Nihil wrote: »

Armitas wrote: »

Nihil wrote: »

Armitas wrote: »

Nihil wrote: »

While some of those abilities gain the most benefit from being slotted on both bars none of them actually have to be ( closest I would say would be twilight due to the casting time). These abilities give a benefit beyond that of a normal ability as it doesn't need to be recast constantly if you choose to have it on both bars, this saves you mana in a long fight. The % decrease to your max magicka only has a major effect when you are at max in that resource, so really at the beginning of a fight.

If they allowed a way to keep them active all the time this would give to many sorc's the ability to have a buff bar and then a combat bar.

If you did like some people in the past suggested and make a special "buff" ability slot this still favors sorcs way to much. We could constantly have +800 armor if we choose with no real down fall (decrease in max magicka doesn't affect our dps, and I doubt most players go all the way back up to max during a fight).

You could choose to treat each of the toggles as a short buff that needs to be recasted instead of thinking as "this should always be active". This is the player choice to have it on both bars, and they can be functional on one bar if you choose to build your spec in a way to make it so.

I have a DK and I have a buff bar right now. Evil hunter, igneous weapons, frag shield, razor armor, rapid regen.

It would be different with a sorc, if I wanted to have a bar full of toggles, I would have clanfaer/unstable familiar, Winged twilight, bound armor, and mage light with crit surge, keep other bar for my attacks and I will have amazing defense, two other pets attacking ( one providing me with mana regen), and 20 % more crit, never using mana to recast them.

Armitas wrote: »

ThatHappyCat wrote: »

Armitas wrote: »

Reducing max magicka by 10% does reduce your dps...

It doesn't. Your maximum magicka is not reduced for calculating the power of magicka-based skills. Likewise, Magicka Flood's effect is not reduced by having magicka-reserving skills active.

I did not know that.

Yea this was misleading when I first read the ability before the game came out so it was the first thing I tested. This makes the loss of max magicka not as detrimental as people play it up to be. I have a build I am going to be testing with the necropotence set for a healer that capitalizes on this.

While this poll does assume a maximal fix which would entail balance, because this is an interesting point let me say something to just it. If we were to go with just making it cost 1 skill slot, (not assuming a maximal fix but altering that one thing) then I agree this is imbalanced. On the surface though I think it would be close to in line if max magicka reduction worked the way I thought it did when I was mistaken about it.

If it did work like that, then I might agree ( I would have to test it out to see how it actually worked in practice, and if melee builds would then be able to abuse it). I sadly can't think of anyway to make it a maximal fix as it currently is in game. The abilities them self all have amazing strengths depending on the build that could justify them having two slots, and unless you nerf the abilities drastically it would be very strong to allow it to only be one slot skill.

Thanks for your response. What you are saying is completely reasonable and I agree. I chose to preface the thread with maximal because what can be done exceeds what we may be able to think about what can be done. In this way the concept can be pondered in isolation, and if desirable a solution can be wrought out.

Here we go again...

Armitas wrote: »

Ourorboros wrote: »

No matter how you want to frame the argument, you are essentially looking for a way to make the game easier and get around game design. Have as many polls as you want, I don't see ZOS giving ground on this, and don't believe they should.

That is a baseless accusation about me. I am looking for the flaw to be removed because I believe that 1 skill should cost 1 skill slot. Even though I don't even have a sorc I don't think 60% of one of their 3 lines should cost 2 slots each along with an innate penalty.

No it's not baseless. Your obviously attached to the subject. You want Mage Light to take 1 slot and work all the time. We get it. It's kind of a pain in the ass for it to take two slots. there is an impetus for this series of polls and discussions you've started on the subject and this incarnation has been crafted differently. Granted Ourorboros may not "know" your motivation to be a desire to make the game easier but it's a reasonable assumption. Maybe the game just doesn't make sense to you and having a toggle on both bars makes so little sense it's a distraction. Maybe you have a build you'd like to use but this two slot toggle is cramping your style? (that one has my vote.) Maybe your crusading for the good of all with total disregard for your self interest...maybe, but I recon his assumption is based on observation of both discussions and seems pretty reasonable to me and I wager a fair few others.

It's not a question of whether or not it makes sense if a skill stops working merely because you switch weapons. It's a game design issue. It's not a "flaw" as you like to refer to it as. It's a balancing measure implemented after game testing. People used to use their secondary action bar as a toggle bar. This was deemed a problem by ZoS and altered to it's current form.

I don't believe you'll see any changes in this anytime soon. People want balance more than they want it all to make sense. As for me I prefer balance be ZoS first priority.

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

But having a familiar, a winged twilight, magelight, etc. all active while you're able to still cast all your offensive spells is unbalanced.

Does it make in-game, logical sense that summons disappear or that effects are negated? No. But that's not why ZO designed it this way.

As stated the poll assumes a maximal fix. A maximal fix entails balance.

I don't believe that they designed the game in a way that does not make sense. It seems more plausible to me that it is a consequence of the system rather than it was designed not to make sense. Even so the fact that some aspect of the game exists does not mean that it was designed that way. We just downloaded 1.4, since eso released we have seen a lot of aspects of the game fixed because they were consequences of their design rather than the intent of their design.

Vizier wrote: »

Here we go again...

Armitas wrote: »

Ourorboros wrote: »

No matter how you want to frame the argument, you are essentially looking for a way to make the game easier and get around game design. Have as many polls as you want, I don't see ZOS giving ground on this, and don't believe they should.

That is a baseless accusation about me. I am looking for the flaw to be removed because I believe that 1 skill should cost 1 skill slot. Even though I don't even have a sorc I don't think 60% of one of their 3 lines should cost 2 slots each along with an innate penalty.

No it's not baseless. Your obviously attached to the subject. You want Mage Light to take 1 slot and work all the time. We get it. It's kind of a pain in the ass for it to take two slots. there is an impetus for this series of polls and discussions you've started on the subject and this incarnation has been crafted differently. Granted Ourorboros may not "know" your motivation to be a desire to make the game easier but it's a reasonable assumption. Maybe the game just doesn't make sense to you and having a toggle on both bars makes so little sense it's a distraction. Maybe you have a build you'd like to use but this two slot toggle is cramping your style? (that one has my vote.) Maybe your crusading for the good of all with total disregard for your self interest...maybe, but I recon his assumption is based on observation of both discussions and seems pretty reasonable to me and I wager a fair few others.

It's not a question of whether or not it makes sense if a skill stops working merely because you switch weapons. It's a game design issue. It's not a "flaw" as you like to refer to it as. It's a balancing measure implemented after game testing. People used to use their secondary action bar as a toggle bar. This was deemed a problem by ZoS and altered to it's current form.

I don't believe you'll see any changes in this anytime soon. People want balance more than they want it all to make sense. As for me I prefer balance be ZoS first priority.

His accusation was that I want the game easier, and that I want to get around the game mechanics. You need to show that that is true, despite the fact I have shown it to be false, and my record proves it. As it is non sequitur it will remain a baseless accusation until you show it to be based. There is also the matter of occam's razor which I mentioned already.

I want all toggles/summons to cost 1 skill slot rather than 2. This is not an incarnation, this is a different poll. 1 was a poll regarding a skill, the other is a poll regarding a category. I find it incredulous that you are unable to tell the difference between a single thing and a category.

People are using their secondary action bar as a buff bar now. The line between both bars is now non existent due to the fact that swaps are now instant. What their priority should or should not be has no bearing on the concept of whether it should or should not cost 1 skill slot. That could be true, and it never reach a priority. That is all not to mention that the poll, as stated if you read it like I asked at the beginning, assumes a maximal fix which entails that it must be balanced.

Armitas wrote: »

seanolan wrote: »

This is not just summoning, but any continuous magicka lowering or magicka cost ability...if I activate the Dragon Knight Sea of Flames, and swap weapons, it goes away. I see no problem with this, as a V12 DK, and doubt many others do either. You just have a bee in your bonnet over not being able to have all your army and best buffs while shooting crystal spam and impulse at the same time. Get over it.

I don't have a sorc.... I am a DK.

COULD EVERYONE PLEASE STOP MAKING BASELESS ASSUMPTIONS.

Hard not to when you continuously whine about the same topic over and over, and use sorcerer abilities to illustrate it. Hardly baseless.

Armitas wrote: »

seanolan wrote: »

Armitas wrote: »

seanolan wrote: »

This is not just summoning, but any continuous magicka lowering or magicka cost ability...if I activate the Dragon Knight Sea of Flames, and swap weapons, it goes away. I see no problem with this, as a V12 DK, and doubt many others do either. You just have a bee in your bonnet over not being able to have all your army and best buffs while shooting crystal spam and impulse at the same time. Get over it.

I don't have a sorc.... I am a DK.

COULD EVERYONE PLEASE STOP MAKING BASELESS ASSUMPTIONS.

Hard not to when you continuously whine about the same topic over and over, and use sorcerer abilities to illustrate it. Hardly baseless.

No it's really easy not to make baseless assumptions, it's called learning to read what is there. I listed several not sorc abilities as well. We are talking about a whole category, that spans across several classes, and abilities.

In any case you should see why making unnecessary assumptions is fruitless. This is why we use Occam's razor is preferred.

Occam's razor would indicate that you would use as an example abilities your character actually has experience with, therefore Occam's razor would actually lend itself to such an assumption. But with your amazing mastery of grammar I would be surprised if you were to actually understand such an intellectual principle.

Armitas wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

But having a familiar, a winged twilight, magelight, etc. all active while you're able to still cast all your offensive spells is unbalanced.

Does it make in-game, logical sense that summons disappear or that effects are negated? No. But that's not why ZO designed it this way.

As stated the poll assumes a maximal fix. A maximal fix entails balance.

I don't believe that they designed the game in a way that does not make sense. It seems more plausible to me that it is a consequence of the system rather than it was designed not to make sense. Even so the fact that some aspect of the game exists does not mean that it was designed that way. We just downloaded 1.4, since eso released we have seen a lot of aspects of the game fixed because they were consequences of their design rather than the intent of their design.

Except you're assuming that it is possible to "fix" this in a way that is balanced. The only possible way to balance this would be to severely alter the constant-effect abilities in order to make them less effective. If they didn't do that, then there's no conceivable way to balance the actionbars around your proposed system.

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Armitas wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

But having a familiar, a winged twilight, magelight, etc. all active while you're able to still cast all your offensive spells is unbalanced.

Does it make in-game, logical sense that summons disappear or that effects are negated? No. But that's not why ZO designed it this way.

As stated the poll assumes a maximal fix. A maximal fix entails balance.

I don't believe that they designed the game in a way that does not make sense. It seems more plausible to me that it is a consequence of the system rather than it was designed not to make sense. Even so the fact that some aspect of the game exists does not mean that it was designed that way. We just downloaded 1.4, since eso released we have seen a lot of aspects of the game fixed because they were consequences of their design rather than the intent of their design.

Except you're assuming that it is possible to "fix" this in a way that is balanced. The only possible way to balance this would be to severely alter the constant-effect abilities in order to make them less effective. If they didn't do that, then there's no conceivable way to balance the actionbars around your proposed system.

It is harder to assume that something is impossible than it is to assume that it is possible. Unless it's a logical impossibility, which I don't think that it is, there could be a way that all skills cost 1 skill slot, and yet all skills are in turn balanced. It would entail logically that skills would be changed for sure, but if maximal then it would also entail it would remain balanced at the end.

Armitas wrote: »

Vizier wrote: »

Here we go again...

Armitas wrote: »

Ourorboros wrote: »

No matter how you want to frame the argument, you are essentially looking for a way to make the game easier and get around game design. Have as many polls as you want, I don't see ZOS giving ground on this, and don't believe they should.

That is a baseless accusation about me. I am looking for the flaw to be removed because I believe that 1 skill should cost 1 skill slot. Even though I don't even have a sorc I don't think 60% of one of their 3 lines should cost 2 slots each along with an innate penalty.

No it's not baseless. Your obviously attached to the subject. You want Mage Light to take 1 slot and work all the time. We get it. It's kind of a pain in the ass for it to take two slots. there is an impetus for this series of polls and discussions you've started on the subject and this incarnation has been crafted differently. Granted Ourorboros may not "know" your motivation to be a desire to make the game easier but it's a reasonable assumption. Maybe the game just doesn't make sense to you and having a toggle on both bars makes so little sense it's a distraction. Maybe you have a build you'd like to use but this two slot toggle is cramping your style? (that one has my vote.) Maybe your crusading for the good of all with total disregard for your self interest...maybe, but I recon his assumption is based on observation of both discussions and seems pretty reasonable to me and I wager a fair few others.

It's not a question of whether or not it makes sense if a skill stops working merely because you switch weapons. It's a game design issue. It's not a "flaw" as you like to refer to it as. It's a balancing measure implemented after game testing. People used to use their secondary action bar as a toggle bar. This was deemed a problem by ZoS and altered to it's current form.

I don't believe you'll see any changes in this anytime soon. People want balance more than they want it all to make sense. As for me I prefer balance be ZoS first priority.

His accusation was that I want the game easier, and that I want to get around the game mechanics. You need to show that that is true, despite the fact I have shown it to be false, and my record proves it. As it is non sequitur it will remain a baseless accusation until you show it to be based. There is also the matter of occam's razor which I mentioned already.

I want all toggles/summons to cost 1 skill slot rather than 2. This is not an incarnation, this is a different poll. 1 was a poll regarding a skill, the other is a poll regarding a category. I find it incredulous that you are unable to tell the difference between a single thing and a category.

People are using their secondary action bar as a buff bar now. The line between both bars is now non existent due to the fact that swaps are now instant. What their priority should or should not be has no bearing on the concept of whether it should or should not cost 1 skill slot. That could be true, and it never reach a priority. That is all not to mention that the poll, as stated if you read it like I asked at the beginning, assumes a maximal fix which entails that it must be balanced.

I did give you the benefit of the doubt on that but his assertion is a reasonable on. He doesn't have to prove anything. It's his opinion based on observing you. I personally don't believe you want to make the game easier. I think you want things to make more sense to you in the way they work in game or you got worked up about mage light on your DK build. I don't have to prove it. I've stated it based on my observation of you. I'm content to let others make up their minds as to the validity of my claim.

This IS another incarnation of the same subject you have a bug buzz about. You started with a poll on Mage Light, didn't dig the way that went and decided to rephrase the poll. Which by the way is a Bologna poll. You couch it at end with a assumption of "maximal fix" which you use to mean "balance?" WTF. OMG Dude. LOL. Love you man. You make me smile.

Can't address this as if the game is balanced....no, just no.

Vizier wrote: »

Armitas wrote: »

Vizier wrote: »

Here we go again...

Armitas wrote: »

Ourorboros wrote: »

No matter how you want to frame the argument, you are essentially looking for a way to make the game easier and get around game design. Have as many polls as you want, I don't see ZOS giving ground on this, and don't believe they should.

That is a baseless accusation about me. I am looking for the flaw to be removed because I believe that 1 skill should cost 1 skill slot. Even though I don't even have a sorc I don't think 60% of one of their 3 lines should cost 2 slots each along with an innate penalty.

No it's not baseless. Your obviously attached to the subject. You want Mage Light to take 1 slot and work all the time. We get it. It's kind of a pain in the ass for it to take two slots. there is an impetus for this series of polls and discussions you've started on the subject and this incarnation has been crafted differently. Granted Ourorboros may not "know" your motivation to be a desire to make the game easier but it's a reasonable assumption. Maybe the game just doesn't make sense to you and having a toggle on both bars makes so little sense it's a distraction. Maybe you have a build you'd like to use but this two slot toggle is cramping your style? (that one has my vote.) Maybe your crusading for the good of all with total disregard for your self interest...maybe, but I recon his assumption is based on observation of both discussions and seems pretty reasonable to me and I wager a fair few others.

It's not a question of whether or not it makes sense if a skill stops working merely because you switch weapons. It's a game design issue. It's not a "flaw" as you like to refer to it as. It's a balancing measure implemented after game testing. People used to use their secondary action bar as a toggle bar. This was deemed a problem by ZoS and altered to it's current form.

I don't believe you'll see any changes in this anytime soon. People want balance more than they want it all to make sense. As for me I prefer balance be ZoS first priority.

His accusation was that I want the game easier, and that I want to get around the game mechanics. You need to show that that is true, despite the fact I have shown it to be false, and my record proves it. As it is non sequitur it will remain a baseless accusation until you show it to be based. There is also the matter of occam's razor which I mentioned already.

I want all toggles/summons to cost 1 skill slot rather than 2. This is not an incarnation, this is a different poll. 1 was a poll regarding a skill, the other is a poll regarding a category. I find it incredulous that you are unable to tell the difference between a single thing and a category.

People are using their secondary action bar as a buff bar now. The line between both bars is now non existent due to the fact that swaps are now instant. What their priority should or should not be has no bearing on the concept of whether it should or should not cost 1 skill slot. That could be true, and it never reach a priority. That is all not to mention that the poll, as stated if you read it like I asked at the beginning, assumes a maximal fix which entails that it must be balanced.

I did give you the benefit of the doubt on that but his assertion is a reasonable on. He doesn't have to prove anything. It's his opinion based on observing you. I personally don't believe you want to make the game easier. I think you want things to make more sense to you in the way they work in game or you got worked up about mage light on your DK build. I don't have to prove it. I've stated it based on my observation of you. I'm content to let others make up their minds as to the validity of my claim.

This IS another incarnation of the same subject you have a bug buzz about. You started with a poll on Mage Light, didn't dig the way that went and decided to rephrase the poll. Which by the way is a Bologna poll. You couch it at end with a assumption of "maximal fix" which you use to mean "balance?" WTF. OMG Dude. LOL. Love you man. You make me smile.

Can't address this as if the game is balanced....no, just no.

If you want to make baseless accusations about people publicly then you should show that it is based on something. Otherwise it is nothing more than forum warrioring. You say his accusation is a reasonable one, and yet provide no reason. In fact you deny that he has to provide any reason. Well then as far as we can know his assertion is unreasonable as well as contrary to a record of evidence.

You are free to make as many assumptions about me as you wish. But you are mistaken to do so.

Another assumption. I am happy with the way the poll went. I see nothing negative about it. It's a poll of less than 1% of the entire population. I started the poll to see where my thought was in line with other thoughts.

Maximal is a philosophical term. It is used in many philosophical arguments and debate. There is nothing wrong with it's use.

Armitas wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Armitas wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Armitas wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

But having a familiar, a winged twilight, magelight, etc. all active while you're able to still cast all your offensive spells is unbalanced.

Does it make in-game, logical sense that summons disappear or that effects are negated? No. But that's not why ZO designed it this way.

As stated the poll assumes a maximal fix. A maximal fix entails balance.

I don't believe that they designed the game in a way that does not make sense. It seems more plausible to me that it is a consequence of the system rather than it was designed not to make sense. Even so the fact that some aspect of the game exists does not mean that it was designed that way. We just downloaded 1.4, since eso released we have seen a lot of aspects of the game fixed because they were consequences of their design rather than the intent of their design.

Except you're assuming that it is possible to "fix" this in a way that is balanced. The only possible way to balance this would be to severely alter the constant-effect abilities in order to make them less effective. If they didn't do that, then there's no conceivable way to balance the actionbars around your proposed system.

It is harder to assume that something is impossible than it is to assume that it is possible. Unless it's a logical impossibility, which I don't think that it is, there could be a way that all skills cost 1 skill slot, and yet all skills are in turn balanced. It would entail logically that skills would be changed for sure, but if maximal then it would also entail it would remain balanced at the end.

Then by all means, provide a hypothetical system that would be balanced that way. You're talking in extremely vague terms, and it seems pretty clear that it's because you haven't been able to address the specifics of the system.

It is not necessary to provide one. So long as it is not a logical impossibility the term has meaning. As I mentioned above maximal is a frequently used philosophical term. I am asking the pollers to assume the term. One would have to show that it is a logical impossibility or show for every available example that it is impossible to refuse the ability of the assumption.

I listed my reasons both in the OP and later. I want to poll the concept, not the how, because the how exceeds the number of possibilities than we players can determine.

In other words you want people to ignore all consequences of your suggestion so as to exclude any opposition (and, for that matter, support) for your agenda?

Armitas wrote: »

ThatHappyCat wrote: »

Armitas wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Armitas wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Armitas wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

But having a familiar, a winged twilight, magelight, etc. all active while you're able to still cast all your offensive spells is unbalanced.

Does it make in-game, logical sense that summons disappear or that effects are negated? No. But that's not why ZO designed it this way.

As stated the poll assumes a maximal fix. A maximal fix entails balance.

I don't believe that they designed the game in a way that does not make sense. It seems more plausible to me that it is a consequence of the system rather than it was designed not to make sense. Even so the fact that some aspect of the game exists does not mean that it was designed that way. We just downloaded 1.4, since eso released we have seen a lot of aspects of the game fixed because they were consequences of their design rather than the intent of their design.

Except you're assuming that it is possible to "fix" this in a way that is balanced. The only possible way to balance this would be to severely alter the constant-effect abilities in order to make them less effective. If they didn't do that, then there's no conceivable way to balance the actionbars around your proposed system.

It is harder to assume that something is impossible than it is to assume that it is possible. Unless it's a logical impossibility, which I don't think that it is, there could be a way that all skills cost 1 skill slot, and yet all skills are in turn balanced. It would entail logically that skills would be changed for sure, but if maximal then it would also entail it would remain balanced at the end.

Then by all means, provide a hypothetical system that would be balanced that way. You're talking in extremely vague terms, and it seems pretty clear that it's because you haven't been able to address the specifics of the system.

It is not necessary to provide one. So long as it is not a logical impossibility the term has meaning. As I mentioned above maximal is a frequently used philosophical term. I am asking the pollers to assume the term. One would have to show that it is a logical impossibility or show for every available example that it is impossible to refuse the ability of the assumption.

I listed my reasons both in the OP and later. I want to poll the concept, not the how, because the how exceeds the number of possibilities than we players can determine.

In other words you want people to ignore all consequences of your suggestion so as to exclude any opposition (and, for that matter, support) for your agenda?

Sigh, more assumptions and accusations while ignoring everything that I have already said...

No, he is basing this on your behavior, well established by now. An assumption would be if he based this solely on your poll. An accusation would be to call you, for example, a pompous git for said behavior. He hasn't done either.

That only should be up to consideration AFTER spellcraft hits and most builds have this option.

Otherwise some classes will have an clear edge over the others (sorcs mostly) , because they are the ones with plenty of skills in this condition.

Yes, 1 skill should be 1 slot !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We have so few slots all builds are the same, everyone has 3 or 4 skills that are op they have few options to make a build custom & unique, unless one wants to nerf there toon.

If your toggle/summons is on both bars, do you have to reactivate it when you switch? Meaning you must hit or activate the button again on the new bar? Or since it's already slotted, it just stays while you play?