Do you think there should be an AoE cap?

Sharee

No

As pointed out, if aoe affects maximum of six targets, then standing in the middle of a 100 man zerg means you can pretty much ignore all ground AOE as there is a 94% chance it won't affect you anyway. That's not good.

bytestream

No

The game already has enought issues, don't make it worse.

What you should be doing is to implement more features that discourage zerging in AvA, don't add stuff that actually makes it more beneficial.


/edit
If you want to implement an AoE cap you also have to activate player collission detection in PvP to discourage zerging.

Baphomet

No

Veridiano02

No

The poll actually talks by itself. That's a bad, a terrible idea, a lazy "solution" for the problem that actually have PvP. It's easy to make an AOE cap than revise all AOE. If they need really need a nerf, because I think the problems here are the vampires, not the AOE skills.

Soloeus

No

This is a case where the 7% will beat the 92% (as of this time of voting)?

There should be no cap whatsoever for AoE effects, for both PVP and PVE. That would mean you have to pray that your AoE hits the right targets, which is bound to end in disaster.

It will make PVP a pure numbers game without consideration of skill.

LadyChaos

I am torn.

While I think no one/two players should become so OP they can decimate unrealistic overwhelming numbers, I absolutely refuse to play GW2 stacking.

I also don't think any one player should be able to AoE farm with such low risks as with the current system, but they should not be hindered from realistic risk vs reward opportunities.

Nerfing only hinders the lower level players, hindering growth as the higher levels ones are the ones who have the OP ability as they unlock all the passives.

I think 6 is too small IMO, 8-10 is more realistic for PvP, or each spell has it's own limit based on it's effectiveness and intended use.

EQ2 does it that particular spells have their own limit. You have an awesome OP AoE that is meant for dungeon crawling, because it is limited to 6 mobs, but cannot decimate a battlefield alone, but a weaker version has 8 targets, and yet another AoE is unlimited... the particular spells are limited in targets not the entire AoE system. Not all AoE is created equal, and shouldn't be blanket capped IMO.

Crazz

No

AOE cap = Mass Zerg = More Lags = People leaving the game
No AoE Cap = small groups killing mass zerg = less zerg = less lags = People enjoing the game.

Please to make us look stupid by going back on GW2. Please.

StormBeforeDawn

No

I am unsubscribing if this is implemented.

axel.fahlgrenb16_ESO

No

This is honestly just a really bad idea. Look at gw2, or at any other game with large scale pvp. You are just killing smaller organized groups, with this we can't do anything against bigger groups, no matter how well we are organized

Arkath

No

Please don't let this go through to live.

Tobiz

No

Increase cost of AoE, Increase cost per enemy hit with AoE, reduce radious, decrease damage of AoE, set a cooldown timer, make Aoe directional only (arc in front of caster)
Either or all of the above but not a cap.
And do it on abilities that need nerfin, not the entire AoE category of skills.
Make sure to increase skill needed to aoe, instead of killing its use. AoE in most MMOs require no skill, just a big magicka/mana/whatever pool.
edit: ragespelling

zazamalek

No

This is the biggest mistake you could make ZOS. AOE is hard to balance, we know. We are also confident you can find a solution to this without absolutely destroying your PvP.

I'm not sure if you (ZOS) played GW2; if not, I recommend you pick up a few copies and give it a go. Get a 5-man group up and running and go and see what AOE caps do.

I played GW2 before the AOE cap and I played it after. WvW just became a lootbag farming fest where one massive zoneblob just rolled around the map killing everything in sight - no more intelligent than farming mobs in MMOs of the past.

Do you want zoneblobs in ESO? Do you? Do you want to find out how your servers handle zoneblobs? Do you?

Find another way, you guys have shown you have the smarts - use them. There's another solution out there somewhere.

Please don't ruin this game, we are begging you. We'll wait while you figure it out - even though AOEs are OP at the moment it's better than AOE caps. This is why people haven't returned to GW2.

Zolyok

Yes

A little post from Zeni team to reassure every body on the fact that they're following this situation with a lot of attention would be nice.
Even if i personnaly think there's should be an AOE cap if 92% of voter say no it's mean that i might be wrong, anyway this can't stay like that.

Misslol

No

They are feeding the faceless zerg... If this goes live i'm off.

Seckelite

No

I think that AOE should be nerfed. But not capping targets. One solution i can think of is to scale damage inversely to the number of targets, i.e. if there are more than 6 targets the damage gets reduced for every extra target

Mephane

No

Seckelite wrote: »

I think that AOE should be nerfed. But not capping targets. One solution i can think of is to scale damage inversely to the number of targets, i.e. if there are more than 6 targets the damage gets reduced for every extra target

Be careful what you wish for. If the scaling is too harsh, that still benefits huge zerg blobs in the very same way, i.e. the more people you stack on top of each other in a spot, the harder it becomes to do any damage to them. Unlimited AoE has the benefitial effect that clustering up is always a bad tactic, as it should be.

Adernath

No

AOE should not be nerfed the slightest. By the contrary, I'd like to see it buffed even more to finally stop all these zerg-tactics in PvP entirely and forces players to spread out.

Of course certain individual abilites can be changed if something turns out to be too OP, but that is a different story.

Zolyok

Yes

I'm not even shure if Zeni have seen this poll

Ramanadjinn

No

Zolyok wrote: »

I'm not even shure if Zeni have seen this poll

I heard they tried but couldn't find the english sub-forum.

zazamalek

No

Zolyok wrote: »

Even if i personnaly think there's should be an AOE cap

The thing is that AOE cap works in theory. In practice humans always find the path of least resistance and AOE caps have a very nasty interaction with that: ZONEBLOB!

Say goodbye to any tactics that involve splitting your group up (a.k.a. any tactics that are actually smart). Say hello to "LOL stay in a tight group and mash 1." AOE caps effectively add a sort of "I win button" into the game - stay in a tight blob and you win.

NoMoreChillies

No

nerf aoe and say goodbye to my money

MurderMostFoul

No

I'd like to see the rationale for this change. The intended effect must be to have PvP be all about who has the numbers. If the devs think this is an "improvement" than at least it would explain their reasoning. Then they can look at this poll and see that they are in the minority in that view. If there is another reason, something hidden like network performance, then they need to come out and say it rather than remaining silent.

Belf

No

ABSOLUTELY NOT

CrispZ

No

1. The way this change is worded in the patch notes is underhanded.

ZeniMax, please don’t pretend that your players (we) are dumb. There is no way that area-of-effect abilities made it through years of play-testing without target caps only to be “fixed” now and capped. There is no way that you intended AoE abilities to be limited to 6 players, and then suddenly pretend like this was your long term vision as soon as you see coordinated groups effectively using AoE damage and positioning. Sometimes, large scale changes to major game mechanics need to be made, but in the interest of building trust with your core community a certain degree of transparency about what changes are made and the rationale for making them absolutely needs to exist.



2. This will seriously cripple the ability of coordinated players to fight larger groups of players when outnumbered.

It was clearly expressed throughout development of ESO by numerous core developers, most notably Brian Wheeler, that a primary goal was to give organized groups of players the tools they need to fight against larger groups if they are well coordinated and use positioning and terrain effectively. This change flies directly in the face of this intention. If your group’s abilities can only affect at most 6 enemies, this permanently limits the possibility of fighting when outnumbered.



3. This will greatly increase the “safety of the zerg”, further promoting zerging as the default tactic in PvP.

If you are fighting with a group of 7 allies, at least someone in your group becomes immune to significant sources of damage. If you continue adding allies in the same place the effect is magnified, greatly enhancing the safety of the zerg. Before this change, even a large zerg was vulnerable if they were outplayed by a rival group. Given this change, ESO is in serious risk of becoming nothing but a numbers game with the side possessing greater numbers always winning regardless of player skill or group coordination.



4. This greatly increases the relative effectiveness of siege weapons, pushing Cyrodiil further towards siege vs. siege rather than player vs. player gameplay.

There is already a serious issue in ESO PvP of players looking towards siege as the optimal way to fight against players. At times, Cyrodiil feels more like “siege vs. siege” than “player vs. player”. The overuse of ballistae, oil pots, and more was already an issue prior to this change. If siege engines remain unchanged, but player activated AoE abilities being capped at 6 targets maximum, this will push players even more to resort to constant use of siege weapons rather than seeking to use their own character’s skill-set.



This change damages immersion, seeing AoE attacks inexplicably failing to damage enemies which surround the player.

For a game in which immersion the typical reason cited for cornerstone gameplay philosophies, this change stands out as violating that same tenet. Being surrounded by a pack of 8 wolves, but seeing two enemies mysteriously and inexplicably immune to damage renders your character impotent and detracts from the intuitive nature of existing AoE mechanics.



In Conclusion

One year ago, ZeniMax developers themselves joined us in celebrating the in-game event of “The Chalamo”, an epic keep defense in which a small group of Daggerfall players fended off a massive horde of Aldmeri and Ebonheart attackers at DC’s last bastion of Chalman Keep. In fact, ZOS were so enthused by this valiant last stand that they commemorated it with an in-game poem which is readable in Cyrodiil. The subtext of this mechanical change to ESO is that ZeniMax never wants to see another keep defense like that again. The Chalman defenders would not have been able to hold the keep for 5 minutes if our abilities were limited to 6 players.

ZeniMax didn’t have a problem with AoE then, they celebrated it when players were using it well. Now, suddenly that hordes of new players are dying if they position themselves poorly and stack in an indefensible position the solution is to neuter AoE abilities to the point that the group of players with the largest numbers is always guaranteed to win.

As I’ve said twice before, but will reiterate for clarity, this is terrible for the game. ZeniMax, please carefully consider the consequences and revert this change before the patch goes live. Don’t damage the PvP mechanics of your own way in a game that will turn it into the second coming of Guild Wars 2.

Redsun

No

aoe cap is a bad decision for pvp. If Zenimax thinks otherwise, come out and convince everyone.

Are there really ex-DAOC devs and players in zenimax? I think not. How else would this happen then?

DerDawson

No

NO! I don´t need Gw2 WvW 2.0!

South_of_Heaven

No

Same with the monster exp nerf. They just couldn't find of a better way to handle things so they butchered here and there.

Hey ZOS! Who the hell takes these decisions? My monkey can think of more clever (and equally simple) solutions than these.
Because it certainly doesn't take a genius to know what makes gameplay interesting and the opposite.

reggielee

Yes

I voted yes.

its absurd to think my spell should hit everything in the landscape, tho capping it at a finite number of players should have been reworked to radius of damage

dusten

No

Milky wrote: »

Absolutely not. This will force tight stack blobbing as the only successful meta. Look to GW2 and see what AoE cap did to it.

::snip::

The issue is not an AoE cap. It's specific skills mechanics. I will not pay a sub for this game if it goes the route of AoE cap. I can go back to GW2 and play that for free if I want to play in that style. I bought ESO because it's different.

This. This this this.

UnrealUK84

No

AOE Cap *ruined* Guild Wars 2 PVP.

Utterly ruined. I wish that was hyperbole, but there's not a player in my guild who came from other PVP MMOs that wasn't completely disappointed in the AoE cap.