Area-of-Effect Abilities - Maximum Target Cap Clarification

Firmament

Samiri wrote: »

WHo the h... buys a game singly because they believes they can spam 2 ability in PvP??

Im sorry, but If thats the reason why you bought the game, well I feel really sorry for you.

Sadly, many, many, many people. Like spam impulse and vamp ultimate.

ValenWoody

valkaneer2b14_ESO wrote: »

Everyone chooses to participate in any poll they take.

This isn't the issue. The issue is whether or not THEY were selected to take the poll in the first place. A poll that is open to anyone (e. g., any open Internet poll) will attract primarily those who are passionate about one side of the issue or the other, and this means the result is automatically skewed by that biased sample.

Bottom line is that the only conclusion that can legitimately be drawn from a poll like this is the conclusion that is both obvious and useless: "Of the people who took this poll, X% voted 'yes' and Y% voted 'no.'" Nothing about the ESO community at large can be extrapolated from it.

As I've said elsewhere here, I have no strong feelings one way or the other about this issue, but I do have strong feelings about the use of open Internet polls to try to characterize a population. They're never valid. They just aren't.

Tetter

Forget the Poll!! holy cow. If your still arguing about the significance of the poll you are not that smart.

has anyone seen a pro's and con's chart on AoE Caps? I think that would be a good place to start.

ValenWoody

Digerati wrote: »

all this bickering about whether or not the poll is valid is ridiculous and absolutely besides the point..

What value does the target-cap bring to the game? What is the merit? Wouldn't forcing strong AoEs to be cast while stationary and be interrupt-able be a better fix? wouldn't implementing damage based on how close you are to the center of the AoE be a better fix? Wouldn't evaluating the abilities on a case-by-case basis be a better strategy than implementing an illogical and arbitrary cap?

This is actually what I'm saying -- forget the poll; it's too easy to dismiss (and rightly so). Argue the merits.

prana33b14_ESO

haha dude's still going with "the forum filled with people complaining about aoe may not have wanted to vote on a poll about aoe".

Digerati

Firmament wrote: »

Samiri wrote: »

WHo the h... buys a game singly because they believes they can spam 2 ability in PvP??

Im sorry, but If thats the reason why you bought the game, well I feel really sorry for you.

Sadly, many, many, many people. Like spam impulse and vamp ultimate.

No rational person is arguing that pulsar and bat swarm don't need some adjustments.

The argument is that an AoE cap is NOT the way to do it... Pulsar and batswarm are overpowered in small-scale engagements that the AoE cap would simply not apply to.. So, the AoE cap wouldn't even balance these abilities; how is this a relevant point?

ValenWoody

jdoe wrote: »

Bad statistics are far worse than no statistics at all

Exactly.

Trayyacakes

I don't care if the poll is accurate or not. I have serious issues with the way zos is handling this. Some tool tips are vague at best while others flat out lie. Cleave deals damage to ALL enemies in front of you. Whirlwind deals damage to ALL surrounding enemies. Grand Healing heals ALL allies in target area. Since when did all=6? AOE cap in open world pvp with chokepoints everywhere? Why have chokepoints? Basically bubble up wait for oil to drop run straight through the chokepoint and zerge on... Is that the kind of game anyone wants? Are some skills overpowered? yes. So you fix those skills don't cap the number they can hit.... and yes your argument of there have been caps all along bla bla bla... not many people knew about these caps... in fact most of the population had no idea. Balance skills that are broken... Inhale should have a limit on the health you can receive from it... not the number it hits. its expensive. Impulse, adjust the damage and make it cost more. Bat swarm... take away ultimate reducing sets and make it cost more. Emperor regen is probably too high. Taking the easy route that encourages bubble zerges.... I'm disappointed. I have been mislead and lied to and I have spent money on a game that I thought was something totally different. I will stick around for a month, but if this causes the type of game play I think it will, I will unsub.

nimrod1984b16_ESO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N29kEyzO7I&feature=youtu.be

This shows pretty much why ESO PvP is already broken as hell even with those caps., note the guy is a mage and a former emperor with 5% ultimate reduce so he can perma spam his ulti because of 100% cost reduction...eso got a nice QA team maybe they should hire me, got 15years XP in those games... i would do altest a better job in regards to balancing.

ValenWoody

prana33b14_ESO wrote: »

haha dude's still going with "the forum filled with people complaining about aoe may not have wanted to vote on a poll about aoe".

...and still you have no clue what I'm talking about. (HINT: it's exactly the opposite.)

This is why we can't have nice things.

fantom

Anyone that unsubs from this game because they can't hit or heal 100 people per second with 0 cooldown abilities is just being a cry-baby.

It's not good game design for 1 person to be able to kill 20 in an open field. And in most cases, they ALREADY can't. But you whiners are so bad that you didn't even notice.

If you're so obsessed with killing 30 players with one, man a siege engine. That's what they're designed for, and they have no AOE cap. They can kill as many people as you want.

ValenWoody

Tetter wrote: »

Forget the Poll!! holy cow. If your still arguing about the significance of the poll you are not that smart.

I think you may be right, because it's like trying to make a point to a sack of rocks.

prana33b14_ESO

ValenWoody wrote: »

prana33b14_ESO wrote: »

haha dude's still going with "the forum filled with people complaining about aoe may not have wanted to vote on a poll about aoe".

...and still you have no clue what I'm talking about. (HINT: it's exactly the opposite.)

This is why we can't have nice things.

uh huh if that were the case you wouldn't be so hung up on bad polls and could make some decisions based on incomplete information. More people visit that forum to complain about aoe (and anything else for that matter) than people just checking stuff out. If anything, the poll is likely biased towards the whiners and it's an even higher percentage that truly want no caps on aoe.

ValenWoody

prana33b14_ESO wrote: »

uh huh if that were the case you wouldn't be so hung up on bad polls and could make some decisions based on incomplete information. More people visit that forum to complain about aoe (and anything else for that matter) than people just checking stuff out. If anything, the poll is likely biased towards the whiners and it's an even higher percentage that truly want no caps on aoe.

Well, thanks then. You just made my point about as well as anyone could have.

arapas

Its time to look for another game, zos made a good game and dont know why. They are just walking to the wrong direction.

Camelot Unchained is the hope for pvp!

Btw, my 3 month sub is already canceled.

InvictoNZ

All of you complaining about AOE need to play a game like EVE Online, where AOE hits everyone, friendlies too.

Elder Scrolls Online with no AOE cap and hitting friendlies would be insanely fun.

Xsorus

hmmm Bat Swarm is already capped, Why are people bringing it up as one of the reasons why Caps are needed?

Clearly we should make it only work on 1 person, as it seems even with a cap on it people are still dumb enough to stand in the big circle of bats

Xsorus

fantom wrote: »

Anyone that unsubs from this game because they can't hit or heal 100 people per second with 0 cooldown abilities is just being a cry-baby.

It's not good game design for 1 person to be able to kill 20 in an open field. And in most cases, they ALREADY can't. But you whiners are so bad that you didn't even notice.

If you're so obsessed with killing 30 players with one, man a siege engine. That's what they're designed for, and they have no AOE cap. They can kill as many people as you want.

So wait... 20 people die to 1 person in open field, and its bad game design? Not that the 20 people who died to 1 person are just herp a derps?

Also could you please provide proof of this? Because the only video I've seen is a bunch if herp a derps beating on a Bat Swarming Emp with cost reduction for ultimate setup....in which case the only people who died were the morons who stood next to him while he did a PBAE lifetap.. and soon as those idiots were dead... The guy instantly died.

bsanayei

Do you want the game to fail because this is how you do it..

Keeping my sub cancelled.

quekwernshenrwb17_ESO

Well, looks like its a good time to quit and stop all my subscription. Thanks Zenimax for informing before the deadline of 1 month.

With Negate Magic having limited AoE caps, we can soon see Vampire Undying DK zergs . As it is, they are already amazingly hard to die with that build and negate magic was one effective method againts zergs who are too stupid to roll out. Now its just gonna be a zerg ball vs zerg ball. GW2 all over again.

Gwynde

While @ZOS_JessicaFolsom is a great community manager, I think that @ZOS_BrianWheeler needs to address this issue, either here in the forums or on Reddit.

Why did you all choose to institute AOE caps as opposed to something more like the DAoC approach, where AOE does less damage the further away targets are from the spell's center?

Are you open to removing AOE caps? Are you open to changing how AOE works so it's more like DAOC?

If not, why not?

Some_Jerk

I do not want aoe caps.

danteafk

Still no change to stackable cooldown reduction batswarm spam?
AoE cap?
Why not copy simple the AoE mechanics from DAoC? You want people enjoy your PvP and subscribe? That is how you would get it.


Otherwise, say bye to 40% of your current player base ZoS.

Eris

It might be that in a mega-server environment, the number of calculations needed to determine who is in what range to the center of the AOE, might be too high of a processor load. Otherwise, I think that the idea has merit and would rock in a rocking way.

The Dude Bro

Cancelled subscription. Community widely thought there was no AoE cap. I don't care if there was one for some abilities or whatever.

ScribeOfSalmacis

Koloki wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Zargorius wrote: »

Well, looks like the era of siege weapons everywhere is about to start. Thanks for the info, this should have been made clear before the launch though.

Of course it should of been made more clear before launch they intended an aoe cap.

But then they wouldn't of gotten a lot of money from people who bought their gaming believing there were no AoE caps in place.

So there are people who bought the game for the sole reason that it had no AoE caps? That is the game maker/breaker mechanic?

ZOS purposefully hide that information because this was their big sales bringer?

Try not to be so over dramatic.

Yes, I actually know quite a few post- Guild Wars 2 hardcore PvP/GvG gamers for whom this is a making/breaking matter. At least one major guild leader I know already quit because of the caps. AoE caps in Guild Wars 2 meant that zerg ruled. A big, compact group had unwarranted survivability that had anything to do with neither personal nor group gaming skill - only because AoE (the only realistic weapon against zerging) had been capped. Sure, there were strong zerg-busting PvP guilds, but the atmosphere was that of frustration, and a lot of good people and guilds stopped playing the game regardless of the virtues that GW2 WvW had.

So I hope that ZOS works to make Cyrodiil the epic, massive-scale PvP that it deserves to be, and that promotes skilled and coordinated open field fights. It also has to happen early and aggressively: ANet took their measures long after some central guilds had stopped playing the game, and it's truly hard to lure people back after they invest their social organisation elsewhere.

Joy_Division

How is this a clarification? The cat's out of the bag Zenimax and many of your subscribers don't like the AoE cap.

Clarifying things have always been this way does not somehow make it better.

cryptoanarchy

The "it was always on Live" reasoning sucks and does not justify adding any sort of AoE cap. Zergs didn't fight stacked because no one knew about an implemented AoE cap to exploit in the first place. There's already a video showing its effectiveness in organized groups. Its potency is no longer a dreaded horror that's suspected to possibly happen; it's real.

It's only a matter of time until organized groups start incorporating that (especially after the last few skills with no cap are "fixed"), and pugs learn. The boring meta of GW2 didn't happen instantly after adding the cap either, but now every pug knows the drill to stay in the mega-blob to stay alive.

I really doubt many ex-GW2 or DAoC players would have bought this game if they knew of the AoE cap. Camelot Unchained, don't fail me now..

Sebyos

Let's be honest, the AvA is laggy, buggy, mostly zergy and has bad performance while the combat is still floaty and unresponsive. Make sure you can at least make it fun ZOS. Remove AoE limits expect on some specific skills that would obviously be overpowered otherwise.

ScribeOfSalmacis

InvictoNZ wrote: »

All of you complaining about AOE need to play a game like EVE Online, where AOE hits everyone, friendlies too.

Elder Scrolls Online with no AOE cap and hitting friendlies would be insanely fun.

It would be a heaven! I'm totally for friendly fire, though it requires anti-griefing measures. Games like Planetside 2 do this, and though it's irritating to die to tank or air zerg farming a cap point, not letting infantry do their job, the bad experiences are really rather rare. The really wonderful thing about friendly fire is how it encourages you to use your wits, tactics and coordination in combat.