Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
360 Degree Blocking Ridiculous
-
Xnemesis✭✭✭✭Baragorath wrote: »I am Nord so you would have to jump and then try to aim and have hope to hit.
First come to close combat with your two dil-dos then pass shield and then try to find your small gap in plate armor.
Take into consideration then attacker and defender moves and act so you have small chance for it.
If tank attacks he have to be sure what is he doing.
It would be an interesting fight that's for sure lol0 -
Samadhi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭...
Finally, Inpenetrable does indeed block critical hits. For some reason it's not popular enough for the majority of the playerbase to invest in. But it does work, thanks...
I didn't deny for a second that Impenetrable blocks critical hits
I pointed out Sneak Attacks provide a guaranteed crit, regardless of critical rating or critical defense
Blocking, by contrast, still reduces the Sneak Attack damage, as well as cancels the Sneak Attack stun. Impenetrable does neither."If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion." -- the 14th Dalai Lama
Wisdom is doing Now that which benefits you later.
1 -
Evandus✭✭✭✭khele23eb17_ESO wrote: »360 degree blocking isn't realism but turning invisible, growing spikes, turning into stone, turning into lightening, summoning creatures out of thin air.....is?
This is not so much an issue of realism as internal consistency. Just because were talking about a fantasy world doesnt mean the place is a magical clusterf... with no rules to it. A well designed, immersive fantasy universe has its own rules - they might not be the same as our world's but they should make sense within the setting of the game/book/film and be pervasive throughout it.
Here, in Tamriel, there is magic. So turning invisible, growing spikes, summoning creatures - those things are not inconsistent with the reality of the game. Those are spells and feats fueled by magicka. Surrounding yourself with a wall of arcane energy and repelling any incoming attack regardless the direction (magicka feat) would also be consistent with the game setting. Raising your weapon(s) in front of your face and bracing yourself for impact (stamina feat) to repel an attack aimed from behind you at your left butt cheek is not. And so wading into battle in a robe and invoking powerful destructive incantations one after another should really not work while being stabbed a dozen times every second by 30 enemies surrounding you, just because youre holding a piece of wood above your head.In a fantasy setting, most caster types use something akin to an energy shield or field generated by an orb to block. This game didn't give those graphical qualities to casting types. Casting types shouldn't have the ability to block taken away.
In this game, blocking is relegated by a stamina pool. Regardless of the arc, traits on armor or certain skills will reduce or negate damage.
And this is why it shouldnt work. In this particular setting they are not using magic to block as shown by game mechanics.
Personally Id suggest this: mages need to buy passives in the staff lines to be able to block - their block uses magicka and is 360 (has an additional 'bubble' animation - no dev time needed the animation is already in game for enchant procs) or 270 to still allow for 'backstab' mechanic. Melee get a frontal cone block for free and weapon trees have a 360 (or 270) block passives (with added lore explanation how it works in the tooltip) - their block uses stamina. You 'mage block' when you have a staff equipped, you 'fighter block' when you use a melee weapon. Would make more sense and be more balanced than it is now.
This is an absurd idea. Another incredibly restricting mechanic which suggests that primary caster types shouldn't have any defenses nor damage mitigation. And adding more skill point investment to it as well. Yeah okay buddy... you realize this is Elder Scrolls right?
How about we as a community continue to push for Zenimax to fix their discrepancy between primary magicka and stamina builds? And at a faster pace. At least they won't venture completely away from core elements.
0 -
demonlkojipub19_ESO✭✭✭✭✭Actually, after seeing the heavy armor suggestion I'm all for this!
180deg blocking for all except 5-piece heavy armor users, who will still have 360. Let it be done, then I will have a reason to go back to heavy
or I think mage block using magicka would work too. Would help put a damper on impulse spamming at the same time.2 -
Evandus✭✭✭✭...
Finally, Inpenetrable does indeed block critical hits. For some reason it's not popular enough for the majority of the playerbase to invest in. But it does work, thanks...
I didn't deny for a second that Impenetrable blocks critical hits
I pointed out Sneak Attacks provide a guaranteed crit, regardless of critical rating or critical defense
Blocking, by contrast, still reduces the Sneak Attack damage, as well as cancels the Sneak Attack stun. Impenetrable does neither.
So then it appears that you wish for your D&D Rogue... er, Nighblade to have the ability to bypass inpenetrable by simply crouching while attacking.
0 -
Cody✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭
and you use the "l2p" card. how original:( think about it, if, in combat, the player im facing is blocking, but I manage to get completely behind them, that DOES take skill, as you wont be able to just sprint behind them, they will use an ability to knock you down/back. if I get completely behind someone, they should not be able to block it. blocking from the sides would not be so bad, but them being able to block all around, makes it almost impossible for some builds to beat them. try fighting them with a NB archer. see how frutraiting it is. I usually have to wait for 4 other teammates to come along, just to beat someone like this.Artemiisia wrote: »maybe its you guys that need to l2p, I can beat people in pvp that has shield and sword, you do know they are a melee class? dont stand next to them.....
best idea so far in this thread is Yajinho
Edited by Cody on July 22, 2014 4:51PM2 -
Samadhi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭...
Finally, Inpenetrable does indeed block critical hits. For some reason it's not popular enough for the majority of the playerbase to invest in. But it does work, thanks...
I didn't deny for a second that Impenetrable blocks critical hits
I pointed out Sneak Attacks provide a guaranteed crit, regardless of critical rating or critical defense
Blocking, by contrast, still reduces the Sneak Attack damage, as well as cancels the Sneak Attack stun. Impenetrable does neither.
So then it appears that you wish for your D&D Rogue... er, Nighblade to have the ability to bypass inpenetrable by simply crouching while attacking.
No, I'm saying that all classes can already bypass Impenetrable by crouching for a Sneak Attack opener.
But if anyone in any type of armour with any type of weapon simply holds that weapon in front of themselves, they block all Sneak Attack effects from behind. They can do this without having Impenetrable on their gear at all.
As a Nightblade, I already don't have any issue with Impenetrable trait in combat.
In full Light or Heavy Armour I can buff my Crit rating to 123% with a Bow equipped.
In full Medium Armour I can buff my Crit rating to 141% with a Bow equipped. 180% if I feel inclined to use a Weapon Crit potion as well.
And all of that is achieved without Thief Mundus or Set bonuses.
Shadowy Disguise gives 100% added weapon critical.
To make your math easier on you
A player with Impenetrable on all pieces of gear including Shield has 80% critical reduction.
That means my buff completely cancels out their Impenetrable traits, and still gives me an extra 20% Critical rating on top of it.
I don't take any issue at all with Impenetrable.
This thread is about blocking, and I think it makes more sense to have block default to the area in front of the character only; while modifying Heavy Armour 5-piece passive to be able to still block 360 degrees.Edited by Samadhi on July 22, 2014 4:51PM"If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion." -- the 14th Dalai Lama
Wisdom is doing Now that which benefits you later.
1 -
Evandus✭✭✭✭...
Finally, Inpenetrable does indeed block critical hits. For some reason it's not popular enough for the majority of the playerbase to invest in. But it does work, thanks...
I didn't deny for a second that Impenetrable blocks critical hits
I pointed out Sneak Attacks provide a guaranteed crit, regardless of critical rating or critical defense
Blocking, by contrast, still reduces the Sneak Attack damage, as well as cancels the Sneak Attack stun. Impenetrable does neither.
So then it appears that you wish for your D&D Rogue... er, Nighblade to have the ability to bypass inpenetrable by simply crouching while attacking.
No, I'm saying that all classes can already bypass Impenetrable by crouching for a Sneak Attack opener.
But if anyone in any type of armour with any type of weapon simply holds that weapon in front of themselves, they block all Sneak Attack effects from behind. They can do this without having Impenetrable on their gear at all.
As a Nightblade, I already don't have any issue with Impenetrable trait in combat.
In full Light or Heavy Armour I can buff my Crit rating to 123% with a Bow equipped.
In full Medium Armour I can buff my Crit rating to 141% with a Bow equipped. 180% if I feel inclined to use a Weapon Crit potion as well.
And all of that is achieved without Thief Mundus or Set bonuses.
Shadowy Disguise gives 100% added weapon critical.
To make your math easier on you
A player with Impenetrable on all pieces of gear including Shield has 80% critical reduction.
That means my buff completely cancels out their Impenetrable traits, and still gives me an extra 20% Critical rating on top of it.
I don't take any issue at all with Impenetrable.
This thread is about blocking, and I think it makes more sense to have block default to the area in front of the character only; while modifying Heavy Armour 5-piece passive to be able to still block 360 degrees.
Concerns with latency make the radius argument questionable. It's reasonable to assume that the devs implemented the blocking mechanic in the way they have to ensure it working. To me, that's not lazy programming. Considering the wide variance in PC quality and internet connection amongst the playerbase at least.
Limiting blocking to a traditional arc translates to he who has the most powerful machine with no latency automatically wins. There are already methods to deal with blocking defenders.
0 -
navarat9✭if blocking is 180, nobody will play tank anymor and you will take forever tofind tank for dungeon because group mobs. really hard to tank them with 180.
0 -
Xsorus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Again, you can't argue realism about this...saying silly things like "Well why can a mage block me with a staff when I hit them with a mace? That's not realistic" while completely ignoring that when you hit anyone in this game wearing cloth with a bladed weapon they don't instantly die.
Its a game, trying to bring realism in on the discussion is silly half the time.
Its also not like there isn't a way to counter Blocking either...PBAE's, GTAE's, Snaring and multi hit abilities all cause trouble for Blockers. If someone is blocking and they're in light armor with a staff without block cost reduction jewelry you blow through their Stamina incredibly quick.
What this is really about is someone dying to Tank in PvP.. and blaming it on Block.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXpX7JMwRXtczc5GTrIYRIw
ESO and GW2 PvP videos2 -
Crisscross✭✭✭xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »GTAE's
Is it bad that I initially read that as Grand Theft Auto Effects?1 -
Artemiisia✭✭✭✭✭
✭Artemiisia wrote: »this idea will break pve totally, since we wont be able to block more then 1-2 mobs then, and the 3rd behind us will just kill us before we can get mobs down.
dungeons/trails will become near impossible to do also.
remember OP/guys when you suggest something dont just think about the pvp aspect of it
Decided not to read this whole thread but wanted to comment on this ^.
WHAT? People are dominating trials in 10 minutes right now and only use 1 tank. It would be an awesome change even in PVE if enemies behind you could not be blocked.
yeah I know they are dominating trails, but this aint about the tank only, all people use block 360, while they are AoE spamming and they wont be able to do trails in 10-20 mins if they didnt use block while AoE spamming, how do I know this Im one of them that has a 20m done so far....0 -
Artemiisia✭✭✭✭✭
✭NookyZooky wrote: »
and you use the "l2p" card. how original:( think about it, if, in combat, the player im facing is blocking, but I manage to get completely behind them, that DOES take skill, as you wont be able to just sprint behind them, they will use an ability to knock you down/back. if I get completely behind someone, they should not be able to block it. blocking from the sides would not be so bad, but them being able to block all around, makes it almost impossible for some builds to beat them. try fighting them with a NB archer. see how frutraiting it is. I usually have to wait for 4 other teammates to come along, just to beat someone like this.Artemiisia wrote: »maybe its you guys that need to l2p, I can beat people in pvp that has shield and sword, you do know they are a melee class? dont stand next to them.....
best idea so far in this thread is Yajinho
Lots of comments in this has been deleted, due to the fact someone was being insulting/degrading/condescending, so my comment has been taking out of content.....
0 -
Durham✭✭✭✭✭
✭Actually 360 blocking will hurt casters as much as melee..but i think sticks should only do about 25% mitigatio period .. this game is elder cast alote atm.... before we nerf a primary melee tactic lets look at sticks and light armor....PVP DEADWAIT
PVP The Unguildables2 -
Durham✭✭✭✭✭
✭The AI/hitboxing issues for npc enemies always causes them to encircle you. This would make tanking extremely difficult.
There's also the lag argument for pvp - directional blocking is always a pain in online games, since the enemy can bunnyhop and circle you preventing you from ever actually facing them as far as the server is concerned.
Plus they can simply charge to you ....run through you and hit from the back... thats not real either.....PVP DEADWAIT
PVP The Unguildables0 -
MonkeyAssassin24✭✭✭I like how people are saying this is an idea that only NB's want because it will help with their pvp. It would actually hurt the defensive capabilities of the most common NB makeup (dw/bow) the most imo. Caster's can still use magical shields, and tanks will most likely go the heavy armor route, which would need to be changed as well to account for a change to blocking, leaving NB's with their daggers hoping to just out-maneuver the enemy.
I don't understand how anybody could be against this if they implemented it with a change (fix) to heavy armor. Give a flanking passive to the tree as previously suggested and fix the mitigation issue, if tanks still quit playing that role because they can't block all attacks and use light armor, then boo-frickin'-hoo.
Changing this as well as tweaking heavy armor to coincide with it to me will only serve to make tanking much more interesting and fun. I can't help but picture two tank built characters taking on a particularly tough encounter with their backs to each other fending off enemies...that sounds badass!On second thought, let's not go to the forums. 'Tis a silly place.1 -
Durham✭✭✭✭✭
✭MonkeyAssassin24 wrote: »I like how people are saying this is an idea that only NB's want because it will help with their pvp. It would actually hurt the defensive capabilities of the most common NB makeup (dw/bow) the most imo. Caster's can still use magical shields, and tanks will most likely go the heavy armor route, which would need to be changed as well to account for a change to blocking, leaving NB's with their daggers hoping to just out-maneuver the enemy.
I don't understand how anybody could be against this if they implemented it with a change (fix) to heavy armor. Give a flanking passive to the tree as previously suggested and fix the mitigation issue, if tanks still quit playing that role because they can't block all attacks and use light armor, then boo-frickin'-hoo.
Changing this as well as tweaking heavy armor to coincide with it to me will only serve to make tanking much more interesting and fun. I can't help but picture two tank built characters taking on a particularly tough encounter with their backs to each other fending off enemies...that sounds badass!
I hear what your saying... I agree with alote of your points... my concern is balance and lag.. currently heavy is shafted .. melee is shafted atm ... making melee harder and take more damage is bad atm... after some balancing i would support you... If this change creats lag in pvp then absolutely not!!!
PVP DEADWAIT
PVP The Unguildables1 -
Muletide✭✭✭Classic case of the "one size fits all" failure.
PVE zones need PVE mechanics and PVP zones need PVP mechanics.
1 -
Jimm_ay✭✭✭You guys make me laugh with your "how can a guy in a dress block a sword.."
Uhhhh - how can the big bad guy in this game be beaten by 20 minutes of kiting...0 -
Anvos✭✭✭I could see maybe giving different weapons, different levels of mitigation, but I honestly don't think making it harder to block is fair when you have to deal with things such as lag and latency.
Another reason I don't care for changing it is I've generally accepted that certain aspects of rpgs and mmos take a little bit of abstract into account with systems, such as how blocking probably represents more than the physical act, but your character being in a state of readiness to react to incoming attacks.0 -
Booba✭✭Well, I play a DK and go for traditional heavy armor and sword'n'board.
I admit that blocking 360 is a lazy mechanic.
I'd be fine if it get nerfed to 180 but only if light/heavy bow and staff attacks get a minimum range.
Let there be passives that decrease that range but you have to admit that missing minimum range for ranged weapons is a lazy mechanic, too.0 -
Maulkin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Well, it's no more ridiculous than a lifting a stick in the air and doing 360 degree damage to anyone within 11 meters (Impulse). Or a single archer insta-firing a volley of like 30 burning arrows. It's a fantasy game it's not based on realism therefore the only criterion that can be used is game balance.
So with that in mind, so long as you can do damage blindly without aiming at an opponent, the opponent should in turn be able to block without having to "aim" his shield at you. A perhaps more moderate change would be that blocking provides a 360 coverage against AoEs but only 180 degrees against single target abilities.
Having said that, I feel tanky players (with their inferior heavy armour and a weapon that provides only defence and debuffs and no offensive capabilities) already get a very raw deal compared to pretty much any other build in the game. So while I would support a change in that direction, I would first like to see changes to strengthen those builds, before they get nerfed.EU | PC | AD2 -
purple-magicb16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭But this mechanic is due in part to technical limitations. If we have directional blocking, you'll be dying to lag since a change in your character's direction might not register in time.
This. There's enuff lag. Don't push it 4 more.I don't comment here often but when I do, I get [snip]1 -
isengrimb16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭Block is fine the way it is. Some of us do play in first person and don't always know if there's anything behind us while fighting things in front of us. Yes, I try to keep the NPCs I KNOW about in front of me, but I have picked up adds that I didn't realize were there until the ones I saw were dead.
If this is a pvp thing, then it definitely needs to be ignored. WoW is messed up PvE wise because of PvP crap, I hope our PvE play doesn't get constantly messed here because of it, too. Unless Zeni is smarter than Blizz, and makes sure that 180 degree blocking only applies in Cyrodiil, and nowhere else.
Edited by isengrimb16_ESO on July 23, 2014 12:01PM0 -
Hilgara✭✭✭✭✭isengrimb16_ESO wrote: »Block is fine the way it is. Some of us do play in first person and don't always know if there's anything behind us while fighting things in front of us. Yes, I try to keep the NPCs I KNOW about in front of me, but I have picked up adds that I didn't realize were there until the ones I saw were dead.
If this is a pvp thing, then it definitely needs to be ignored. WoW is messed up PvE wise because of PvP crap, I hope our PvE play doesn't get constantly messed here because of it, too.
Theres a simple solution to this. Don't fight in 1st person. Anyone doing this is seriously gimping their combat ability. If you choose to do this anyway then please don't expect the game to accommodate you because if it did it would be not worth playing for the rest of us.0 -
isengrimb16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭But we already have 360 degree blocking, YOU are the one asking for the change.
And playing in first person is considered a legitmate playstyle by ZOS - they even widened our FoV.
Why should I change my playstyle, because YOU want "realistic blocking"?
It's fine as it is. As I said above, toggle it for Cyrodiil, and let the PvPers be the only one to deal with gimpy blocks.
Edited by isengrimb16_ESO on July 23, 2014 12:05PM0 -
Xnemesis✭✭✭✭isengrimb16_ESO wrote: »Block is fine the way it is. Some of us do play in first person and don't always know if there's anything behind us while fighting things in front of us. Yes, I try to keep the NPCs I KNOW about in front of me, but I have picked up adds that I didn't realize were there until the ones I saw were dead.
If this is a pvp thing, then it definitely needs to be ignored. WoW is messed up PvE wise because of PvP crap, I hope our PvE play doesn't get constantly messed here because of it, too. Unless Zeni is smarter than Blizz, and makes sure that 180 degree blocking only applies in Cyrodiil, and nowhere else.
You do know you subbed to PvE on a game massively marketed as an AvAvA PvP game right?0 -
Hilgara✭✭✭✭✭isengrimb16_ESO wrote: »But we already have 360 degree blocking, YOU are the one asking for the change.
And playing in first person is considered a legitmate playstyle by ZOS - they even widened our FoV.
Why should I change my playstyle, because YOU want "realistic blocking"?
Not in the slightest bit bothered about the blocking. There are bigger fish to fry (although I do think it should be a heavy armour passive)
But you were among those complaining that the vet difficulty was too high. Well that's not surprising if you were trying to do it 1st person.
If you decide to gimp yourself you can't then complain about difficulty.1 -
isengrimb16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭Again, let the 180 degree gimp block *** be left in Cyrodiil only. Yes, I play first person - JUST LIKE I DO IN EVERY TES GAME.
The third person animations are too jerky, and the damn sight doesn't line up properly, it really *** me up, so I play first person. I'd be much WORSE in third person.
Why change block just to be "realistic"? Next we'll have people wanting to take Khajit and Argonians out because it offends their sense of "realism" to have non-ape, non-elf races or some crap.
It's a small thing, but it could mess up a lot of people's playstyle, so it's best to leave it as it is.
And hey, you can make fun of me re: difficulty, but at least I'm not one of the twerps whining about how "faceroll" everything is. Maybe if THOSE people started playing first person, THEY would be singing a different tune, hmm?
Different strokes. I imaging ZOS made 360 blocking for a reason (lag deaths being only one them.)
1 -
Xnemesis✭✭✭✭isengrimb16_ESO wrote: »Again, let the 180 degree gimp block *** be left in Cyrodiil only. Yes, I play first person - JUST LIKE I DO IN EVERY TES GAME.
The third person animations are too jerky, and the damn sight doesn't line up properly, it really *** me up, so I play first person. I'd be much WORSE in third person.
Why change block just to be "realistic"? Next we'll have people wanting to take Khajit and Argonians out because it offends their sense of "realism" to have non-ape, non-elf races or some crap.
It's a small thing, but it could mess up a lot of people's playstyle, so it's best to leave it as it is.
And hey, you can make fun of me re: difficulty, but at least I'm not one of the twerps whining about how "faceroll" everything is. Maybe if THOSE people started playing first person, THEY would be singing a different tune, hmm?
Different strokes. I imaging ZOS made 360 blocking for a reason (lag deaths being only one them.)
1st person is definitely a tougher play style choice I will give you that. Also lots of Ideas have been suggested that would just affect player damage.... so you precious PvE would be unaffected.0