Still Skeptical (1.6 AoE)

Firellight · January 2015

Removed hard caps on the number of targets that can be affected by area of effect abilities.
AoE abilities can now hit up to 60 targets; the first 6 will take 100% damage, the next 24 targets will take 50% damage, and the last 30 targets will take 25% damage.
Abilities that apply a secondary effect, such as Caltrops, will only snare the 6 targets who take full damage.

My issues with AoE are that we can't control who is taking full damage, and zerging is still a decent way to win battles.

What are your thoughts?

Nijjion · January 2015

Yeah definitely needs changing or tweaking maybe 75%/50% change.

Satiar · January 2015

Firellight wrote: »

Removed hard caps on the number of targets that can be affected by area of effect abilities.
AoE abilities can now hit up to 60 targets; the first 6 will take 100% damage, the next 24 targets will take 50% damage, and the last 30 targets will take 25% damage.
Abilities that apply a secondary effect, such as Caltrops, will only snare the 6 targets who take full damage.

My issues with AoE are that we can't control who is taking full damage, and zerging is still a decent way to win battles.

What are your thoughts?

Zerging is always going to be effective. Why shouldn't it be?

Firellight · January 2015

Satiar wrote: »

Zerging is always going to be effective. Why shouldn't it be?

Zerging is a viable option, but it's a very cheap tactic, and players should have the consequence that they could be wiped with a siege. The problem is that zergs are both easy to attack and defend with. Zerging shouldn't, imo, have both of these benefits.

Rylana · January 2015

Zerging will be the only viable playstyle after this goes live, in its current state.

So many oversights/issues with all of it, I dont even know where to begin.

Satiar · January 2015

Rylana wrote: »

Zerging will be the only viable playstyle after this goes live, in its current state.

So many oversights/issues with all of it, I dont even know where to begin.

Firellight wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Zerging is always going to be effective. Why shouldn't it be?

Zerging is a viable option, but it's a very cheap tactic, and players should have the consequence that they could be wiped with a siege. The problem is that zergs are both easy to attack and defend with. Zerging shouldn't, imo, have both of these benefits.

Players in large numbers will always be effective.

What will always be more effective is smaller groups of better organized players. My group, for example, has almost no Sorcs so we've had to zergbust without negates and such things for ages. It's doable, and will continue to be doable because there is nothing in the patch notes that wrecks what we currently do.

themdogesbite · January 2015

Why should a large group get as much ultimate of one guy as one guy can get of the zerg?`You loose nothing from zerging after this patch.

Columba · January 2015

Intentionally lagging out the server should be penalized

danno8 · January 2015

Best way to combat zerging is to split your own zerg into smaller groups and attack multiple objectives.

Coordinated havoc does combat zerging effectively, but it requires way more organization and communication, which is why you see less of it.

JTorus · January 2015

Everyone has this mindset that zerging is some unstoppable gauntlet, it isn't. When people group up, disrupt it, break them up, confuse them, siege, make them nervous, looks for weak links, don't give an opportunity to communicate, make them react rather than act.

It isn't like you don't see them rallying up, you know it's coming.

Mind-F them.

Cody · January 2015

zergs are a problem because they have the potential to cause huge lag. Granted, this is also because the servers well.... suck... but when the huge impulse blob shows up, get ready to have absolutely NO fun whatsoever.

MagnusRex · January 2015

you should just be able to hit everyone with the full damage. If they want to be clumped up, go ahead, but they should not take less damage because of it.

Columba · January 2015

JTorus wrote: »

Everyone has this mindset that zerging is some unstoppable gauntlet, it isn't. When people group up, disrupt it, break them up, confuse them, siege, make them nervous, looks for weak links, don't give an opportunity to communicate, make them react rather than act.

It isn't like you don't see them rallying up, you know it's coming.

Mind-F them.

Except that it lags out the fight.

Poxheart · January 2015

What I'm most skeptical about is how the game will handle the increase damage calculations. It already struggles with the 6 target limit, I don't see it getting any better when it has to calculate which target takes full, which takes 50%, and which takes 25%.

Cody · January 2015

Well I have enjoyed popping quick cloak, charging into the AOE spammers, and watching them kill themselves:D

Columba · January 2015

Poxheart wrote: »

What I'm most skeptical about is how the game will handle the increase damage calculations. It already struggles with the 6 target limit, I don't see it getting any better when it has to calculate which target takes full, which takes 50%, and which takes 25%.

this is the real design issue. It will be bad.

Poxheart · January 2015

Columba wrote: »

Poxheart wrote: »

What I'm most skeptical about is how the game will handle the increase damage calculations. It already struggles with the 6 target limit, I don't see it getting any better when it has to calculate which target takes full, which takes 50%, and which takes 25%.

this is the real design issue. It will be bad.

There just aren't enough people on the PTS to actually test it either. There was a Chalman fight a little while ago with no more than 8 people attacking & defending. Kinda hard to test the new AOE changes with only 16 people fighting.

Roechacca · January 2015

Keep in mind AOEs are Blockable now . Stamina drops are incredible fast . If you were a block caster 1.5 , expect to relearn everything . Damage scales are so high now it's very hard to see the full effects of this without some large groups going toe to toe during a siege . So far PTS has been a lot of dueling as expected . Once people reacquaint with the new system , larger fights will yield more info on this change .

Tripwyr · January 2015

Satiar wrote: »

Rylana wrote: »

Zerging will be the only viable playstyle after this goes live, in its current state.

So many oversights/issues with all of it, I dont even know where to begin.

Firellight wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Zerging is always going to be effective. Why shouldn't it be?

Zerging is a viable option, but it's a very cheap tactic, and players should have the consequence that they could be wiped with a siege. The problem is that zergs are both easy to attack and defend with. Zerging shouldn't, imo, have both of these benefits.

My group, for example, has almost no Sorcs so we've had to zergbust without negates and such things for ages.

Satiar wrote: »

Member of Havoc

Uh what?

Winnamine · January 2015

Tripwyr wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Rylana wrote: »

Zerging will be the only viable playstyle after this goes live, in its current state.

So many oversights/issues with all of it, I dont even know where to begin.

Firellight wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Zerging is always going to be effective. Why shouldn't it be?

Zerging is a viable option, but it's a very cheap tactic, and players should have the consequence that they could be wiped with a siege. The problem is that zergs are both easy to attack and defend with. Zerging shouldn't, imo, have both of these benefits.

My group, for example, has almost no Sorcs so we've had to zergbust without negates and such things for ages.

Satiar wrote: »

Member of Havoc

Uh what?

No, he's right Trip.
Havoc just doesn't seem to have the people they used to have

They used to be good fights too.

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO · January 2015

This change has nothing to do with the concept of zerging, it's about stacking on top of each other to avoid damage.

The natural purpose of AOEs is to deny an area through damage, with a cap, it loses all purposes and at the same time encourages a group to stack on top of each other for added defenses.

The individual calculations may seem more important, but it is just marginaly so.
The gain is that since groups can no longer stack without wiping, there is actually less spamming of aoes going on.
The overall amount of calculations is thus reduced.

Also, due to being based from the center of impact, there is a semi linear skill test going on.
On the attacker side, your aim impacts as much damage you do and to whom. A properly targeted aoe would have more interesting results than a badly aimed one.
On the defender side, evading damage is rewarded as you compete with your allies to be the furthest away from the point of impact. The 6 worse at that get 100% damage, the rest get 50%. Objectively, there will almost never be a point where and aoe will hit more than 30 players so the last plateau is pointless.

I personally feel that distance based damage mitigation would be more interesting. 100% damage and as you reach the edge of the area, it gradualy goes dowwn to 50%
But that would be harder to balance, as you'd need aoes to do more damage at teh center to remain competitive. The chose road is an easier yet still interesting one.

Perhaps an interesting tweak would be that the 24 next get 75% damage instead of 50%, and the last plateay up to 60 players get 50% damage.
50% damage reduction is still a lot and I feel some groups would still find ways to shrug it off.

Lhorion · January 2015

Theory: Not bad imo, but i don't have thought about it for a long time.
Practise: I am scared the server will crash. On a full camapgn at prime time you cannot play at the live server. How does Zenimax think they can deal with removing the cap? It will be a lag party!

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO · January 2015

Lhorion wrote: »

Theory: Not bad imo, but i don't have thought about it for a long time.
Practise: I am scared the server will crash. On a full camapgn at prime time you cannot play at the live server. How does Zenimax think they can deal with removing the cap? It will be a lag party!

A big reason why the servers currently are a lag party is because of the cap.
This change doesn't make it worse, it makes it better.

Lhorion · January 2015

Why does the cap causes lag?

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO · January 2015

Lhorion wrote: »

Why does the cap causes lag?

Because it impacts player behaviour.
With the cap, the best tactic is to get as many people as possible and all try to stack on top of each other. Since only 6 player out of the entire group can be hit, and that it is harder to focus fire someone within such a "blob", the only answer is to spam aoe at it.

However, the 6 targets are msotly random, but the smart healing mechanic always heal those that have been damaged, so those group gain a lot of damage mitigation (75% for 24 players) and can heal themselves fairly easily.

It results in standoff wars where two enemy blobs can stack in the same physical space, and the one with the most numbers will win but after a long while. All of this process means way too many calculation for the game and sometimes, it actually loses tracks and everyone in the zone get their damage not registering.

If you remove the aoe caps, those groups can one shot each other, and that's the end of it. So they'll have to spread out and adapt tactics to actually properly fight eachother. This means using more single target abilities and keeping aoes for when opportunities arise.

Lhorion · January 2015

Not 60 targets will get the big damage. Most of them will get very low damage. So they wont oneshot the other zerg. They will still spamm AoE-spells and I think effects on 60 targets will be harder for the performance than effects on 6.

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO · January 2015

Lhorion wrote: »

Not 60 targets will get the big damage. Most of them will get very low damage. So they wont oneshot the other zerg. They will still spamm AoE-spells and I think effects on 60 targets will be harder for the performance than effects on 6.

Healing hasn't been uncaped, so only 6 at a time can be healed.
So instead of having 6 getting damaged and 6 getting healed, you have everyone getting damaged and only 6 getting healed.

They will kill each other fast if they stack.

I'd rather have everything uncapped, it would work better gameplay wise, but this solution here will work too.

Scamandros · January 2015

discouraging stacking is great and all but it will be a bloody mess in keep assault/defence where the flag rooms tend to be rather tight spaces already. Prepare to be bombed and blown up faster then ever

Tankqull · January 2015

Scamandros wrote: »

discouraging stacking is great and all but it will be a bloody mess in keep assault/defence where the flag rooms tend to be rather tight spaces already. Prepare to be bombed and blown up faster then ever

its rather simple you are not supposed to get a defended keep.
so clean the keep from enemys before "claiming" it for your ally - problem solved...

Valnas · January 2015

Alacrity's 'new' zerg busting strat

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO · January 2015

Tankqull wrote: »

Scamandros wrote: »

discouraging stacking is great and all but it will be a bloody mess in keep assault/defence where the flag rooms tend to be rather tight spaces already. Prepare to be bombed and blown up faster then ever

its rather simple you are not supposed to get a defended keep.
so clean the keep from enemys before "claiming" it for your ally - problem solved...

This.
Win the battle first, then get the spoils.