Vampire nerf

chimneyswift_ESO · August 2014

Karikin wrote: »

Vampire
Reduced the passive Undeath’s damage reduction to 33%, and adjusted the tooltip accordingly.

ummm why? Vampires were likely just about right with the exception of some of the passives not working.

Yep, don't understand this change whatsoever! Hey, we'll give you INSANE fire weakness...AND then let's just nerf one of the most unique passives in the game even though it wasn't really creating anything terribly OP. Sad times

LtCrunch · August 2014

Nox_Aeterna wrote: »

One can only assume how much we are willing to hold to vampires even when they are just a huge nerf to our chars.

I wanted to be a vampire because i always become one in TES games , the 50% fire vun is ESO is already a MAJOR issue , bigger than in ANY other TES game , a majority of things in this game for some reason loves fire magic.

You took damage just from going outside during the daytime in Oblivion if you were at a later stage of vampirism in addition to fire weakness.....I'd say that's a much larger negative impact than what we have in ESO.

Samadhi · August 2014

chimneyswift_ESO wrote: »

Karikin wrote: »

Vampire
Reduced the passive Undeath’s damage reduction to 33%, and adjusted the tooltip accordingly.

ummm why? Vampires were likely just about right with the exception of some of the passives not working.

Yep, don't understand this change whatsoever! Hey, we'll give you INSANE fire weakness...AND then let's just nerf one of the most unique passives in the game even though it wasn't really creating anything terribly OP. Sad times

Fire weakness isn't all that bad, I don't even worry about it with a v10 yellow Fire Resist enchantment on.

Comparing against Flame Atronachs in Cyrodiil.
Non-Vampire with no Fire Resist ring: 150 damage on regular hits; 301 damage on firey explosion
Vampire with 1 Fire Resist ring: 154 damage on regular hits; 308 damage on firey explosion

Same character, all other gear the same except the ring with the Fire Resist enchantment. Only variable that changed was vampire/non-vampire.

bedford_jayb16_ESO · August 2014

Yay nerf bat >

chimneyswift_ESO · August 2014

Braddass wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

Karikin wrote: »

the point is if you are a vampire you should become stronger in some areas and weaker in others.

Vampires are already weak versus fire, Why make the survivability worse? not mad if there is a good reason, I just want that reason.

Because the pros outweigh the cons so much right now it's generally stupid to not be a vampire.

That is the point exactly. If the cons were equal to the pros, there wouldn't be so many Vamps running around, sparkling in the sunlight.

They need to make Vamps burn in sunlight, and be attacked on sight by guards ... then the cons would be more in line.

Why do people always default to "sparkling" twilight vampires?! Vampires have been in Elder Scrolls games LONG before Twilight and all that, and the vampires in TES games are always more badass than other versions of pop-culture vamps. *sigh*

Kos · August 2014

Vampires suck

kieso · August 2014

if a nerf bat gets close to a vampire bat..do they mate?

UrQuan · August 2014

Nox_Aeterna wrote: »

One can only assume how much we are willing to hold to vampires even when they are just a huge nerf to our chars.

I wanted to be a vampire because i always become one in TES games , the 50% fire vun is ESO is already a MAJOR issue , bigger than in ANY other TES game , a majority of things in this game for some reason loves fire magic.

I think the reason so many things in this game love fire magic is because there seems to be so many vampires running around Tamriel...

Sumpfheini · August 2014

vampire is actually still too strong, the strong abilities and passives outweight the disadvantages completely.
The only thing that is unfair is that DKs are the only class with a distinctive advantage against them.

Azraeel · August 2014

Brandalf wrote: »

Nox_Aeterna wrote: »

One can only assume how much we are willing to hold to vampires even when they are just a huge nerf to our chars.

I wanted to be a vampire because i always become one in TES games , the 50% fire vun is ESO is already a MAJOR issue , bigger than in ANY other TES game , a majority of things in this game for some reason loves fire magic.

You took damage just from going outside during the daytime in Oblivion if you were at a later stage of vampirism in addition to fire weakness.....I'd say that's a much larger negative impact than what we have in ESO.

In Skyrim they totally removed that. You could go out to the sun normally, however, you won't regenerate attributes. Now, why this isn't feasible in ESO? Simply because we can't forward time like we did in previous games. In Morrowind and Oblivion, we had the ability to forward time so we can play during night time. This cannot be done here, so it is illogical to do it.

For those who think being a vampire greatly outshines not being one are mistaken, or they obviously never tried tanking. First and foremost, you can kiss your health regeneration good bye, even with that silly improved crap, your health regeneration will sit down at 30'ish. Second is fire weakness, half of the god damn dungeon bosses can squirt out fire. So you have to sacrifice a ring slot, which might i add, would ruin a jewelry set, just for the resist. Not to mention, all classes got access to fire attacks. But this isn't all, everyone who invests in Fighters Guild get extra damage against Vampires. The only useful thing was the 50% mitigation, which got nerfed to 33%.

So with all those weaknesses/disadvantages, people still have the nerves to whine about a 5 seconds ultimate.

SkillzMFG · August 2014

They should make fire resistance grow with vampirism stages, that's the only thing vampires need.

bosmern_ESO · August 2014

Karikin wrote: »

the point is if you are a vampire you should become stronger in some areas and weaker in others.

Vampires are already weak versus fire, Why make the survivability worse? not mad if there is a good reason, I just want that reason.

I don't think anyone can say vampires should remain as they are with the state WW's are in. Yeah, Vampire make you stronger in some areas (not even going to touch on the point where they are almost un-killable with swarm), guess what, WW just make you weaker. There has never been a point in a battle where I thought I should WW transfer.

Which is why I really can't wait for WW buffs, which they've been dragging their feet with because WW have been terrible since the start.

Azraeel · August 2014

bosmern_ESO wrote: »

Karikin wrote: »

the point is if you are a vampire you should become stronger in some areas and weaker in others.

Vampires are already weak versus fire, Why make the survivability worse? not mad if there is a good reason, I just want that reason.

I don't think anyone can say vampires should remain as they are with the state WW's are in. Yeah, Vampire make you stronger in some areas (not even going to touch on the point where they are almost un-killable with swarm), guess what, WW just make you weaker. There has never been a point in a battle where I thought I should WW transfer.

Which is why I really can't wait for WW buffs, which they've been dragging their feet with because WW have been terrible since the start.

So let me get this right, just because WW sucks, Vampirism should suck? Where the hell did you get the logic from? They should fix WW, not nerf Vampirism until they are a hindrance.

Braddass · August 2014

chimneyswift_ESO wrote: »

Braddass wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

Karikin wrote: »

the point is if you are a vampire you should become stronger in some areas and weaker in others.

Vampires are already weak versus fire, Why make the survivability worse? not mad if there is a good reason, I just want that reason.

Because the pros outweigh the cons so much right now it's generally stupid to not be a vampire.

That is the point exactly. If the cons were equal to the pros, there wouldn't be so many Vamps running around, sparkling in the sunlight.

They need to make Vamps burn in sunlight, and be attacked on sight by guards ... then the cons would be more in line.

Why do people always default to "sparkling" twilight vampires?! Vampires have been in Elder Scrolls games LONG before Twilight and all that, and the vampires in TES games are always more badass than other versions of pop-culture vamps. *sigh*

Because, just like Twilight Vampires, there is very little downside to being an ESO Vampire.

Some people chose Vamp for the same reason they use cheats and hacks ... they want to play god mode (and are used to doing just that). They want all the pros and no cons. Vamps (especially at launch) were just cheesy. I would love to see a breakdown of what percentage of Emperors have been Vampires since launch..

They have toned Vamps down a bit, but the pros still far outweigh the cons.

chimneyswift_ESO · August 2014

Braddass wrote: »

chimneyswift_ESO wrote: »

Braddass wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

Karikin wrote: »

the point is if you are a vampire you should become stronger in some areas and weaker in others.

Vampires are already weak versus fire, Why make the survivability worse? not mad if there is a good reason, I just want that reason.

Because the pros outweigh the cons so much right now it's generally stupid to not be a vampire.

That is the point exactly. If the cons were equal to the pros, there wouldn't be so many Vamps running around, sparkling in the sunlight.

They need to make Vamps burn in sunlight, and be attacked on sight by guards ... then the cons would be more in line.

Why do people always default to "sparkling" twilight vampires?! Vampires have been in Elder Scrolls games LONG before Twilight and all that, and the vampires in TES games are always more badass than other versions of pop-culture vamps. *sigh*

Because, just like Twilight Vampires, there is very little downside to being an ESO Vampire.

Some people chose Vamp for the same reason they use cheats and hacks ... they want to play god mode (and are used to doing just that). They want all the pros and no cons. Vamps (especially at launch) were just cheesy. I would love to see a breakdown of what percentage of Emperors have been Vampires since launch..

They have toned Vamps down a bit, but the pros still far outweigh the cons.

Well like you, I'm against those people who early on in release exploited vamps to get their ult down to 4 or whatever. But none of this has to do anything with Twilight. I chose vamp in ESO cause I never played a vamp in any previous TES game and wanted to try something different. Got vamp on my own (no bite) at level 18 and have been one ever since. And just for the record, being a vamp is very far from "playing god mode." If anything is "god mode" right now it's those blazin shields from Templars.