Impulse is for cookie cutter nubs.

There are much better AOE's to spam.

I spam Blazing spear on my temp, with the aedric spear passive proc 800-1100 dmg per enemy + DOT

Also

Steel Tornado does more dmg than any AOE in the game with a solid stamina build.

ExiledKhallisi wrote: »

Impulse is for cookie cutter nubs.

There are much better AOE's to spam.

I spam Blazing spear on my temp, with the aedric spear passive proc 800-1100 dmg per enemy + DOT

Also

Steel Tornado does more dmg than any AOE in the game with a solid stamina build.

You're focusing to much on the initial dmg. Impulse is god-mode for other reasons.

I have plenty of time to roll dodge out of Blazing Spear. I can block Blazing Spear negating both the stun and mitigating the dmg. I can even reflect Blazing Spear and let the caster have it back in his face. There's so many counters against spell projectiles. You also have to manually aim Blazing Spear since GT, preventing you from spamming it x3 per second with a macro.

Impulse doesn't follow any regulations. It's a cheap PBAoE that can be spammed and not blocked. Only counter is moving away from the players spamming it. Sadly, that's a bit inconvenient when you're suppose to stack on a flag, to prevent loosing your home keep.

Than again, Impulse isn't the problem here exclusively. It just happens to be the most effective offensive AoE skill for running trains.

I agree with OP, the only reason why people are against the fact that impulse is overpowered is because they don't want to change it, they don't want ZOS to realize it and nerf impulse a bit. By now, everyone knows it's overpowered and your seeing more and more people using it.

For me it's not about the DPS, it's about the person who is a DPS build that cannot properly DPS an opponent with impulse. So for me the issue is, it's too spammable. I once was able to out DPS an opponent with impulse, just before I was going to kill him/her, he started to spam it again and get away from within range and even get back to stealth.

It's too easy to get away from a fight, I mean if your going to PVP, PVP like a man and stand your ground! lol

I'm not saying to get rid of impulse, that will never happen but at least do something to minimize it.

Nihil wrote: »

Zormac wrote: »

Nihil wrote: »

Zormac wrote: »

Tankqull wrote: »

Zormac wrote: »

You guys keep saying this, Zenimax will nerf Impulse instead of making the other skills more powerful, as they should.

to be hones t i dont see the reason for either.
the OP stated himself that he could use a class build with slightly higher survivability but less then 10% dps lost.
other classes are not even in the situation to even reach his class build dps with impulse nor their own skills.
if impulse needs to be nerfed the dk skill would be too...

My point is that "nerf" is an outdated concept. That's not how you balance a game.

Actually games need to nerf and buff to keep it healthy. Just buffing everything else to be "on par" Is a lot more intensive for the game designers to do and a large waist of time too. In essance if they buffed every aspect of the game to bring it up to lvl with the skills that would be considered over powered then in essance they will be nerfing the skill by ommision... It just makes people feel better not seeing their skill altered down.

If they buffed "every aspect of the game", you would be right. However, it's not about buffing everything, but creating pairs/groups of skills that would make players choose a character over the other. If the Dragonknight is tankier than they had hoped and people prefer them for PvP, give the others a way to deal with them, insted of making the Dragonknight weaker. It doesn't make sense that everything that was invested in a character simply disappears because the Eight Divines (*cough* developers) decided that character was too strong. But it does make sense that other people became stronger and are able to fight you.

In an attempt to make the game fair for many, they've been making it unfair for many other players. "Play however you want... unless you're too powerful. Otherwise we'll have to remove your legs".

But how do you balance the other aspects of the game? In your example of a dragon knight being to tanky, You buff the other classes skill lines to counter the tankiness, but at the same time you have now made it rather they can A) counter other players defense so that you need to buff the other classes defense, or B ) increased damage too much that you need to relook at the PVE side of the game to make sure you haven't imbalanced the challanges there. Where instead you could of lowered the tankiness of a character instead of risking imbalancing different areas of the game.

Not all problems need to be fixed by nerfing it, this would be stupid. But to fix by buffing also leads to risking making another ability / combo to strong, and thus needing to buff other abilities again. I liked how I saw another player put it on these forums. You have the game difficulty set at y , 2 classes are performing at y-1 one class at y and another class at y+1. Instead of changing it so the classes can match the y+1. bring y+1 down to y and the y-1 up to y.

Your name is Nihil? Like REALLY?

…come on man…

Nihili wrote: »

Nihil wrote: »

Zormac wrote: »

Nihil wrote: »

Zormac wrote: »

Tankqull wrote: »

Zormac wrote: »

You guys keep saying this, Zenimax will nerf Impulse instead of making the other skills more powerful, as they should.

to be hones t i dont see the reason for either.
the OP stated himself that he could use a class build with slightly higher survivability but less then 10% dps lost.
other classes are not even in the situation to even reach his class build dps with impulse nor their own skills.
if impulse needs to be nerfed the dk skill would be too...

My point is that "nerf" is an outdated concept. That's not how you balance a game.

Actually games need to nerf and buff to keep it healthy. Just buffing everything else to be "on par" Is a lot more intensive for the game designers to do and a large waist of time too. In essance if they buffed every aspect of the game to bring it up to lvl with the skills that would be considered over powered then in essance they will be nerfing the skill by ommision... It just makes people feel better not seeing their skill altered down.

If they buffed "every aspect of the game", you would be right. However, it's not about buffing everything, but creating pairs/groups of skills that would make players choose a character over the other. If the Dragonknight is tankier than they had hoped and people prefer them for PvP, give the others a way to deal with them, insted of making the Dragonknight weaker. It doesn't make sense that everything that was invested in a character simply disappears because the Eight Divines (*cough* developers) decided that character was too strong. But it does make sense that other people became stronger and are able to fight you.

In an attempt to make the game fair for many, they've been making it unfair for many other players. "Play however you want... unless you're too powerful. Otherwise we'll have to remove your legs".

But how do you balance the other aspects of the game? In your example of a dragon knight being to tanky, You buff the other classes skill lines to counter the tankiness, but at the same time you have now made it rather they can A) counter other players defense so that you need to buff the other classes defense, or B ) increased damage too much that you need to relook at the PVE side of the game to make sure you haven't imbalanced the challanges there. Where instead you could of lowered the tankiness of a character instead of risking imbalancing different areas of the game.

Not all problems need to be fixed by nerfing it, this would be stupid. But to fix by buffing also leads to risking making another ability / combo to strong, and thus needing to buff other abilities again. I liked how I saw another player put it on these forums. You have the game difficulty set at y , 2 classes are performing at y-1 one class at y and another class at y+1. Instead of changing it so the classes can match the y+1. bring y+1 down to y and the y-1 up to y.

YOU joined after me, that means YOU are more unoriginal about your username. I did it first. Kay?

LOL, we can go with that XD. I took it from the Latin word meaning Nothing, as that was a nickname I use to have.

Nihil wrote: »

Zormac wrote: »

Nihil wrote: »

Zormac wrote: »

Tankqull wrote: »

Zormac wrote: »

You guys keep saying this, Zenimax will nerf Impulse instead of making the other skills more powerful, as they should.

to be hones t i dont see the reason for either.
the OP stated himself that he could use a class build with slightly higher survivability but less then 10% dps lost.
other classes are not even in the situation to even reach his class build dps with impulse nor their own skills.
if impulse needs to be nerfed the dk skill would be too...

My point is that "nerf" is an outdated concept. That's not how you balance a game.

Actually games need to nerf and buff to keep it healthy. Just buffing everything else to be "on par" Is a lot more intensive for the game designers to do and a large waist of time too. In essance if they buffed every aspect of the game to bring it up to lvl with the skills that would be considered over powered then in essance they will be nerfing the skill by ommision... It just makes people feel better not seeing their skill altered down.

If they buffed "every aspect of the game", you would be right. However, it's not about buffing everything, but creating pairs/groups of skills that would make players choose a character over the other. If the Dragonknight is tankier than they had hoped and people prefer them for PvP, give the others a way to deal with them, insted of making the Dragonknight weaker. It doesn't make sense that everything that was invested in a character simply disappears because the Eight Divines (*cough* developers) decided that character was too strong. But it does make sense that other people became stronger and are able to fight you.

In an attempt to make the game fair for many, they've been making it unfair for many other players. "Play however you want... unless you're too powerful. Otherwise we'll have to remove your legs".

But how do you balance the other aspects of the game? In your example of a dragon knight being to tanky, You buff the other classes skill lines to counter the tankiness, but at the same time you have now made it rather they can A) counter other players defense so that you need to buff the other classes defense, or B ) increased damage too much that you need to relook at the PVE side of the game to make sure you haven't imbalanced the challanges there. Where instead you could of lowered the tankiness of a character instead of risking imbalancing different areas of the game.

Not all problems need to be fixed by nerfing it, this would be stupid. But to fix by buffing also leads to risking making another ability / combo to strong, and thus needing to buff other abilities again. I liked how I saw another player put it on these forums. You have the game difficulty set at y , 2 classes are performing at y-1 one class at y and another class at y+1. Instead of changing it so the classes can match the y+1. bring y+1 down to y and the y-1 up to y.

But it's not the players' fault that the game is imbalanced, so why punish them with nerfs? Instead, work harder to make the rest of the game up to par.

I'd say they should do like other companies do in fighting games. A character that is considered overpowered can be defeated because we learn how to exploit their weakness using our own strength. In fighting games there's a lot of specialization, and that's their original idea in ESO - Dragonknights are more resilient, with all the armor and powerful self healing. Nightblades are stealthy and agile. Sorcerers are arcane nukers, and Templars are supporters. Dragonknights and Templars rely on damage mitigation, armor, healing, while Sorcerers and Nightblades rely on careful planning, positioning, agility and taking enemies out as quickly as possible. Even with the alternative to the standards, such as a "firemage" build for the Dragonknight, or a "bloodmage" build for the Nightblade, they still keep several traits from their original roles. The DK mage is tankier and more AoE oriented than a Sorcerer. A tank Sorcerer won't be able to regain health and stamina as well as a DK or Templar. It should funnel down to how you want to play - a resilient character, or an agile one, a crowd controller or quick to kill a target.

In fighting games, such as Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat or King of Fighters, you pick a specific character because you want to master those amazing skills, and you want to beat your friend who is a master at another character with another set of amazing skills. People choose different characters because there's a very attractive selection - do you want to play as the strong Zangief or the fast Chun-li? Why would you pick one over the other? Because their specializations are clear - I want a strong/agile/brawler/ranged character, so I'll choose this one or that one. After you do that, you need to learn to beat Chun-li playing as Zangief, not complain to Capcom that "Chun-li is too fast and should be nerfed".

I'm comparing to fighting games because PvP is essentially a fighting game, and it's the appropriate use of your skills that will give you the upper hand in a fight. However, in ESO, they are de-specializing the characters further and further. The Dragonknight today isn't as effective against crowds as it used to be when the game was first released, even though they are still pretty powerful. Nightblades aren't as stealthy. Vampires aren't as fast. Everything is being nerfed down to a standard. However, people have created characters with something in mind, like the OP with his agile vampire, and suddenly Zenimax castrated him. From one patch to the next, people have seen their characters growing weaker and weaker.

Instead of frustrating players by removing the things that they liked so much about the heroes they created, give other players more attractive options to overcome these obstacles, otherwise you'll be creating dumb players who won't learn how to solve problems. I can't tell how many times I died to bosses in many games until I learned how to beat them with what I had, and I guarantee that many of them would be considered OP in an MMO.

Zormac wrote: »

Nihil wrote: »

Zormac wrote: »

Nihil wrote: »

Zormac wrote: »

Tankqull wrote: »

Zormac wrote: »

You guys keep saying this, Zenimax will nerf Impulse instead of making the other skills more powerful, as they should.

to be hones t i dont see the reason for either.
the OP stated himself that he could use a class build with slightly higher survivability but less then 10% dps lost.
other classes are not even in the situation to even reach his class build dps with impulse nor their own skills.
if impulse needs to be nerfed the dk skill would be too...

My point is that "nerf" is an outdated concept. That's not how you balance a game.

Actually games need to nerf and buff to keep it healthy. Just buffing everything else to be "on par" Is a lot more intensive for the game designers to do and a large waist of time too. In essance if they buffed every aspect of the game to bring it up to lvl with the skills that would be considered over powered then in essance they will be nerfing the skill by ommision... It just makes people feel better not seeing their skill altered down.

If they buffed "every aspect of the game", you would be right. However, it's not about buffing everything, but creating pairs/groups of skills that would make players choose a character over the other. If the Dragonknight is tankier than they had hoped and people prefer them for PvP, give the others a way to deal with them, insted of making the Dragonknight weaker. It doesn't make sense that everything that was invested in a character simply disappears because the Eight Divines (*cough* developers) decided that character was too strong. But it does make sense that other people became stronger and are able to fight you.

In an attempt to make the game fair for many, they've been making it unfair for many other players. "Play however you want... unless you're too powerful. Otherwise we'll have to remove your legs".

But how do you balance the other aspects of the game? In your example of a dragon knight being to tanky, You buff the other classes skill lines to counter the tankiness, but at the same time you have now made it rather they can A) counter other players defense so that you need to buff the other classes defense, or B ) increased damage too much that you need to relook at the PVE side of the game to make sure you haven't imbalanced the challanges there. Where instead you could of lowered the tankiness of a character instead of risking imbalancing different areas of the game.

Not all problems need to be fixed by nerfing it, this would be stupid. But to fix by buffing also leads to risking making another ability / combo to strong, and thus needing to buff other abilities again. I liked how I saw another player put it on these forums. You have the game difficulty set at y , 2 classes are performing at y-1 one class at y and another class at y+1. Instead of changing it so the classes can match the y+1. bring y+1 down to y and the y-1 up to y.

But it's not the players' fault that the game is imbalanced, so why punish them with nerfs? Instead, work harder to make the rest of the game up to par.

I'd say they should do like other companies do in fighting games. A character that is considered overpowered can be defeated because we learn how to exploit their weakness using our own strength. In fighting games there's a lot of specialization, and that's their original idea in ESO - Dragonknights are more resilient, with all the armor and powerful self healing. Nightblades are stealthy and agile. Sorcerers are arcane nukers, and Templars are supporters. Dragonknights and Templars rely on damage mitigation, armor, healing, while Sorcerers and Nightblades rely on careful planning, positioning, agility and taking enemies out as quickly as possible. Even with the alternative to the standards, such as a "firemage" build for the Dragonknight, or a "bloodmage" build for the Nightblade, they still keep several traits from their original roles. The DK mage is tankier and more AoE oriented than a Sorcerer. A tank Sorcerer won't be able to regain health and stamina as well as a DK or Templar. It should funnel down to how you want to play - a resilient character, or an agile one, a crowd controller or quick to kill a target.

In fighting games, such as Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat or King of Fighters, you pick a specific character because you want to master those amazing skills, and you want to beat your friend who is a master at another character with another set of amazing skills. People choose different characters because there's a very attractive selection - do you want to play as the strong Zangief or the fast Chun-li? Why would you pick one over the other? Because their specializations are clear - I want a strong/agile/brawler/ranged character, so I'll choose this one or that one. After you do that, you need to learn to beat Chun-li playing as Zangief, not complain to Capcom that "Chun-li is too fast and should be nerfed".

I'm comparing to fighting games because PvP is essentially a fighting game, and it's the appropriate use of your skills that will give you the upper hand in a fight. However, in ESO, they are de-specializing the characters further and further. The Dragonknight today isn't as effective against crowds as it used to be when the game was first released, even though they are still pretty powerful. Nightblades aren't as stealthy. Vampires aren't as fast. Everything is being nerfed down to a standard. However, people have created characters with something in mind, like the OP with his agile vampire, and suddenly Zenimax castrated him. From one patch to the next, people have seen their characters growing weaker and weaker.

Instead of frustrating players by removing the things that they liked so much about the heroes they created, give other players more attractive options to overcome these obstacles, otherwise you'll be creating dumb players who won't learn how to solve problems. I can't tell how many times I died to bosses in many games until I learned how to beat them with what I had, and I guarantee that many of them would be considered OP in an MMO.

They have done some buffing with the nerfing as well tho. Developers can't always envision every avenue that players are going to try, thus exploits and over powered builds ( which are actually overpowered and players aren't creative enough to learn how to counter). I personally think Developers need to take the complaints that players have about builds with a grain of salt, because the majority of players don't think correctly on how to balance the aspect of the game and just want to make their life easier. But this doesn't mean that they should never nerf something, if it is to strong and literally is causing problems that could be detrimental to the game, then it needs to be nerfed. Vampires at launch was just to great with their ability to spam their ultimate. The Vampires complained it was due to Sorcs and DK's ability to lower ultimate, while most of the ultimate lost was gained from vampirism. No matter what type of buff they attempted their was no way that they would of been able to get everything up to par with vampires ultimate spam generation.

Tournaments for fighting games have prohibited certain characters due to them being overpowered. That is the difference tho of online games and counsel fighting games, devs can rework some of the flaws in the game and make it so players can all compete without making it ridiculously easy else where, and players themselves needing to prohibit builds in designed tournaments.

The OP actually had nothing on Vampire, I think you are thinking of a different thread, this one is about a build for DK aoe dps, he focuses on survivability skills and sustain trying to get his DoT's to match impulse spam.

You NEED to nerf at times in games, it is to hard to balance a game at ever growing power levels for every aspect of the game. It isn't punishing the players, it is trying to get it on equal footing. The players who might feel punished would still feel punished even if they did buff other classes to equal theirs ( seen complaints like this in the past, thus the nerfing by ommision.)

Ragefist wrote: »

I suppose ZOS is already working on the problem.

This is a more-than-safe-assumption. Aside from the big-business, corporate-game-design paranoia (much of which is justified I might add..), ZOS is running metrics and will be parsing the data as I type (ok, maybe not - time zones and all that...).

Much as folks love to wail and cry on forums, forums in and of themselves are simply pressure valves - they give folks a place to vent. No balancing is undertaken based on forum posts/activity. Metrics is king.

The best, niche, scenario is A.Poster exposes an imbalance that, through exposure, become so prolific that it becomes an immediate problem. As a result, ZOS focus their money on addressing - or seeming to address - the issue, in favour of another issue. The adjustments are the same but the time schedule is influenced.

At the end of the day, 'balance' is a process - you have to ask yourself:

''How much do I value my belief/understanding/trust/misc in ZOS's efforts in developing an entertaining game model for as many players as possible?"

If you answer is any monetary denomination greater than the subscription you are paying then.. you should probably end your subscription.

Edit: Adjustment/time schedule clarification.