to PBAE and AOE effects....Spreading the hell out.

It worked for 12 Years just fine...AOE cap however in GW2, Not so much...the biggest failure in that game.

Actually DAOC implemented an explosion effect so the further you were away from the center of the AoE the less damage you took, but that came after launch and there was much grinding of teeth when they implemented it from the PBAE Enchanters.

Yes, DAOC also had no 6 skill limit at the time and was generaly better balanced (altough many whined about dev midgard love, they had their own balance complaints). Id love to see some of the DAOC complexity like them hard to land positional combos for one, spamming 1 button over and over compared to the daoc way is laughable. Worthy to mention purge in DAOC was a very invaluable tool with high cd not just some spammable left-right mouse click everyone can do to break out of cc and genrally cc had alot more weight then ESO cc.

There is a reason why DAOC lived over 10 years with a sub model and this game is olready loosing population after 1 month of launch...

That being said ESO has potential and if i didnt want to belive there is still hope, id be qutting with the rest of the lot. There is a limit to how much frustration one can swallow though...

Kililin

No

lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hyK9tLzG5o

I see it now, the bot trains are just preparing their bot armies for pvp.
Tactics like in the video should be doable with bots, than they can farm AP for sale too!

Whoever defends the cap in face of this is just full of it...

Wolfaen

No

ZOS, please take out the AOE cap. You have massive amounts of people quitting because of it. Thanks.

RaZaddha

No

TheGrandAlliance wrote: »

"RaZaddha wrote: »

Please stop posting, you are quickly becoming the laughing stock of this community.

Do you even read your own posts?

I do, I share the same opinion of 3278 other people, that we want DAoC combat, not GW2 zerg combat, while you are the only person I have ever seen who has the argument that AoE cap is "realistic", I'm the one who follows reason, you follow some mad man logic that the devs would ever implement such a lame, stupid, ***-poor excuse that AoE cap is "realistic".

TheGrandAlliance

Yes

RaZaddha wrote: »

I do, I share the same opinion of 3278 other people, that we want DAoC combat, not GW2 zerg combat, while you are the only person I have ever seen who has the argument that AoE cap is "realistic", I'm the one who follows reason, you follow some mad man logic that the devs would ever implement such a lame, stupid, ***-poor excuse that AoE cap is "realistic".

WEll +1 for me because developer's agree with me and are making it happen.

And of course if only 3278 are the online ones complaining... well in a game with (intented) player base of 1million+ that is nothing. Ruining the game to satisfy the /elitewhine players who want to 1v100 everything and boast about it isn't a game. AoE caps have their reasons. It does not mean this game will be GW2 zerg situation.


AoE caps already exist for some combat situation now: Were you complaining about zergs during beta; launch? No. It appears "what you don't know doesn't hurt you" applies in this case.


To make this short RaZaddha: ZeniMax has spoken. Me wins... you loses. If you are gonna /ragequit then the door to WoW is <<<<<<<.

NordJitsu

No

TheGrandAlliance wrote: »

RaZaddha wrote: »

34.7K Views, 970 Comments and not a single word about why theres an AoE cap in place.

@RaZaddha‌

I guess you failed to read my posts.


It is there to add realism to the game. One attack by a mage or a warrior cannot hit unlimited targets. There is so much "strength" of a warrior, or a mage's attack has only so much "magical power", and thus can only hit so many targets. If a mage wanted to hit more targets they would need to use more magic. A warrior limited by his strength.


Whether the cap is 6 or not can be debated. Nonetheless; why this concept is so hard to understand, I would not expect one's who consider RP aspects of games to understand therefore.

No. Area of Effect means it should affect an area.

You don't throw a grenade in a room and hit only 6/20 people.

You hit everyone in the blast radius.

Explain to me how a firery magical explosion should be different in "realism" terms (lolollol).

Asava

No

Stop making sense Nord or Jobo will come in here crying over fairness again...

TheGrandAlliance

Yes

NordJitsu wrote: »

No. Area of Effect means it should affect an area.

You don't throw a grenade in a room and hit only 6/20 people.

You hit everyone in the blast radius.

Explain to me how a firery magical explosion should be different in "realism" terms (lolollol).

Correction: You only hit 6/20 people or whatever hard... the rest only have pieces to hit them. Ones further away take less damage and further still takes less.


AoE just means it hits targest in a range vs single target. Doesn't mean it has unlimited energy to hit everything, everywhere. The "Law of the Conservation of Energy" is still in effect even with magic. The lore does explain how magic works in-game in the various lorebooks... it isn't some "unlimited attack". Try reading sometimes... it is a skill.

Have Neil deGrassus Tyson or whatever (host of COMOS TV show) explain the ways of physics to you... then try again.