Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Sensesfail13 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

Here is the state of a guild that USED TO HAVE GUILD TALKS with ZOS.

Sorry about that. my guild is currently 475 strong and has talks with the devs also. we have an inactive policy of 10 days and usaully about 50-75 memebrs on at any time. Our sister guild we started to take our overflow is about 250 strong with about 40-50 active at any time. so perhaps there is a problem with the recruting.

First off, Its a sad day when someone like you is having chats with ZoS for the "betterment" of the game seeing as I have read nothing but drivel from your posts.
Secondly, quality over quantity and quality is few and far between in this game anymore. We have a low population player base, I have yet to read a valid argument

Darnathian wrote: »

When 1.6 came we lost a LOT of players. I don't think as many will leave this time but a lot will if this hits live as is

If DPS builds get their way and this nerf goes through, and the only reason I have heard is because it's annoying and lacks skill, then a lot more will leave.

It is a different play style not to mention latency sucks in this game so you can't pick when to block if your a tank. That latency when you go to press block with a incoming frag for example can decide a fight. So this will make it extremely difficult to play

To see the game live right now in PVP and to decide this is the problem, not the sorc shield stacking meta, or insane DPS from fear using nb's, is irresponsible

This permablocking "problem" has been around since launch. It has not made players leave. The only complaints have been things said like lack of skill. Like Pressing two shields is hard.

Careful what you wish for. Pvp is only fun if you have others to fight. Dk and temars are being made to be impossible to use in pvp outside of group play. So more zergs and less small group play. Overall less players shortly after.

There is no adjustment to be made here. Will be even more DPS builds. Unfortunately for a dk its all dot based. So either stam build using non class skills or go home.

Congrats sorcs and nb's you win. The game is yours.

THANK YOU! and Thank you @Personofsecrets for being a voice of reason in this continued argumentative debacle all over the forums. It is truly amazing the stupidity that abounds upon these forums and any time something goes against the GM's opinions is immediately edited or the person is banned. Ive been sticking with this game since early BETA and as much as I will stick around and give the new update a chance with these changes I am not being very optimistic that it will eventually turn out for the best.

I love how you think, along with the others after your post quoted above, that because you and s9me other people do not like the change that it is the majority opinion on what is happen8ng. Scratch that, how you believe your opinion is better than mine. These are simply all of our opinions based on our experiences and no one is better than another. The things I state come straight from my experience in game along with feedback I have heard from friends of mine in game. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument. I too have been in this game since beta and have been subbed every day and will continue to do so. There have been changes in this game that I have agreed and disagreed with and this is one I agree with. This happens to be one you disagree with. It happens.

I think most of the people against the nerf are informed about the developers data that there are 50% for and 50% against.

While there are some people who are for the change that I think have decent points, many of them have been stooges (pvp players, not tanks, proud of their ability to 'adapt') giving (false) positives or just repeating the red herring that tanking is not really that fun and not really that interactive. The people who are for the nerf are even split on their opinions of what tanks should do and how the nerf will effect them. Some say tanks should be interacting more, some say tanks "should just tank," some say that tanks will no longer be able to "just hold block," while others insist that "just holding block" is still capable and justifies the nerf.

The fors aren't really cohesive in their thoughts, haven't been intellectually honest, and have never really refuted the ideas of the against. The strongest debate tactic the fors even have is that they get to say the change is happening regardless of what the against want because the developers are on the fors side.

And what are the pros to changing it back? Infinite stamina regen while holding block and mitigating crazy amounts of damage way our of proportion for what gets dealt out with zero downside? The fact is that there is enough information out there to show the pros and cons of BOTH sides. Just as the player base is split 50/50 so are the pros and cons of both. So, it comes down to a matter of opinion which is a 50/50 split. This leaves zos as the tie-breaker. They were ultimately of the opinion that it was better. If they had decided it was not good they still would have had hate from 50 percent of ppl.

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Sensesfail13 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

Here is the state of a guild that USED TO HAVE GUILD TALKS with ZOS.

Sorry about that. my guild is currently 475 strong and has talks with the devs also. we have an inactive policy of 10 days and usaully about 50-75 memebrs on at any time. Our sister guild we started to take our overflow is about 250 strong with about 40-50 active at any time. so perhaps there is a problem with the recruting.

First off, Its a sad day when someone like you is having chats with ZoS for the "betterment" of the game seeing as I have read nothing but drivel from your posts.
Secondly, quality over quantity and quality is few and far between in this game anymore. We have a low population player base, I have yet to read a valid argument

Darnathian wrote: »

When 1.6 came we lost a LOT of players. I don't think as many will leave this time but a lot will if this hits live as is

If DPS builds get their way and this nerf goes through, and the only reason I have heard is because it's annoying and lacks skill, then a lot more will leave.

It is a different play style not to mention latency sucks in this game so you can't pick when to block if your a tank. That latency when you go to press block with a incoming frag for example can decide a fight. So this will make it extremely difficult to play

To see the game live right now in PVP and to decide this is the problem, not the sorc shield stacking meta, or insane DPS from fear using nb's, is irresponsible

This permablocking "problem" has been around since launch. It has not made players leave. The only complaints have been things said like lack of skill. Like Pressing two shields is hard.

Careful what you wish for. Pvp is only fun if you have others to fight. Dk and temars are being made to be impossible to use in pvp outside of group play. So more zergs and less small group play. Overall less players shortly after.

There is no adjustment to be made here. Will be even more DPS builds. Unfortunately for a dk its all dot based. So either stam build using non class skills or go home.

Congrats sorcs and nb's you win. The game is yours.

THANK YOU! and Thank you @Personofsecrets for being a voice of reason in this continued argumentative debacle all over the forums. It is truly amazing the stupidity that abounds upon these forums and any time something goes against the GM's opinions is immediately edited or the person is banned. Ive been sticking with this game since early BETA and as much as I will stick around and give the new update a chance with these changes I am not being very optimistic that it will eventually turn out for the best.

I love how you think, along with the others after your post quoted above, that because you and s9me other people do not like the change that it is the majority opinion on what is happen8ng. Scratch that, how you believe your opinion is better than mine. These are simply all of our opinions based on our experiences and no one is better than another. The things I state come straight from my experience in game along with feedback I have heard from friends of mine in game. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument. I too have been in this game since beta and have been subbed every day and will continue to do so. There have been changes in this game that I have agreed and disagreed with and this is one I agree with. This happens to be one you disagree with. It happens.

I think most of the people against the nerf are informed about the developers data that there are 50% for and 50% against.

While there are some people who are for the change that I think have decent points, many of them have been stooges (pvp players, not tanks, proud of their ability to 'adapt') giving (false) positives or just repeating the red herring that tanking is not really that fun and not really that interactive. The people who are for the nerf are even split on their opinions of what tanks should do and how the nerf will effect them. Some say tanks should be interacting more, some say tanks "should just tank," some say that tanks will no longer be able to "just hold block," while others insist that "just holding block" is still capable and justifies the nerf.

The fors aren't really cohesive in their thoughts, haven't been intellectually honest, and have never really refuted the ideas of the against. The strongest debate tactic the fors even have is that they get to say the change is happening regardless of what the against want because the developers are on the fors side.

And what are the pros to changing it back? Infinite stamina regen while holding block and mitigating crazy amounts of damage way our of proportion for what gets dealt out with zero downside? The fact is that there is enough information out there to show the pros and cons of BOTH sides. Just as the player base is split 50/50 so are the pros and cons of both. So, it comes down to a matter of opinion which is a 50/50 split. This leaves zos as the tie-breaker. They were ultimately of the opinion that it was better. If they had decided it was not good they still would have had hate from 50 percent of ppl.

Don't think that all opinions are equal.

Look at your opinion that stamina regeneration is "infinite." Please check you character sheet. You will see a number there and not a sideways figure 8.

Since you seem to be for the change, I suppose it makes sense that you would set up such a silly straw man argument for yourself to easily burn down. Your "zero downside" comment is even more telling that your not super knowledgeable about what is going on with tanking and drives home the point that not all opinions are equal. That is because some opinions are bad, wrong, incorrect, flawed, etc, etc.

You do realize they are called perma-dodgers and perma-blockers cause they can do both forever right. Yes there is a number. A number that is higher than what it cost to block or dodge. Therefore, it refills quicker than it depletes making it infinite. I see this in pve and pvp. The zero downside refers to downside of using that mechanic as a tank. I obviously understand that they lose out on dps for instance when doing something like this but that is what being a tank is. A tank can pull of mitigating a ridiculous amount of damage without depleting that resource they pull from to do so. They never have to stop blocking and can cause sustained damage while doing so. A dps on the other hand has to dodge and use higher cost attacks eventually depleting the resource you pull from. It is all relative to the build. So again the zero downside refers to zero downside relative to your build.

Additionally, you continue to make open ended remarks complain about my uninformed opinion about the game. However,you have yet to give me an substantive feedback yourself. You talk about how my zero downside remark or infinite remark are simply wrong, but do not offer a rebutted of any sort. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Sensesfail13 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

Here is the state of a guild that USED TO HAVE GUILD TALKS with ZOS.

Sorry about that. my guild is currently 475 strong and has talks with the devs also. we have an inactive policy of 10 days and usaully about 50-75 memebrs on at any time. Our sister guild we started to take our overflow is about 250 strong with about 40-50 active at any time. so perhaps there is a problem with the recruting.

First off, Its a sad day when someone like you is having chats with ZoS for the "betterment" of the game seeing as I have read nothing but drivel from your posts.
Secondly, quality over quantity and quality is few and far between in this game anymore. We have a low population player base, I have yet to read a valid argument

Darnathian wrote: »

When 1.6 came we lost a LOT of players. I don't think as many will leave this time but a lot will if this hits live as is

If DPS builds get their way and this nerf goes through, and the only reason I have heard is because it's annoying and lacks skill, then a lot more will leave.

It is a different play style not to mention latency sucks in this game so you can't pick when to block if your a tank. That latency when you go to press block with a incoming frag for example can decide a fight. So this will make it extremely difficult to play

To see the game live right now in PVP and to decide this is the problem, not the sorc shield stacking meta, or insane DPS from fear using nb's, is irresponsible

This permablocking "problem" has been around since launch. It has not made players leave. The only complaints have been things said like lack of skill. Like Pressing two shields is hard.

Careful what you wish for. Pvp is only fun if you have others to fight. Dk and temars are being made to be impossible to use in pvp outside of group play. So more zergs and less small group play. Overall less players shortly after.

There is no adjustment to be made here. Will be even more DPS builds. Unfortunately for a dk its all dot based. So either stam build using non class skills or go home.

Congrats sorcs and nb's you win. The game is yours.

THANK YOU! and Thank you @Personofsecrets for being a voice of reason in this continued argumentative debacle all over the forums. It is truly amazing the stupidity that abounds upon these forums and any time something goes against the GM's opinions is immediately edited or the person is banned. Ive been sticking with this game since early BETA and as much as I will stick around and give the new update a chance with these changes I am not being very optimistic that it will eventually turn out for the best.

I love how you think, along with the others after your post quoted above, that because you and s9me other people do not like the change that it is the majority opinion on what is happen8ng. Scratch that, how you believe your opinion is better than mine. These are simply all of our opinions based on our experiences and no one is better than another. The things I state come straight from my experience in game along with feedback I have heard from friends of mine in game. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument. I too have been in this game since beta and have been subbed every day and will continue to do so. There have been changes in this game that I have agreed and disagreed with and this is one I agree with. This happens to be one you disagree with. It happens.

I think most of the people against the nerf are informed about the developers data that there are 50% for and 50% against.

While there are some people who are for the change that I think have decent points, many of them have been stooges (pvp players, not tanks, proud of their ability to 'adapt') giving (false) positives or just repeating the red herring that tanking is not really that fun and not really that interactive. The people who are for the nerf are even split on their opinions of what tanks should do and how the nerf will effect them. Some say tanks should be interacting more, some say tanks "should just tank," some say that tanks will no longer be able to "just hold block," while others insist that "just holding block" is still capable and justifies the nerf.

The fors aren't really cohesive in their thoughts, haven't been intellectually honest, and have never really refuted the ideas of the against. The strongest debate tactic the fors even have is that they get to say the change is happening regardless of what the against want because the developers are on the fors side.

And what are the pros to changing it back? Infinite stamina regen while holding block and mitigating crazy amounts of damage way our of proportion for what gets dealt out with zero downside? The fact is that there is enough information out there to show the pros and cons of BOTH sides. Just as the player base is split 50/50 so are the pros and cons of both. So, it comes down to a matter of opinion which is a 50/50 split. This leaves zos as the tie-breaker. They were ultimately of the opinion that it was better. If they had decided it was not good they still would have had hate from 50 percent of ppl.

Don't think that all opinions are equal.

Look at your opinion that stamina regeneration is "infinite." Please check you character sheet. You will see a number there and not a sideways figure 8.

Since you seem to be for the change, I suppose it makes sense that you would set up such a silly straw man argument for yourself to easily burn down. Your "zero downside" comment is even more telling that your not super knowledgeable about what is going on with tanking and drives home the point that not all opinions are equal. That is because some opinions are bad, wrong, incorrect, flawed, etc, etc.

You do realize they are called perma-dodgers and perma-blockers cause they can do both forever right. Yes there is a number. A number that is higher than what it cost to block or dodge. Therefore, it refills quicker than it depletes making it infinite. I see this in pve and pvp. The zero downside refers to downside of using that mechanic as a tank. I obviously understand that they lose out on dps for instance when doing something like this but that is what being a tank is. A tank can pull of mitigating a ridiculous amount of damage without depleting that resource they pull from to do so. They never have to stop blocking and can cause sustained damage while doing so. A dps on the other hand has to dodge and use higher cost attacks eventually depleting the resource you pull from. It is all relative to the build. So again the zero downside refers to zero downside relative to your build.

Additionally, you continue to make open ended remarks complain about my uninformed opinion about the game. However,you have yet to give me an substantive feedback yourself. You talk about how my zero downside remark or infinite remark are simply wrong, but do not offer a rebutted of any sort. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

That was the rebuttal.

You said that everyone has their opinions.

I say that the weight of opinions are different.

The proof to back up my claim was to show how two of your opinions of your post are misleading. That is under the assumption that we value changes being made to the game under opinions that are informed by facts and not over exaggerations, caricatures, red herrings, and straw man arguments.

What specific thing do you want me give 'substantive feedback' on? What rebuttal do you expect from me when you privilege the opinions of those who are for the nerf by stating untruths about the tank role?

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Sensesfail13 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

Here is the state of a guild that USED TO HAVE GUILD TALKS with ZOS.

Sorry about that. my guild is currently 475 strong and has talks with the devs also. we have an inactive policy of 10 days and usaully about 50-75 memebrs on at any time. Our sister guild we started to take our overflow is about 250 strong with about 40-50 active at any time. so perhaps there is a problem with the recruting.

First off, Its a sad day when someone like you is having chats with ZoS for the "betterment" of the game seeing as I have read nothing but drivel from your posts.
Secondly, quality over quantity and quality is few and far between in this game anymore. We have a low population player base, I have yet to read a valid argument

Darnathian wrote: »

When 1.6 came we lost a LOT of players. I don't think as many will leave this time but a lot will if this hits live as is

If DPS builds get their way and this nerf goes through, and the only reason I have heard is because it's annoying and lacks skill, then a lot more will leave.

It is a different play style not to mention latency sucks in this game so you can't pick when to block if your a tank. That latency when you go to press block with a incoming frag for example can decide a fight. So this will make it extremely difficult to play

To see the game live right now in PVP and to decide this is the problem, not the sorc shield stacking meta, or insane DPS from fear using nb's, is irresponsible

This permablocking "problem" has been around since launch. It has not made players leave. The only complaints have been things said like lack of skill. Like Pressing two shields is hard.

Careful what you wish for. Pvp is only fun if you have others to fight. Dk and temars are being made to be impossible to use in pvp outside of group play. So more zergs and less small group play. Overall less players shortly after.

There is no adjustment to be made here. Will be even more DPS builds. Unfortunately for a dk its all dot based. So either stam build using non class skills or go home.

Congrats sorcs and nb's you win. The game is yours.

THANK YOU! and Thank you @Personofsecrets for being a voice of reason in this continued argumentative debacle all over the forums. It is truly amazing the stupidity that abounds upon these forums and any time something goes against the GM's opinions is immediately edited or the person is banned. Ive been sticking with this game since early BETA and as much as I will stick around and give the new update a chance with these changes I am not being very optimistic that it will eventually turn out for the best.

I love how you think, along with the others after your post quoted above, that because you and s9me other people do not like the change that it is the majority opinion on what is happen8ng. Scratch that, how you believe your opinion is better than mine. These are simply all of our opinions based on our experiences and no one is better than another. The things I state come straight from my experience in game along with feedback I have heard from friends of mine in game. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument. I too have been in this game since beta and have been subbed every day and will continue to do so. There have been changes in this game that I have agreed and disagreed with and this is one I agree with. This happens to be one you disagree with. It happens.

I think most of the people against the nerf are informed about the developers data that there are 50% for and 50% against.

While there are some people who are for the change that I think have decent points, many of them have been stooges (pvp players, not tanks, proud of their ability to 'adapt') giving (false) positives or just repeating the red herring that tanking is not really that fun and not really that interactive. The people who are for the nerf are even split on their opinions of what tanks should do and how the nerf will effect them. Some say tanks should be interacting more, some say tanks "should just tank," some say that tanks will no longer be able to "just hold block," while others insist that "just holding block" is still capable and justifies the nerf.

The fors aren't really cohesive in their thoughts, haven't been intellectually honest, and have never really refuted the ideas of the against. The strongest debate tactic the fors even have is that they get to say the change is happening regardless of what the against want because the developers are on the fors side.

And what are the pros to changing it back? Infinite stamina regen while holding block and mitigating crazy amounts of damage way our of proportion for what gets dealt out with zero downside? The fact is that there is enough information out there to show the pros and cons of BOTH sides. Just as the player base is split 50/50 so are the pros and cons of both. So, it comes down to a matter of opinion which is a 50/50 split. This leaves zos as the tie-breaker. They were ultimately of the opinion that it was better. If they had decided it was not good they still would have had hate from 50 percent of ppl.

Don't think that all opinions are equal.

Look at your opinion that stamina regeneration is "infinite." Please check you character sheet. You will see a number there and not a sideways figure 8.

Since you seem to be for the change, I suppose it makes sense that you would set up such a silly straw man argument for yourself to easily burn down. Your "zero downside" comment is even more telling that your not super knowledgeable about what is going on with tanking and drives home the point that not all opinions are equal. That is because some opinions are bad, wrong, incorrect, flawed, etc, etc.

You do realize they are called perma-dodgers and perma-blockers cause they can do both forever right. Yes there is a number. A number that is higher than what it cost to block or dodge. Therefore, it refills quicker than it depletes making it infinite. I see this in pve and pvp. The zero downside refers to downside of using that mechanic as a tank. I obviously understand that they lose out on dps for instance when doing something like this but that is what being a tank is. A tank can pull of mitigating a ridiculous amount of damage without depleting that resource they pull from to do so. They never have to stop blocking and can cause sustained damage while doing so. A dps on the other hand has to dodge and use higher cost attacks eventually depleting the resource you pull from. It is all relative to the build. So again the zero downside refers to zero downside relative to your build.

Additionally, you continue to make open ended remarks complain about my uninformed opinion about the game. However,you have yet to give me an substantive feedback yourself. You talk about how my zero downside remark or infinite remark are simply wrong, but do not offer a rebutted of any sort. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

That was the rebuttal.

You said that everyone has their opinions.

I say that the weight of opinions are different.

The proof to back up my claim was to show how two of your opinions of your post are misleading. That is under the assumption that we value changes being made to the game under opinions that are informed by facts and not over exaggerations, caricatures, red herrings, and straw man arguments.

What specific thing do you want me give 'substantive feedback' on? What rebuttal do you expect from me when you privilege the opinions of those who are for the nerf by stating untruths about the tank role?

You say my response was misleading assumptions based on uninformed exaggerated facts that others make. I stated how my comment of infinite and zero down side contained informed factual information about the current state of the game. I ask, how is my information I'll informed and misleading or even exaggerated? I am also curious what exactly it is you don't like about the nerf? I have stated why I like it. In fact, I enjoy to here the different opions and experiences from the other side. If nothing more, it sheds light on the other side of the issue so at least I can better understand your side. I may still not agree, but that does not mean that I think your opinion is invalid. Heck, it may not even be that the points you make or state are wrong. It may simply be that although those points are valid concerns, that I think the good outweighs the bad for keeping it in place. Just as you have heard many of the same straw man arguments, so have i. So let's discuss in more detail rather than going back and forth on these perceived straw man arguments.

You called stamina regeneration infinite. That is a hand waving over exaggeration if I have ever heard one. You can back peddle on your statements and try to uncover a reason as to why they are informed, but your attempt to sound more reasonable comes off as a double downing on the statements I called you out for. Running out of stamina is a real issue for certain builds and is widely considered to be a resource requiring very close attentions, for tanks or otherwise, in PVP.

How do you expect me to continue to engage with you in discussion when you made those fatal errors and are sticking by them?

Let's discuss my 'infinite' stamina regeneration in AA. You can find the the link in my signature. Not only do I have to build, gear wise for that, but it also takes very specific skill use and champion point allotment. My stamina stamina pool also depends on how well I keep my resources balanced and how the fight proceeds. By the way, a downside of the build is that I don't have much magic to spare. And that is not a "downside relative to my build?" What does that even mean?

Now the point of that AA example is the following. Even if I concede to you that stamina for tanks is 'infinite' and with 'zero downsides,' which anyone can tell you it is not, you are yet to persuade anyone that tanks do not deserve their stamina regeneration, you have not shown that tanks aren't having fun with their stamina regeneration, and you aren't showing that tanking isn't interactive with that stamina regeneration. Just to be clear, the reason I bring up what is fun and interactive is because the ideas of fun and interactivity are the stated reason, by the developers, for designing of the nerf.

At the end of the day, on live server there are tanks and pvp blockers that have enough stamina regen to regen more stamina than they use blocking.

Despite the nonsensical arguments against that, there are and it's not exactly hard to do it.

I'd rather ZOS find a more elegant solution to the problem, but that doesn't change the fact that they found a solution to the problem with what they are doing.

P.S. on top of the perma blocking there are skills that can be used from block, melee attacks that do not take you out of block.

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Sensesfail13 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

Here is the state of a guild that USED TO HAVE GUILD TALKS with ZOS.

Sorry about that. my guild is currently 475 strong and has talks with the devs also. we have an inactive policy of 10 days and usaully about 50-75 memebrs on at any time. Our sister guild we started to take our overflow is about 250 strong with about 40-50 active at any time. so perhaps there is a problem with the recruting.

First off, Its a sad day when someone like you is having chats with ZoS for the "betterment" of the game seeing as I have read nothing but drivel from your posts.
Secondly, quality over quantity and quality is few and far between in this game anymore. We have a low population player base, I have yet to read a valid argument

Darnathian wrote: »

When 1.6 came we lost a LOT of players. I don't think as many will leave this time but a lot will if this hits live as is

If DPS builds get their way and this nerf goes through, and the only reason I have heard is because it's annoying and lacks skill, then a lot more will leave.

It is a different play style not to mention latency sucks in this game so you can't pick when to block if your a tank. That latency when you go to press block with a incoming frag for example can decide a fight. So this will make it extremely difficult to play

To see the game live right now in PVP and to decide this is the problem, not the sorc shield stacking meta, or insane DPS from fear using nb's, is irresponsible

This permablocking "problem" has been around since launch. It has not made players leave. The only complaints have been things said like lack of skill. Like Pressing two shields is hard.

Careful what you wish for. Pvp is only fun if you have others to fight. Dk and temars are being made to be impossible to use in pvp outside of group play. So more zergs and less small group play. Overall less players shortly after.

There is no adjustment to be made here. Will be even more DPS builds. Unfortunately for a dk its all dot based. So either stam build using non class skills or go home.

Congrats sorcs and nb's you win. The game is yours.

THANK YOU! and Thank you @Personofsecrets for being a voice of reason in this continued argumentative debacle all over the forums. It is truly amazing the stupidity that abounds upon these forums and any time something goes against the GM's opinions is immediately edited or the person is banned. Ive been sticking with this game since early BETA and as much as I will stick around and give the new update a chance with these changes I am not being very optimistic that it will eventually turn out for the best.

I love how you think, along with the others after your post quoted above, that because you and s9me other people do not like the change that it is the majority opinion on what is happen8ng. Scratch that, how you believe your opinion is better than mine. These are simply all of our opinions based on our experiences and no one is better than another. The things I state come straight from my experience in game along with feedback I have heard from friends of mine in game. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument. I too have been in this game since beta and have been subbed every day and will continue to do so. There have been changes in this game that I have agreed and disagreed with and this is one I agree with. This happens to be one you disagree with. It happens.

I think most of the people against the nerf are informed about the developers data that there are 50% for and 50% against.

While there are some people who are for the change that I think have decent points, many of them have been stooges (pvp players, not tanks, proud of their ability to 'adapt') giving (false) positives or just repeating the red herring that tanking is not really that fun and not really that interactive. The people who are for the nerf are even split on their opinions of what tanks should do and how the nerf will effect them. Some say tanks should be interacting more, some say tanks "should just tank," some say that tanks will no longer be able to "just hold block," while others insist that "just holding block" is still capable and justifies the nerf.

The fors aren't really cohesive in their thoughts, haven't been intellectually honest, and have never really refuted the ideas of the against. The strongest debate tactic the fors even have is that they get to say the change is happening regardless of what the against want because the developers are on the fors side.

And what are the pros to changing it back? Infinite stamina regen while holding block and mitigating crazy amounts of damage way our of proportion for what gets dealt out with zero downside? The fact is that there is enough information out there to show the pros and cons of BOTH sides. Just as the player base is split 50/50 so are the pros and cons of both. So, it comes down to a matter of opinion which is a 50/50 split. This leaves zos as the tie-breaker. They were ultimately of the opinion that it was better. If they had decided it was not good they still would have had hate from 50 percent of ppl.

Don't think that all opinions are equal.

Look at your opinion that stamina regeneration is "infinite." Please check you character sheet. You will see a number there and not a sideways figure 8.

Since you seem to be for the change, I suppose it makes sense that you would set up such a silly straw man argument for yourself to easily burn down. Your "zero downside" comment is even more telling that your not super knowledgeable about what is going on with tanking and drives home the point that not all opinions are equal. That is because some opinions are bad, wrong, incorrect, flawed, etc, etc.

You do realize they are called perma-dodgers and perma-blockers cause they can do both forever right. Yes there is a number. A number that is higher than what it cost to block or dodge. Therefore, it refills quicker than it depletes making it infinite. I see this in pve and pvp. The zero downside refers to downside of using that mechanic as a tank. I obviously understand that they lose out on dps for instance when doing something like this but that is what being a tank is. A tank can pull of mitigating a ridiculous amount of damage without depleting that resource they pull from to do so. They never have to stop blocking and can cause sustained damage while doing so. A dps on the other hand has to dodge and use higher cost attacks eventually depleting the resource you pull from. It is all relative to the build. So again the zero downside refers to zero downside relative to your build.

Additionally, you continue to make open ended remarks complain about my uninformed opinion about the game. However,you have yet to give me an substantive feedback yourself. You talk about how my zero downside remark or infinite remark are simply wrong, but do not offer a rebutted of any sort. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

That was the rebuttal.

You said that everyone has their opinions.

I say that the weight of opinions are different.

The proof to back up my claim was to show how two of your opinions of your post are misleading. That is under the assumption that we value changes being made to the game under opinions that are informed by facts and not over exaggerations, caricatures, red herrings, and straw man arguments.

What specific thing do you want me give 'substantive feedback' on? What rebuttal do you expect from me when you privilege the opinions of those who are for the nerf by stating untruths about the tank role?

You say my response was misleading assumptions based on uninformed exaggerated facts that others make. I stated how my comment of infinite and zero down side contained informed factual information about the current state of the game. I ask, how is my information I'll informed and misleading or even exaggerated? I am also curious what exactly it is you don't like about the nerf? I have stated why I like it. In fact, I enjoy to here the different opions and experiences from the other side. If nothing more, it sheds light on the other side of the issue so at least I can better understand your side. I may still not agree, but that does not mean that I think your opinion is invalid. Heck, it may not even be that the points you make or state are wrong. It may simply be that although those points are valid concerns, that I think the good outweighs the bad for keeping it in place. Just as you have heard many of the same straw man arguments, so have i. So let's discuss in more detail rather than going back and forth on these perceived straw man arguments.

You called stamina regeneration infinite. That is a hand waving over exaggeration if I have ever heard one. You can back peddle on your statements and try to uncover a reason as to why they are informed, but your attempt to sound more reasonable comes off as a double downing on the statements I called you out for. Running out of stamina is a real issue for certain builds and is widely considered to be a resource requiring very close attentions, for tanks or otherwise, in PVP.

How do you expect me to continue to engage with you in discussion when you made those fatal errors and are sticking by them?

Let's discuss my 'infinite' stamina regeneration in AA. You can find the the link in my signature. Not only do I have to build, gear wise for that, but it also takes very specific skill use and champion point allotment. My stamina stamina pool also depends on how well I keep my resources balanced and how the fight proceeds. By the way, a downside of the build is that I don't have much magic to spare. And that is not a "downside relative to my build?" What does that even mean?

Now the point of that AA example is the following. Even if I concede to you that stamina for tanks is 'infinite' and with 'zero downsides,' which anyone can tell you it is not, you are yet to persuade anyone that tanks do not deserve their stamina regeneration, you have not shown that tanks aren't having fun with their stamina regeneration, and you aren't showing that tanking isn't interactive with that stamina regeneration. Just to be clear, the reason I bring up what is fun and interactive is because the ideas of fun and interactivity are the stated reason, by the developers, for designing of the nerf.

First, I am not back peddling on any statement. I am merely describing what is meant by my infinite statement which is that based on the amount of regen versus cost of blocking. There was no back peddling. It was simply me explaining why my statement was correct and not at all an exaggeration. You call yourself an experienced player and that what i say is wrong. however, you fail to realize that it is the truth which is why this even happened in the first place. you say it is a problem for certain builds. well ya a build that is not properly specced out to tank. i have never been in a run in any trial or dungeon where a tank needs to lift up that block button even once. is there a build out there that might run out of stamina..sure..that is by far the minority in this game and not a properly specced tank.

additionally, you have made my argument for me in your build you suggested i look at. You state, " I estimate that I lose 1000 stamina every 2 seconds from blocking. So that means my stamina regeneration has to be at least 1000 plus the costs of pierce armor..." i mean lol. you are yelling at me about points i have made and how i exagerrate and all that good stuff. This is exactly my infinite argument! you state that you lose 1,000 stamina and that you stamina regen has to be more than this and the cost of the ability you use. That my friend is called infinite stamina while blocking and have come from the words you have written. not to mention this is a basic, cookie cutter build you use. this is the build that many people run. again, a propely specced tank (which woukd be the majority of tanks) has no problems. in fact in your build, each screenshot shows you blocking, or block casting, and yet still have over 80% stam. you have literally made the argument for me!

as for the interactive argument...yes having to do more in a fight (which is the prduct of this chnage), by definition is more interactive. you can not objectively measure fun since it is a subjective feeling. fun is a matter of opinion, so proving or disproving that depends on the person.

as to the downside relative to the build. that means that if i am a stamina dps, for instance, my downside is lack of magika and damage mitigation. likewise, if i am a tank focused on stamina, then my downside is going to be magika. every build has an inherent downside to it. so, my point on zero-downside is tied into what the build does. For instance, a build that is specced out in stamina recovery and blocking has zero-downside to perma-blocking cause it is infinite. That is what i mean by zero-downside realtive to the build as opposed to the inherent down-sides of the build. a tank has no reason not to be speccing into those two categories. in fact, that is their role. so, when a tank is blocking and holding aggro, they have done their job and fullfilled their role. however, they do so without running out of stamina by simply holding down one button and getting agrro. what is the downside? there is none. your out regening your cost and therfore have no downside in your role.

now, you constantly keep saying the same things to me. you have yet to actually dissect anything i say. you just pass them over and say that i am making blanket statements without giving any information while responding with statements that just say that i am making blanket statements. you have yet to make any statments yourself outside of saying what i am saying is basically wrong and generalized. you have yet to give me any informed or relative information on this matter. in fact, you start your last response by telling me my information is exaggerated after i have shown why they are not. you provide no information to rebut what i said. In fact, you gave me information that furthered my argument. you go on to say that i provide no reason for tanks not to have their stamina regen. i did state why. There is no downside to them holding block while throwing in an block-casting taunt. they take all damage while not losing anything. this is the reason why i like this change. you then finish by arguing a point i have not even brought up since we have been talking. (the interactivity). in fact, you are the one that keeps bringing this argument up. as mentioned above, the inherent nature of this nerf does increase interactivity. However, this is merely a secondary argument to the nerf. this is not the core reason for it, but merely a reason that supplements the reason for the change. you have continuously ignored my reasoned arguments w/o providing any sound arguments of your own. you merely attack my reasons by calling them blanket statements, try to attack by credibility by trying to say i dont know what i am talking about, and then you finish trying to counter my argument with a secondary argument that was not even core to our "debate." You have continuously provided nothing new to this discussion while supplementing an argument i made with your build. I have tried to have a meaningful conversation with you, but to no avail. In fact, i have encouraged you to provide some information and clarification on your side, yet have received none.

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Sensesfail13 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

Here is the state of a guild that USED TO HAVE GUILD TALKS with ZOS.

Sorry about that. my guild is currently 475 strong and has talks with the devs also. we have an inactive policy of 10 days and usaully about 50-75 memebrs on at any time. Our sister guild we started to take our overflow is about 250 strong with about 40-50 active at any time. so perhaps there is a problem with the recruting.

First off, Its a sad day when someone like you is having chats with ZoS for the "betterment" of the game seeing as I have read nothing but drivel from your posts.
Secondly, quality over quantity and quality is few and far between in this game anymore. We have a low population player base, I have yet to read a valid argument

Darnathian wrote: »

When 1.6 came we lost a LOT of players. I don't think as many will leave this time but a lot will if this hits live as is

If DPS builds get their way and this nerf goes through, and the only reason I have heard is because it's annoying and lacks skill, then a lot more will leave.

It is a different play style not to mention latency sucks in this game so you can't pick when to block if your a tank. That latency when you go to press block with a incoming frag for example can decide a fight. So this will make it extremely difficult to play

To see the game live right now in PVP and to decide this is the problem, not the sorc shield stacking meta, or insane DPS from fear using nb's, is irresponsible

This permablocking "problem" has been around since launch. It has not made players leave. The only complaints have been things said like lack of skill. Like Pressing two shields is hard.

Careful what you wish for. Pvp is only fun if you have others to fight. Dk and temars are being made to be impossible to use in pvp outside of group play. So more zergs and less small group play. Overall less players shortly after.

There is no adjustment to be made here. Will be even more DPS builds. Unfortunately for a dk its all dot based. So either stam build using non class skills or go home.

Congrats sorcs and nb's you win. The game is yours.

THANK YOU! and Thank you @Personofsecrets for being a voice of reason in this continued argumentative debacle all over the forums. It is truly amazing the stupidity that abounds upon these forums and any time something goes against the GM's opinions is immediately edited or the person is banned. Ive been sticking with this game since early BETA and as much as I will stick around and give the new update a chance with these changes I am not being very optimistic that it will eventually turn out for the best.

I love how you think, along with the others after your post quoted above, that because you and s9me other people do not like the change that it is the majority opinion on what is happen8ng. Scratch that, how you believe your opinion is better than mine. These are simply all of our opinions based on our experiences and no one is better than another. The things I state come straight from my experience in game along with feedback I have heard from friends of mine in game. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument. I too have been in this game since beta and have been subbed every day and will continue to do so. There have been changes in this game that I have agreed and disagreed with and this is one I agree with. This happens to be one you disagree with. It happens.

I think most of the people against the nerf are informed about the developers data that there are 50% for and 50% against.

While there are some people who are for the change that I think have decent points, many of them have been stooges (pvp players, not tanks, proud of their ability to 'adapt') giving (false) positives or just repeating the red herring that tanking is not really that fun and not really that interactive. The people who are for the nerf are even split on their opinions of what tanks should do and how the nerf will effect them. Some say tanks should be interacting more, some say tanks "should just tank," some say that tanks will no longer be able to "just hold block," while others insist that "just holding block" is still capable and justifies the nerf.

The fors aren't really cohesive in their thoughts, haven't been intellectually honest, and have never really refuted the ideas of the against. The strongest debate tactic the fors even have is that they get to say the change is happening regardless of what the against want because the developers are on the fors side.

And what are the pros to changing it back? Infinite stamina regen while holding block and mitigating crazy amounts of damage way our of proportion for what gets dealt out with zero downside? The fact is that there is enough information out there to show the pros and cons of BOTH sides. Just as the player base is split 50/50 so are the pros and cons of both. So, it comes down to a matter of opinion which is a 50/50 split. This leaves zos as the tie-breaker. They were ultimately of the opinion that it was better. If they had decided it was not good they still would have had hate from 50 percent of ppl.

Don't think that all opinions are equal.

Look at your opinion that stamina regeneration is "infinite." Please check you character sheet. You will see a number there and not a sideways figure 8.

Since you seem to be for the change, I suppose it makes sense that you would set up such a silly straw man argument for yourself to easily burn down. Your "zero downside" comment is even more telling that your not super knowledgeable about what is going on with tanking and drives home the point that not all opinions are equal. That is because some opinions are bad, wrong, incorrect, flawed, etc, etc.

You do realize they are called perma-dodgers and perma-blockers cause they can do both forever right. Yes there is a number. A number that is higher than what it cost to block or dodge. Therefore, it refills quicker than it depletes making it infinite. I see this in pve and pvp. The zero downside refers to downside of using that mechanic as a tank. I obviously understand that they lose out on dps for instance when doing something like this but that is what being a tank is. A tank can pull of mitigating a ridiculous amount of damage without depleting that resource they pull from to do so. They never have to stop blocking and can cause sustained damage while doing so. A dps on the other hand has to dodge and use higher cost attacks eventually depleting the resource you pull from. It is all relative to the build. So again the zero downside refers to zero downside relative to your build.

Additionally, you continue to make open ended remarks complain about my uninformed opinion about the game. However,you have yet to give me an substantive feedback yourself. You talk about how my zero downside remark or infinite remark are simply wrong, but do not offer a rebutted of any sort. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

That was the rebuttal.

You said that everyone has their opinions.

I say that the weight of opinions are different.

The proof to back up my claim was to show how two of your opinions of your post are misleading. That is under the assumption that we value changes being made to the game under opinions that are informed by facts and not over exaggerations, caricatures, red herrings, and straw man arguments.

What specific thing do you want me give 'substantive feedback' on? What rebuttal do you expect from me when you privilege the opinions of those who are for the nerf by stating untruths about the tank role?

You say my response was misleading assumptions based on uninformed exaggerated facts that others make. I stated how my comment of infinite and zero down side contained informed factual information about the current state of the game. I ask, how is my information I'll informed and misleading or even exaggerated? I am also curious what exactly it is you don't like about the nerf? I have stated why I like it. In fact, I enjoy to here the different opions and experiences from the other side. If nothing more, it sheds light on the other side of the issue so at least I can better understand your side. I may still not agree, but that does not mean that I think your opinion is invalid. Heck, it may not even be that the points you make or state are wrong. It may simply be that although those points are valid concerns, that I think the good outweighs the bad for keeping it in place. Just as you have heard many of the same straw man arguments, so have i. So let's discuss in more detail rather than going back and forth on these perceived straw man arguments.

You called stamina regeneration infinite. That is a hand waving over exaggeration if I have ever heard one. You can back peddle on your statements and try to uncover a reason as to why they are informed, but your attempt to sound more reasonable comes off as a double downing on the statements I called you out for. Running out of stamina is a real issue for certain builds and is widely considered to be a resource requiring very close attentions, for tanks or otherwise, in PVP.

How do you expect me to continue to engage with you in discussion when you made those fatal errors and are sticking by them?

Let's discuss my 'infinite' stamina regeneration in AA. You can find the the link in my signature. Not only do I have to build, gear wise for that, but it also takes very specific skill use and champion point allotment. My stamina stamina pool also depends on how well I keep my resources balanced and how the fight proceeds. By the way, a downside of the build is that I don't have much magic to spare. And that is not a "downside relative to my build?" What does that even mean?

Now the point of that AA example is the following. Even if I concede to you that stamina for tanks is 'infinite' and with 'zero downsides,' which anyone can tell you it is not, you are yet to persuade anyone that tanks do not deserve their stamina regeneration, you have not shown that tanks aren't having fun with their stamina regeneration, and you aren't showing that tanking isn't interactive with that stamina regeneration. Just to be clear, the reason I bring up what is fun and interactive is because the ideas of fun and interactivity are the stated reason, by the developers, for designing of the nerf.

First, I am not back peddling on any statement. I am merely describing what is meant by my infinite statement which is that based on the amount of regen versus cost of blocking. There was no back peddling. It was simply me explaining why my statement was correct and not at all an exaggeration. You call yourself an experienced player and that what i say is wrong. however, you fail to realize that it is the truth which is why this even happened in the first place. you say it is a problem for certain builds. well ya a build that is not properly specced out to tank. i have never been in a run in any trial or dungeon where a tank needs to lift up that block button even once. is there a build out there that might run out of stamina..sure..that is by far the minority in this game and not a properly specced tank.

additionally, you have made my argument for me in your build you suggested i look at. You state, " I estimate that I lose 1000 stamina every 2 seconds from blocking. So that means my stamina regeneration has to be at least 1000 plus the costs of pierce armor..." i mean lol. you are yelling at me about points i have made and how i exagerrate and all that good stuff. This is exactly my infinite argument! you state that you lose 1,000 stamina and that you stamina regen has to be more than this and the cost of the ability you use. That my friend is called infinite stamina while blocking and have come from the words you have written. not to mention this is a basic, cookie cutter build you use. this is the build that many people run. again, a propely specced tank (which woukd be the majority of tanks) has no problems. in fact in your build, each screenshot shows you blocking, or block casting, and yet still have over 80% stam. you have literally made the argument for me!

as for the interactive argument...yes having to do more in a fight (which is the prduct of this chnage), by definition is more interactive. you can not objectively measure fun since it is a subjective feeling. fun is a matter of opinion, so proving or disproving that depends on the person.

as to the downside relative to the build. that means that if i am a stamina dps, for instance, my downside is lack of magika and damage mitigation. likewise, if i am a tank focused on stamina, then my downside is going to be magika. every build has an inherent downside to it. so, my point on zero-downside is tied into what the build does. For instance, a build that is specced out in stamina recovery and blocking has zero-downside to perma-blocking cause it is infinite. That is what i mean by zero-downside realtive to the build as opposed to the inherent down-sides of the build. a tank has no reason not to be speccing into those two categories. in fact, that is their role. so, when a tank is blocking and holding aggro, they have done their job and fullfilled their role. however, they do so without running out of stamina by simply holding down one button and getting agrro. what is the downside? there is none. your out regening your cost and therfore have no downside in your role.

now, you constantly keep saying the same things to me. you have yet to actually dissect anything i say. you just pass them over and say that i am making blanket statements without giving any information while responding with statements that just say that i am making blanket statements. you have yet to make any statments yourself outside of saying what i am saying is basically wrong and generalized. you have yet to give me any informed or relative information on this matter. in fact, you start your last response by telling me my information is exaggerated after i have shown why they are not. you provide no information to rebut what i said. In fact, you gave me information that furthered my argument. you go on to say that i provide no reason for tanks not to have their stamina regen. i did state why. There is no downside to them holding block while throwing in an block-casting taunt. they take all damage while not losing anything. this is the reason why i like this change. you then finish by arguing a point i have not even brought up since we have been talking. (the interactivity). in fact, you are the one that keeps bringing this argument up. as mentioned above, the inherent nature of this nerf does increase interactivity. However, this is merely a secondary argument to the nerf. this is not the core reason for it, but merely a reason that supplements the reason for the change. you have continuously ignored my reasoned arguments w/o providing any sound arguments of your own. you merely attack my reasons by calling them blanket statements, try to attack by credibility by trying to say i dont know what i am talking about, and then you finish trying to counter my argument with a secondary argument that was not even core to our "debate." You have continuously provided nothing new to this discussion while supplementing an argument i made with your build. I have tried to have a meaningful conversation with you, but to no avail. In fact, i have encouraged you to provide some information and clarification on your side, yet have received none.

Again Bowmanz, you are just sticking to your silly comments about "infinite stamina" and "zero downsides." If you can't get past making those mistakes, then we can't have a real conversation about tanking.

You are merely generalizing the points I made without looking at the underlying understanding of what I said. You also, yet again, continue to provide these generalized notions of what I am saying and undermine my points by tossing them aside into those genralizedwords that I used which w ere discussed on my meaning. You also, yet again, continue to provide no information which rebut what I am trying to say. You simple hide behind yhe curtain of tossing me into a group of people that don't know what I am talking about without providing any justification for doing so. In fact, I provided many reasons behind my words which shed a light on the fact that I do understand what I am talking about. After about 17 months in the game and over 2,000 hours logged I would say I have an understanding of the mechanics and the nuances of this game.

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Sensesfail13 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

Here is the state of a guild that USED TO HAVE GUILD TALKS with ZOS.

Sorry about that. my guild is currently 475 strong and has talks with the devs also. we have an inactive policy of 10 days and usaully about 50-75 memebrs on at any time. Our sister guild we started to take our overflow is about 250 strong with about 40-50 active at any time. so perhaps there is a problem with the recruting.

First off, Its a sad day when someone like you is having chats with ZoS for the "betterment" of the game seeing as I have read nothing but drivel from your posts.
Secondly, quality over quantity and quality is few and far between in this game anymore. We have a low population player base, I have yet to read a valid argument

Darnathian wrote: »

When 1.6 came we lost a LOT of players. I don't think as many will leave this time but a lot will if this hits live as is

If DPS builds get their way and this nerf goes through, and the only reason I have heard is because it's annoying and lacks skill, then a lot more will leave.

It is a different play style not to mention latency sucks in this game so you can't pick when to block if your a tank. That latency when you go to press block with a incoming frag for example can decide a fight. So this will make it extremely difficult to play

To see the game live right now in PVP and to decide this is the problem, not the sorc shield stacking meta, or insane DPS from fear using nb's, is irresponsible

This permablocking "problem" has been around since launch. It has not made players leave. The only complaints have been things said like lack of skill. Like Pressing two shields is hard.

Careful what you wish for. Pvp is only fun if you have others to fight. Dk and temars are being made to be impossible to use in pvp outside of group play. So more zergs and less small group play. Overall less players shortly after.

There is no adjustment to be made here. Will be even more DPS builds. Unfortunately for a dk its all dot based. So either stam build using non class skills or go home.

Congrats sorcs and nb's you win. The game is yours.

THANK YOU! and Thank you @Personofsecrets for being a voice of reason in this continued argumentative debacle all over the forums. It is truly amazing the stupidity that abounds upon these forums and any time something goes against the GM's opinions is immediately edited or the person is banned. Ive been sticking with this game since early BETA and as much as I will stick around and give the new update a chance with these changes I am not being very optimistic that it will eventually turn out for the best.

I love how you think, along with the others after your post quoted above, that because you and s9me other people do not like the change that it is the majority opinion on what is happen8ng. Scratch that, how you believe your opinion is better than mine. These are simply all of our opinions based on our experiences and no one is better than another. The things I state come straight from my experience in game along with feedback I have heard from friends of mine in game. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument. I too have been in this game since beta and have been subbed every day and will continue to do so. There have been changes in this game that I have agreed and disagreed with and this is one I agree with. This happens to be one you disagree with. It happens.

I think most of the people against the nerf are informed about the developers data that there are 50% for and 50% against.

While there are some people who are for the change that I think have decent points, many of them have been stooges (pvp players, not tanks, proud of their ability to 'adapt') giving (false) positives or just repeating the red herring that tanking is not really that fun and not really that interactive. The people who are for the nerf are even split on their opinions of what tanks should do and how the nerf will effect them. Some say tanks should be interacting more, some say tanks "should just tank," some say that tanks will no longer be able to "just hold block," while others insist that "just holding block" is still capable and justifies the nerf.

The fors aren't really cohesive in their thoughts, haven't been intellectually honest, and have never really refuted the ideas of the against. The strongest debate tactic the fors even have is that they get to say the change is happening regardless of what the against want because the developers are on the fors side.

And what are the pros to changing it back? Infinite stamina regen while holding block and mitigating crazy amounts of damage way our of proportion for what gets dealt out with zero downside? The fact is that there is enough information out there to show the pros and cons of BOTH sides. Just as the player base is split 50/50 so are the pros and cons of both. So, it comes down to a matter of opinion which is a 50/50 split. This leaves zos as the tie-breaker. They were ultimately of the opinion that it was better. If they had decided it was not good they still would have had hate from 50 percent of ppl.

Don't think that all opinions are equal.

Look at your opinion that stamina regeneration is "infinite." Please check you character sheet. You will see a number there and not a sideways figure 8.

Since you seem to be for the change, I suppose it makes sense that you would set up such a silly straw man argument for yourself to easily burn down. Your "zero downside" comment is even more telling that your not super knowledgeable about what is going on with tanking and drives home the point that not all opinions are equal. That is because some opinions are bad, wrong, incorrect, flawed, etc, etc.

You do realize they are called perma-dodgers and perma-blockers cause they can do both forever right. Yes there is a number. A number that is higher than what it cost to block or dodge. Therefore, it refills quicker than it depletes making it infinite. I see this in pve and pvp. The zero downside refers to downside of using that mechanic as a tank. I obviously understand that they lose out on dps for instance when doing something like this but that is what being a tank is. A tank can pull of mitigating a ridiculous amount of damage without depleting that resource they pull from to do so. They never have to stop blocking and can cause sustained damage while doing so. A dps on the other hand has to dodge and use higher cost attacks eventually depleting the resource you pull from. It is all relative to the build. So again the zero downside refers to zero downside relative to your build.

Additionally, you continue to make open ended remarks complain about my uninformed opinion about the game. However,you have yet to give me an substantive feedback yourself. You talk about how my zero downside remark or infinite remark are simply wrong, but do not offer a rebutted of any sort. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

That was the rebuttal.

You said that everyone has their opinions.

I say that the weight of opinions are different.

The proof to back up my claim was to show how two of your opinions of your post are misleading. That is under the assumption that we value changes being made to the game under opinions that are informed by facts and not over exaggerations, caricatures, red herrings, and straw man arguments.

What specific thing do you want me give 'substantive feedback' on? What rebuttal do you expect from me when you privilege the opinions of those who are for the nerf by stating untruths about the tank role?

You say my response was misleading assumptions based on uninformed exaggerated facts that others make. I stated how my comment of infinite and zero down side contained informed factual information about the current state of the game. I ask, how is my information I'll informed and misleading or even exaggerated? I am also curious what exactly it is you don't like about the nerf? I have stated why I like it. In fact, I enjoy to here the different opions and experiences from the other side. If nothing more, it sheds light on the other side of the issue so at least I can better understand your side. I may still not agree, but that does not mean that I think your opinion is invalid. Heck, it may not even be that the points you make or state are wrong. It may simply be that although those points are valid concerns, that I think the good outweighs the bad for keeping it in place. Just as you have heard many of the same straw man arguments, so have i. So let's discuss in more detail rather than going back and forth on these perceived straw man arguments.

You called stamina regeneration infinite. That is a hand waving over exaggeration if I have ever heard one. You can back peddle on your statements and try to uncover a reason as to why they are informed, but your attempt to sound more reasonable comes off as a double downing on the statements I called you out for. Running out of stamina is a real issue for certain builds and is widely considered to be a resource requiring very close attentions, for tanks or otherwise, in PVP.

How do you expect me to continue to engage with you in discussion when you made those fatal errors and are sticking by them?

Let's discuss my 'infinite' stamina regeneration in AA. You can find the the link in my signature. Not only do I have to build, gear wise for that, but it also takes very specific skill use and champion point allotment. My stamina stamina pool also depends on how well I keep my resources balanced and how the fight proceeds. By the way, a downside of the build is that I don't have much magic to spare. And that is not a "downside relative to my build?" What does that even mean?

Now the point of that AA example is the following. Even if I concede to you that stamina for tanks is 'infinite' and with 'zero downsides,' which anyone can tell you it is not, you are yet to persuade anyone that tanks do not deserve their stamina regeneration, you have not shown that tanks aren't having fun with their stamina regeneration, and you aren't showing that tanking isn't interactive with that stamina regeneration. Just to be clear, the reason I bring up what is fun and interactive is because the ideas of fun and interactivity are the stated reason, by the developers, for designing of the nerf.

First, I am not back peddling on any statement. I am merely describing what is meant by my infinite statement which is that based on the amount of regen versus cost of blocking. There was no back peddling. It was simply me explaining why my statement was correct and not at all an exaggeration. You call yourself an experienced player and that what i say is wrong. however, you fail to realize that it is the truth which is why this even happened in the first place. you say it is a problem for certain builds. well ya a build that is not properly specced out to tank. i have never been in a run in any trial or dungeon where a tank needs to lift up that block button even once. is there a build out there that might run out of stamina..sure..that is by far the minority in this game and not a properly specced tank.

additionally, you have made my argument for me in your build you suggested i look at. You state, " I estimate that I lose 1000 stamina every 2 seconds from blocking. So that means my stamina regeneration has to be at least 1000 plus the costs of pierce armor..." i mean lol. you are yelling at me about points i have made and how i exagerrate and all that good stuff. This is exactly my infinite argument! you state that you lose 1,000 stamina and that you stamina regen has to be more than this and the cost of the ability you use. That my friend is called infinite stamina while blocking and have come from the words you have written. not to mention this is a basic, cookie cutter build you use. this is the build that many people run. again, a propely specced tank (which woukd be the majority of tanks) has no problems. in fact in your build, each screenshot shows you blocking, or block casting, and yet still have over 80% stam. you have literally made the argument for me!

as for the interactive argument...yes having to do more in a fight (which is the prduct of this chnage), by definition is more interactive. you can not objectively measure fun since it is a subjective feeling. fun is a matter of opinion, so proving or disproving that depends on the person.

as to the downside relative to the build. that means that if i am a stamina dps, for instance, my downside is lack of magika and damage mitigation. likewise, if i am a tank focused on stamina, then my downside is going to be magika. every build has an inherent downside to it. so, my point on zero-downside is tied into what the build does. For instance, a build that is specced out in stamina recovery and blocking has zero-downside to perma-blocking cause it is infinite. That is what i mean by zero-downside realtive to the build as opposed to the inherent down-sides of the build. a tank has no reason not to be speccing into those two categories. in fact, that is their role. so, when a tank is blocking and holding aggro, they have done their job and fullfilled their role. however, they do so without running out of stamina by simply holding down one button and getting agrro. what is the downside? there is none. your out regening your cost and therfore have no downside in your role.

now, you constantly keep saying the same things to me. you have yet to actually dissect anything i say. you just pass them over and say that i am making blanket statements without giving any information while responding with statements that just say that i am making blanket statements. you have yet to make any statments yourself outside of saying what i am saying is basically wrong and generalized. you have yet to give me any informed or relative information on this matter. in fact, you start your last response by telling me my information is exaggerated after i have shown why they are not. you provide no information to rebut what i said. In fact, you gave me information that furthered my argument. you go on to say that i provide no reason for tanks not to have their stamina regen. i did state why. There is no downside to them holding block while throwing in an block-casting taunt. they take all damage while not losing anything. this is the reason why i like this change. you then finish by arguing a point i have not even brought up since we have been talking. (the interactivity). in fact, you are the one that keeps bringing this argument up. as mentioned above, the inherent nature of this nerf does increase interactivity. However, this is merely a secondary argument to the nerf. this is not the core reason for it, but merely a reason that supplements the reason for the change. you have continuously ignored my reasoned arguments w/o providing any sound arguments of your own. you merely attack my reasons by calling them blanket statements, try to attack by credibility by trying to say i dont know what i am talking about, and then you finish trying to counter my argument with a secondary argument that was not even core to our "debate." You have continuously provided nothing new to this discussion while supplementing an argument i made with your build. I have tried to have a meaningful conversation with you, but to no avail. In fact, i have encouraged you to provide some information and clarification on your side, yet have received none.

Again Bowmanz, you are just sticking to your silly comments about "infinite stamina" and "zero downsides." If you can't get past making those mistakes, then we can't have a real conversation about tanking.

You are merely generalizing the points I made without looking at the underlying understanding of what I said. You also, yet again, continue to provide these generalized notions of what I am saying and undermine my points by tossing them aside into those genralizedwords that I used which w ere discussed on my meaning. You also, yet again, continue to provide no information which rebut what I am trying to say. You simple hide behind yhe curtain of tossing me into a group of people that don't know what I am talking about without providing any justification for doing so. In fact, I provided many reasons behind my words which shed a light on the fact that I do understand what I am talking about. After about 17 months in the game and over 2,000 hours logged I would say I have an understanding of the mechanics and the nuances of this game.

You understand nuances of the game yet come to totally wrong outcomes.

Tell me, what role doesn't strive fore "infinite resources" as you put it? What good players aren't keeping their resources balanced so that they are able to keep up their rotations, 'doing what they should be doing,' and having those "infinite resources" regardless of their role?

That is another thing, you think that tanks have completed their job when they are just holding aggro. Really? I've got news for you, that is incredibly wrong. Nobody that doesn't want the nerf thinks like that. We all accept that tanks should be (and do) much more than just taunting and holding block. We aren't just dinking around and nerfing us doesn't mystically give us the ability to do more.

In your 2000 hours of game time you have developed a caricature view of tanking and that view is causing you to believe that tanking needs an extreme nerf to be fun and interactive.

Personofsecrets wrote: »

Now let's talk about DPS and healers. I've heard both of these roles brag about not running out of resources. Let's pretend that tanks can't run out of stamina. What makes tanks resource strategy more degenerate, for the health of the game, than DPS and healers resource strategy? One would think that such a nerf should affect everyone if having 'less is more,' but tanks are getting picked on. Why is that?

If you think tanks are being singled out and picked on for some nefarious reason past you shouldn't be able to hold block permanently... well, there isn't much discussions to be had with you.

rfennell_ESO wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

Now let's talk about DPS and healers. I've heard both of these roles brag about not running out of resources. Let's pretend that tanks can't run out of stamina. What makes tanks resource strategy more degenerate, for the health of the game, than DPS and healers resource strategy? One would think that such a nerf should affect everyone if having 'less is more,' but tanks are getting picked on. Why is that?

If you think tanks are being singled out and picked on for some nefarious reason past you shouldn't be able to hold block permanently... well, there isn't much discussions to be had with you.

Tanks have a harder time keeping their resources balanced than other roles. That is a function of their armor passives and a function of spreading out attributes or champion points while having to use a combination of stamina and magic skills.

And yet tanks get nerfed and nerfed in a way that makes their balancing act more precarious. I'm not calling the nerf nefarious, I'm calling it dumb.

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Sensesfail13 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

Here is the state of a guild that USED TO HAVE GUILD TALKS with ZOS.

Sorry about that. my guild is currently 475 strong and has talks with the devs also. we have an inactive policy of 10 days and usaully about 50-75 memebrs on at any time. Our sister guild we started to take our overflow is about 250 strong with about 40-50 active at any time. so perhaps there is a problem with the recruting.

First off, Its a sad day when someone like you is having chats with ZoS for the "betterment" of the game seeing as I have read nothing but drivel from your posts.
Secondly, quality over quantity and quality is few and far between in this game anymore. We have a low population player base, I have yet to read a valid argument

Darnathian wrote: »

When 1.6 came we lost a LOT of players. I don't think as many will leave this time but a lot will if this hits live as is

If DPS builds get their way and this nerf goes through, and the only reason I have heard is because it's annoying and lacks skill, then a lot more will leave.

It is a different play style not to mention latency sucks in this game so you can't pick when to block if your a tank. That latency when you go to press block with a incoming frag for example can decide a fight. So this will make it extremely difficult to play

To see the game live right now in PVP and to decide this is the problem, not the sorc shield stacking meta, or insane DPS from fear using nb's, is irresponsible

This permablocking "problem" has been around since launch. It has not made players leave. The only complaints have been things said like lack of skill. Like Pressing two shields is hard.

Careful what you wish for. Pvp is only fun if you have others to fight. Dk and temars are being made to be impossible to use in pvp outside of group play. So more zergs and less small group play. Overall less players shortly after.

There is no adjustment to be made here. Will be even more DPS builds. Unfortunately for a dk its all dot based. So either stam build using non class skills or go home.

Congrats sorcs and nb's you win. The game is yours.

THANK YOU! and Thank you @Personofsecrets for being a voice of reason in this continued argumentative debacle all over the forums. It is truly amazing the stupidity that abounds upon these forums and any time something goes against the GM's opinions is immediately edited or the person is banned. Ive been sticking with this game since early BETA and as much as I will stick around and give the new update a chance with these changes I am not being very optimistic that it will eventually turn out for the best.

I love how you think, along with the others after your post quoted above, that because you and s9me other people do not like the change that it is the majority opinion on what is happen8ng. Scratch that, how you believe your opinion is better than mine. These are simply all of our opinions based on our experiences and no one is better than another. The things I state come straight from my experience in game along with feedback I have heard from friends of mine in game. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument. I too have been in this game since beta and have been subbed every day and will continue to do so. There have been changes in this game that I have agreed and disagreed with and this is one I agree with. This happens to be one you disagree with. It happens.

I think most of the people against the nerf are informed about the developers data that there are 50% for and 50% against.

While there are some people who are for the change that I think have decent points, many of them have been stooges (pvp players, not tanks, proud of their ability to 'adapt') giving (false) positives or just repeating the red herring that tanking is not really that fun and not really that interactive. The people who are for the nerf are even split on their opinions of what tanks should do and how the nerf will effect them. Some say tanks should be interacting more, some say tanks "should just tank," some say that tanks will no longer be able to "just hold block," while others insist that "just holding block" is still capable and justifies the nerf.

The fors aren't really cohesive in their thoughts, haven't been intellectually honest, and have never really refuted the ideas of the against. The strongest debate tactic the fors even have is that they get to say the change is happening regardless of what the against want because the developers are on the fors side.

And what are the pros to changing it back? Infinite stamina regen while holding block and mitigating crazy amounts of damage way our of proportion for what gets dealt out with zero downside? The fact is that there is enough information out there to show the pros and cons of BOTH sides. Just as the player base is split 50/50 so are the pros and cons of both. So, it comes down to a matter of opinion which is a 50/50 split. This leaves zos as the tie-breaker. They were ultimately of the opinion that it was better. If they had decided it was not good they still would have had hate from 50 percent of ppl.

Don't think that all opinions are equal.

Look at your opinion that stamina regeneration is "infinite." Please check you character sheet. You will see a number there and not a sideways figure 8.

Since you seem to be for the change, I suppose it makes sense that you would set up such a silly straw man argument for yourself to easily burn down. Your "zero downside" comment is even more telling that your not super knowledgeable about what is going on with tanking and drives home the point that not all opinions are equal. That is because some opinions are bad, wrong, incorrect, flawed, etc, etc.

You do realize they are called perma-dodgers and perma-blockers cause they can do both forever right. Yes there is a number. A number that is higher than what it cost to block or dodge. Therefore, it refills quicker than it depletes making it infinite. I see this in pve and pvp. The zero downside refers to downside of using that mechanic as a tank. I obviously understand that they lose out on dps for instance when doing something like this but that is what being a tank is. A tank can pull of mitigating a ridiculous amount of damage without depleting that resource they pull from to do so. They never have to stop blocking and can cause sustained damage while doing so. A dps on the other hand has to dodge and use higher cost attacks eventually depleting the resource you pull from. It is all relative to the build. So again the zero downside refers to zero downside relative to your build.

Additionally, you continue to make open ended remarks complain about my uninformed opinion about the game. However,you have yet to give me an substantive feedback yourself. You talk about how my zero downside remark or infinite remark are simply wrong, but do not offer a rebutted of any sort. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

That was the rebuttal.

You said that everyone has their opinions.

I say that the weight of opinions are different.

The proof to back up my claim was to show how two of your opinions of your post are misleading. That is under the assumption that we value changes being made to the game under opinions that are informed by facts and not over exaggerations, caricatures, red herrings, and straw man arguments.

What specific thing do you want me give 'substantive feedback' on? What rebuttal do you expect from me when you privilege the opinions of those who are for the nerf by stating untruths about the tank role?

You say my response was misleading assumptions based on uninformed exaggerated facts that others make. I stated how my comment of infinite and zero down side contained informed factual information about the current state of the game. I ask, how is my information I'll informed and misleading or even exaggerated? I am also curious what exactly it is you don't like about the nerf? I have stated why I like it. In fact, I enjoy to here the different opions and experiences from the other side. If nothing more, it sheds light on the other side of the issue so at least I can better understand your side. I may still not agree, but that does not mean that I think your opinion is invalid. Heck, it may not even be that the points you make or state are wrong. It may simply be that although those points are valid concerns, that I think the good outweighs the bad for keeping it in place. Just as you have heard many of the same straw man arguments, so have i. So let's discuss in more detail rather than going back and forth on these perceived straw man arguments.

You called stamina regeneration infinite. That is a hand waving over exaggeration if I have ever heard one. You can back peddle on your statements and try to uncover a reason as to why they are informed, but your attempt to sound more reasonable comes off as a double downing on the statements I called you out for. Running out of stamina is a real issue for certain builds and is widely considered to be a resource requiring very close attentions, for tanks or otherwise, in PVP.

How do you expect me to continue to engage with you in discussion when you made those fatal errors and are sticking by them?

Let's discuss my 'infinite' stamina regeneration in AA. You can find the the link in my signature. Not only do I have to build, gear wise for that, but it also takes very specific skill use and champion point allotment. My stamina stamina pool also depends on how well I keep my resources balanced and how the fight proceeds. By the way, a downside of the build is that I don't have much magic to spare. And that is not a "downside relative to my build?" What does that even mean?

Now the point of that AA example is the following. Even if I concede to you that stamina for tanks is 'infinite' and with 'zero downsides,' which anyone can tell you it is not, you are yet to persuade anyone that tanks do not deserve their stamina regeneration, you have not shown that tanks aren't having fun with their stamina regeneration, and you aren't showing that tanking isn't interactive with that stamina regeneration. Just to be clear, the reason I bring up what is fun and interactive is because the ideas of fun and interactivity are the stated reason, by the developers, for designing of the nerf.

First, I am not back peddling on any statement. I am merely describing what is meant by my infinite statement which is that based on the amount of regen versus cost of blocking. There was no back peddling. It was simply me explaining why my statement was correct and not at all an exaggeration. You call yourself an experienced player and that what i say is wrong. however, you fail to realize that it is the truth which is why this even happened in the first place. you say it is a problem for certain builds. well ya a build that is not properly specced out to tank. i have never been in a run in any trial or dungeon where a tank needs to lift up that block button even once. is there a build out there that might run out of stamina..sure..that is by far the minority in this game and not a properly specced tank.

additionally, you have made my argument for me in your build you suggested i look at. You state, " I estimate that I lose 1000 stamina every 2 seconds from blocking. So that means my stamina regeneration has to be at least 1000 plus the costs of pierce armor..." i mean lol. you are yelling at me about points i have made and how i exagerrate and all that good stuff. This is exactly my infinite argument! you state that you lose 1,000 stamina and that you stamina regen has to be more than this and the cost of the ability you use. That my friend is called infinite stamina while blocking and have come from the words you have written. not to mention this is a basic, cookie cutter build you use. this is the build that many people run. again, a propely specced tank (which woukd be the majority of tanks) has no problems. in fact in your build, each screenshot shows you blocking, or block casting, and yet still have over 80% stam. you have literally made the argument for me!

as for the interactive argument...yes having to do more in a fight (which is the prduct of this chnage), by definition is more interactive. you can not objectively measure fun since it is a subjective feeling. fun is a matter of opinion, so proving or disproving that depends on the person.

as to the downside relative to the build. that means that if i am a stamina dps, for instance, my downside is lack of magika and damage mitigation. likewise, if i am a tank focused on stamina, then my downside is going to be magika. every build has an inherent downside to it. so, my point on zero-downside is tied into what the build does. For instance, a build that is specced out in stamina recovery and blocking has zero-downside to perma-blocking cause it is infinite. That is what i mean by zero-downside realtive to the build as opposed to the inherent down-sides of the build. a tank has no reason not to be speccing into those two categories. in fact, that is their role. so, when a tank is blocking and holding aggro, they have done their job and fullfilled their role. however, they do so without running out of stamina by simply holding down one button and getting agrro. what is the downside? there is none. your out regening your cost and therfore have no downside in your role.

now, you constantly keep saying the same things to me. you have yet to actually dissect anything i say. you just pass them over and say that i am making blanket statements without giving any information while responding with statements that just say that i am making blanket statements. you have yet to make any statments yourself outside of saying what i am saying is basically wrong and generalized. you have yet to give me any informed or relative information on this matter. in fact, you start your last response by telling me my information is exaggerated after i have shown why they are not. you provide no information to rebut what i said. In fact, you gave me information that furthered my argument. you go on to say that i provide no reason for tanks not to have their stamina regen. i did state why. There is no downside to them holding block while throwing in an block-casting taunt. they take all damage while not losing anything. this is the reason why i like this change. you then finish by arguing a point i have not even brought up since we have been talking. (the interactivity). in fact, you are the one that keeps bringing this argument up. as mentioned above, the inherent nature of this nerf does increase interactivity. However, this is merely a secondary argument to the nerf. this is not the core reason for it, but merely a reason that supplements the reason for the change. you have continuously ignored my reasoned arguments w/o providing any sound arguments of your own. you merely attack my reasons by calling them blanket statements, try to attack by credibility by trying to say i dont know what i am talking about, and then you finish trying to counter my argument with a secondary argument that was not even core to our "debate." You have continuously provided nothing new to this discussion while supplementing an argument i made with your build. I have tried to have a meaningful conversation with you, but to no avail. In fact, i have encouraged you to provide some information and clarification on your side, yet have received none.

Again Bowmanz, you are just sticking to your silly comments about "infinite stamina" and "zero downsides." If you can't get past making those mistakes, then we can't have a real conversation about tanking.

You are merely generalizing the points I made without looking at the underlying understanding of what I said. You also, yet again, continue to provide these generalized notions of what I am saying and undermine my points by tossing them aside into those genralizedwords that I used which w ere discussed on my meaning. You also, yet again, continue to provide no information which rebut what I am trying to say. You simple hide behind yhe curtain of tossing me into a group of people that don't know what I am talking about without providing any justification for doing so. In fact, I provided many reasons behind my words which shed a light on the fact that I do understand what I am talking about. After about 17 months in the game and over 2,000 hours logged I would say I have an understanding of the mechanics and the nuances of this game.

You understand nuances of the game yet come to totally wrong outcomes.

Tell me, what role doesn't strive fore "infinite resources" as you put it? What good players aren't keeping their resources balanced so that they are able to keep up their rotations, 'doing what they should be doing,' and having those "infinite resources" regardless of their role?

That is another thing, you think that tanks have completed their job when they are just holding aggro. Really? I've got news for you, that is incredibly wrong. Nobody that doesn't want the nerf thinks like that. We all accept that tanks should be (and do) much more than just taunting and holding block. We aren't just dinking around and nerfing us doesn't mystically give us the ability to do more.

In your 2000 hours of game time you have developed a caricature view of tanking and that view is causing you to believe that tanking needs an extreme nerf to be fun and interactive.

You have changed the argument slightly in your first point. We are talking about a specific problem in this thread, not the infinite resource problem in general. I do think that it is a general problem for all. Steps have been taken ito rectify that in the form of dodgeroll. Thus is by no means where they end with dealing with the issue in general. Going to joy-divisions point, blocking was just the biggest problem right now. In the future others will complain about other resource managment nerfs. Especially as more and more ppl get champ points making it even more of a problem. But, in this thread we are discussing the specific issue of blocking.

I by no means think there job is over.but they can do that job while continually blocking no problem and receiving no detriment for doing so. Tanking is like an offensive lineman in football, no one ever talks about them, they don't get front page news, but without them and all the work they do on the front line, everything's fails. Yet again at the end of your post you fall back on the interactivity argument which Is not the core argument here. For someone who insisted that my side of the debate uses that as a crutch argument, you sure do fall back on it a lot.

I also know for a fact that my experiences shape MG understanding of how tanks operate. The thing is I have a lot of experience. That said, I do not think my experience is the end all be all either. As I stated before, I am very happy to listen to your experiences. In fact I encourage it. This is how ones knowledge epands. I also said that you may have valid points, but I may decide that the good outweighs the bad. I still respect your desicio s based on your experience.

That is where we differ. I have provided an outline of my experience. You have not done so. Simply saying you will not engage in discussion with me on that experience is wrong. In fact, with idling that experience that you base your decision on is contributing to the problem for the your side. You refuse to engage with debate with someone because you feel that they have no idea what they ate talking about. Instead if enlightening them on the issues associated with their outlook and provide someone with more knowledge on the situation, you disregard them. This not only leaves that persons side Un rebutted, but leaves your voice out of the discussion. Additionally, the other person leaves the debate arena with no new knowledge of the situation based on someone else's expereience.

Please I would be more than happy to read a longer post based on your experience. Make me better understand your side. Don't just sweep it under the rug. Don't refrain from sharing cause you feel I am unworthy. Please share with me. I genuinely want to hear it. It is the only way we go as a community.

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Sensesfail13 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

Here is the state of a guild that USED TO HAVE GUILD TALKS with ZOS.

Sorry about that. my guild is currently 475 strong and has talks with the devs also. we have an inactive policy of 10 days and usaully about 50-75 memebrs on at any time. Our sister guild we started to take our overflow is about 250 strong with about 40-50 active at any time. so perhaps there is a problem with the recruting.

First off, Its a sad day when someone like you is having chats with ZoS for the "betterment" of the game seeing as I have read nothing but drivel from your posts.
Secondly, quality over quantity and quality is few and far between in this game anymore. We have a low population player base, I have yet to read a valid argument

Darnathian wrote: »

When 1.6 came we lost a LOT of players. I don't think as many will leave this time but a lot will if this hits live as is

If DPS builds get their way and this nerf goes through, and the only reason I have heard is because it's annoying and lacks skill, then a lot more will leave.

It is a different play style not to mention latency sucks in this game so you can't pick when to block if your a tank. That latency when you go to press block with a incoming frag for example can decide a fight. So this will make it extremely difficult to play

To see the game live right now in PVP and to decide this is the problem, not the sorc shield stacking meta, or insane DPS from fear using nb's, is irresponsible

This permablocking "problem" has been around since launch. It has not made players leave. The only complaints have been things said like lack of skill. Like Pressing two shields is hard.

Careful what you wish for. Pvp is only fun if you have others to fight. Dk and temars are being made to be impossible to use in pvp outside of group play. So more zergs and less small group play. Overall less players shortly after.

There is no adjustment to be made here. Will be even more DPS builds. Unfortunately for a dk its all dot based. So either stam build using non class skills or go home.

Congrats sorcs and nb's you win. The game is yours.

THANK YOU! and Thank you @Personofsecrets for being a voice of reason in this continued argumentative debacle all over the forums. It is truly amazing the stupidity that abounds upon these forums and any time something goes against the GM's opinions is immediately edited or the person is banned. Ive been sticking with this game since early BETA and as much as I will stick around and give the new update a chance with these changes I am not being very optimistic that it will eventually turn out for the best.

I love how you think, along with the others after your post quoted above, that because you and s9me other people do not like the change that it is the majority opinion on what is happen8ng. Scratch that, how you believe your opinion is better than mine. These are simply all of our opinions based on our experiences and no one is better than another. The things I state come straight from my experience in game along with feedback I have heard from friends of mine in game. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument. I too have been in this game since beta and have been subbed every day and will continue to do so. There have been changes in this game that I have agreed and disagreed with and this is one I agree with. This happens to be one you disagree with. It happens.

I think most of the people against the nerf are informed about the developers data that there are 50% for and 50% against.

While there are some people who are for the change that I think have decent points, many of them have been stooges (pvp players, not tanks, proud of their ability to 'adapt') giving (false) positives or just repeating the red herring that tanking is not really that fun and not really that interactive. The people who are for the nerf are even split on their opinions of what tanks should do and how the nerf will effect them. Some say tanks should be interacting more, some say tanks "should just tank," some say that tanks will no longer be able to "just hold block," while others insist that "just holding block" is still capable and justifies the nerf.

The fors aren't really cohesive in their thoughts, haven't been intellectually honest, and have never really refuted the ideas of the against. The strongest debate tactic the fors even have is that they get to say the change is happening regardless of what the against want because the developers are on the fors side.

And what are the pros to changing it back? Infinite stamina regen while holding block and mitigating crazy amounts of damage way our of proportion for what gets dealt out with zero downside? The fact is that there is enough information out there to show the pros and cons of BOTH sides. Just as the player base is split 50/50 so are the pros and cons of both. So, it comes down to a matter of opinion which is a 50/50 split. This leaves zos as the tie-breaker. They were ultimately of the opinion that it was better. If they had decided it was not good they still would have had hate from 50 percent of ppl.

Don't think that all opinions are equal.

Look at your opinion that stamina regeneration is "infinite." Please check you character sheet. You will see a number there and not a sideways figure 8.

Since you seem to be for the change, I suppose it makes sense that you would set up such a silly straw man argument for yourself to easily burn down. Your "zero downside" comment is even more telling that your not super knowledgeable about what is going on with tanking and drives home the point that not all opinions are equal. That is because some opinions are bad, wrong, incorrect, flawed, etc, etc.

You do realize they are called perma-dodgers and perma-blockers cause they can do both forever right. Yes there is a number. A number that is higher than what it cost to block or dodge. Therefore, it refills quicker than it depletes making it infinite. I see this in pve and pvp. The zero downside refers to downside of using that mechanic as a tank. I obviously understand that they lose out on dps for instance when doing something like this but that is what being a tank is. A tank can pull of mitigating a ridiculous amount of damage without depleting that resource they pull from to do so. They never have to stop blocking and can cause sustained damage while doing so. A dps on the other hand has to dodge and use higher cost attacks eventually depleting the resource you pull from. It is all relative to the build. So again the zero downside refers to zero downside relative to your build.

Additionally, you continue to make open ended remarks complain about my uninformed opinion about the game. However,you have yet to give me an substantive feedback yourself. You talk about how my zero downside remark or infinite remark are simply wrong, but do not offer a rebutted of any sort. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

That was the rebuttal.

You said that everyone has their opinions.

I say that the weight of opinions are different.

The proof to back up my claim was to show how two of your opinions of your post are misleading. That is under the assumption that we value changes being made to the game under opinions that are informed by facts and not over exaggerations, caricatures, red herrings, and straw man arguments.

What specific thing do you want me give 'substantive feedback' on? What rebuttal do you expect from me when you privilege the opinions of those who are for the nerf by stating untruths about the tank role?

You say my response was misleading assumptions based on uninformed exaggerated facts that others make. I stated how my comment of infinite and zero down side contained informed factual information about the current state of the game. I ask, how is my information I'll informed and misleading or even exaggerated? I am also curious what exactly it is you don't like about the nerf? I have stated why I like it. In fact, I enjoy to here the different opions and experiences from the other side. If nothing more, it sheds light on the other side of the issue so at least I can better understand your side. I may still not agree, but that does not mean that I think your opinion is invalid. Heck, it may not even be that the points you make or state are wrong. It may simply be that although those points are valid concerns, that I think the good outweighs the bad for keeping it in place. Just as you have heard many of the same straw man arguments, so have i. So let's discuss in more detail rather than going back and forth on these perceived straw man arguments.

You called stamina regeneration infinite. That is a hand waving over exaggeration if I have ever heard one. You can back peddle on your statements and try to uncover a reason as to why they are informed, but your attempt to sound more reasonable comes off as a double downing on the statements I called you out for. Running out of stamina is a real issue for certain builds and is widely considered to be a resource requiring very close attentions, for tanks or otherwise, in PVP.

How do you expect me to continue to engage with you in discussion when you made those fatal errors and are sticking by them?

Let's discuss my 'infinite' stamina regeneration in AA. You can find the the link in my signature. Not only do I have to build, gear wise for that, but it also takes very specific skill use and champion point allotment. My stamina stamina pool also depends on how well I keep my resources balanced and how the fight proceeds. By the way, a downside of the build is that I don't have much magic to spare. And that is not a "downside relative to my build?" What does that even mean?

Now the point of that AA example is the following. Even if I concede to you that stamina for tanks is 'infinite' and with 'zero downsides,' which anyone can tell you it is not, you are yet to persuade anyone that tanks do not deserve their stamina regeneration, you have not shown that tanks aren't having fun with their stamina regeneration, and you aren't showing that tanking isn't interactive with that stamina regeneration. Just to be clear, the reason I bring up what is fun and interactive is because the ideas of fun and interactivity are the stated reason, by the developers, for designing of the nerf.

First, I am not back peddling on any statement. I am merely describing what is meant by my infinite statement which is that based on the amount of regen versus cost of blocking. There was no back peddling. It was simply me explaining why my statement was correct and not at all an exaggeration. You call yourself an experienced player and that what i say is wrong. however, you fail to realize that it is the truth which is why this even happened in the first place. you say it is a problem for certain builds. well ya a build that is not properly specced out to tank. i have never been in a run in any trial or dungeon where a tank needs to lift up that block button even once. is there a build out there that might run out of stamina..sure..that is by far the minority in this game and not a properly specced tank.

additionally, you have made my argument for me in your build you suggested i look at. You state, " I estimate that I lose 1000 stamina every 2 seconds from blocking. So that means my stamina regeneration has to be at least 1000 plus the costs of pierce armor..." i mean lol. you are yelling at me about points i have made and how i exagerrate and all that good stuff. This is exactly my infinite argument! you state that you lose 1,000 stamina and that you stamina regen has to be more than this and the cost of the ability you use. That my friend is called infinite stamina while blocking and have come from the words you have written. not to mention this is a basic, cookie cutter build you use. this is the build that many people run. again, a propely specced tank (which woukd be the majority of tanks) has no problems. in fact in your build, each screenshot shows you blocking, or block casting, and yet still have over 80% stam. you have literally made the argument for me!

as for the interactive argument...yes having to do more in a fight (which is the prduct of this chnage), by definition is more interactive. you can not objectively measure fun since it is a subjective feeling. fun is a matter of opinion, so proving or disproving that depends on the person.

as to the downside relative to the build. that means that if i am a stamina dps, for instance, my downside is lack of magika and damage mitigation. likewise, if i am a tank focused on stamina, then my downside is going to be magika. every build has an inherent downside to it. so, my point on zero-downside is tied into what the build does. For instance, a build that is specced out in stamina recovery and blocking has zero-downside to perma-blocking cause it is infinite. That is what i mean by zero-downside realtive to the build as opposed to the inherent down-sides of the build. a tank has no reason not to be speccing into those two categories. in fact, that is their role. so, when a tank is blocking and holding aggro, they have done their job and fullfilled their role. however, they do so without running out of stamina by simply holding down one button and getting agrro. what is the downside? there is none. your out regening your cost and therfore have no downside in your role.

now, you constantly keep saying the same things to me. you have yet to actually dissect anything i say. you just pass them over and say that i am making blanket statements without giving any information while responding with statements that just say that i am making blanket statements. you have yet to make any statments yourself outside of saying what i am saying is basically wrong and generalized. you have yet to give me any informed or relative information on this matter. in fact, you start your last response by telling me my information is exaggerated after i have shown why they are not. you provide no information to rebut what i said. In fact, you gave me information that furthered my argument. you go on to say that i provide no reason for tanks not to have their stamina regen. i did state why. There is no downside to them holding block while throwing in an block-casting taunt. they take all damage while not losing anything. this is the reason why i like this change. you then finish by arguing a point i have not even brought up since we have been talking. (the interactivity). in fact, you are the one that keeps bringing this argument up. as mentioned above, the inherent nature of this nerf does increase interactivity. However, this is merely a secondary argument to the nerf. this is not the core reason for it, but merely a reason that supplements the reason for the change. you have continuously ignored my reasoned arguments w/o providing any sound arguments of your own. you merely attack my reasons by calling them blanket statements, try to attack by credibility by trying to say i dont know what i am talking about, and then you finish trying to counter my argument with a secondary argument that was not even core to our "debate." You have continuously provided nothing new to this discussion while supplementing an argument i made with your build. I have tried to have a meaningful conversation with you, but to no avail. In fact, i have encouraged you to provide some information and clarification on your side, yet have received none.

Again Bowmanz, you are just sticking to your silly comments about "infinite stamina" and "zero downsides." If you can't get past making those mistakes, then we can't have a real conversation about tanking.

You are merely generalizing the points I made without looking at the underlying understanding of what I said. You also, yet again, continue to provide these generalized notions of what I am saying and undermine my points by tossing them aside into those genralizedwords that I used which w ere discussed on my meaning. You also, yet again, continue to provide no information which rebut what I am trying to say. You simple hide behind yhe curtain of tossing me into a group of people that don't know what I am talking about without providing any justification for doing so. In fact, I provided many reasons behind my words which shed a light on the fact that I do understand what I am talking about. After about 17 months in the game and over 2,000 hours logged I would say I have an understanding of the mechanics and the nuances of this game.

You understand nuances of the game yet come to totally wrong outcomes.

Tell me, what role doesn't strive fore "infinite resources" as you put it? What good players aren't keeping their resources balanced so that they are able to keep up their rotations, 'doing what they should be doing,' and having those "infinite resources" regardless of their role?

That is another thing, you think that tanks have completed their job when they are just holding aggro. Really? I've got news for you, that is incredibly wrong. Nobody that doesn't want the nerf thinks like that. We all accept that tanks should be (and do) much more than just taunting and holding block. We aren't just dinking around and nerfing us doesn't mystically give us the ability to do more.

In your 2000 hours of game time you have developed a caricature view of tanking and that view is causing you to believe that tanking needs an extreme nerf to be fun and interactive.

You have changed the argument slightly in your first point. We are talking about a specific problem in this thread, not the infinite resource problem in general. I do think that it is a general problem for all. Steps have been taken ito rectify that in the form of dodgeroll. Thus is by no means where they end with dealing with the issue in general. Going to joy-divisions point, blocking was just the biggest problem right now. In the future others will complain about other resource managment nerfs. Especially as more and more ppl get champ points making it even more of a problem. But, in this thread we are discussing the specific issue of blocking.

I by no means think there job is over.but they can do that job while continually blocking no problem and receiving no detriment for doing so. Tanking is like an offensive lineman in football, no one ever talks about them, they don't get front page news, but without them and all the work they do on the front line, everything's fails. Yet again at the end of your post you fall back on the interactivity argument which Is not the core argument here. For someone who insisted that my side of the debate uses that as a crutch argument, you sure do fall back on it a lot.

I also know for a fact that my experiences shape MG understanding of how tanks operate. The thing is I have a lot of experience. That said, I do not think my experience is the end all be all either. As I stated before, I am very happy to listen to your experiences. In fact I encourage it. This is how ones knowledge epands. I also said that you may have valid points, but I may decide that the good outweighs the bad. I still respect your desicio s based on your experience.

That is where we differ. I have provided an outline of my experience. You have not done so. Simply saying you will not engage in discussion with me on that experience is wrong. In fact, with idling that experience that you base your decision on is contributing to the problem for the your side. You refuse to engage with debate with someone because you feel that they have no idea what they ate talking about. Instead if enlightening them on the issues associated with their outlook and provide someone with more knowledge on the situation, you disregard them. This not only leaves that persons side Un rebutted, but leaves your voice out of the discussion. Additionally, the other person leaves the debate arena with no new knowledge of the situation based on someone else's expereience.

Please I would be more than happy to read a longer post based on your experience. Make me better understand your side. Don't just sweep it under the rug. Don't refrain from sharing cause you feel I am unworthy. Please share with me. I genuinely want to hear it. It is the only way we go as a community.

Why would I discuss a view that is wrong?

I had a similar discussion with another player who insisted that the nerf wouldn't be that bad because it would cause tanks to light attack, which, according to that player, tanks should already have been doing for ultimate generation purposes. I went as far as making a video to show them that their idea was wrong and that tanks don't need to light attack for ultimate generation purposes. They insisted on their claim, we had no fruitful discussion, and the only thing to do at that point was to question if someone who is wrong in their opinion about what tanks do should be part of the discussion on how how tanks should be.

This is a similar discussion. You want more proof than my AA build as to how tanks discuss stamina? Then go to my VDSA build. My post, post number 22, discussed how not having a balanced stamina stat became problematic for the build and why I therefore made adjustments to the build. How is that for enlightenment?

So there you have it, again, nobody has infinite stamina. Players have to build and play in a certain way to reach stamina equilibrium and, even then, that is just an equilibrium which can allow for stamina to drop well below the equilibrium point. Your attempt to redefine what infinite means doesn't change that tanks don't have infinite stamina nor what tanks do in order to keep balanced resources.

The same goes for your 'zero downside' remark. You redefine what zero downside means, but even under your definition, nobody is playing in a 'I'm perfectly fine just holding block' way and even if you found a player that did such a thing, then everyone who is against the nerf would agree that the player is doing things wrong.

Just like the past discussion that I referenced, I can point out how someone is wrong in their analysis of what tanks do and why they should therefore rethink their opinion on the stamina regeneration nerf, but that person remains staunch in their view and persists in misinforming about tanking.

Joy_Division wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

rfennell_ESO wrote: »

At the end of the day, on live server there are tanks and pvp blockers that have enough stamina regen to regen more stamina than they use blocking.

Despite the nonsensical arguments against that, there are and it's not exactly hard to do it.

I'd rather ZOS find a more elegant solution to the problem, but that doesn't change the fact that they found a solution to the problem with what they are doing.

P.S. on top of the perma blocking there are skills that can be used from block, melee attacks that do not take you out of block.

Now let's talk about DPS and healers. I've heard both of these roles brag about not running out of resources. Let's pretend that tanks can't run out of stamina. What makes tanks resource strategy more degenerate, for the health of the game, than DPS and healers resource strategy? One would think that such a nerf should affect everyone if having 'less is more,' but tanks are getting picked on. Why is that?

That's also a problem. As for why ZoS has singled out tanks, probably because people have complained about perma-blocking DKs killing them in Cyrodiil since launch whereas perma-healing templars are not nearly seen as game-breaking.

None of this means I agree with ZoS's "solution," just answering your question.

This could be. I tried to find old threads about the permablocing menace, but couldn't with the forum search function. I'm not saying that they have never existed, but I couldn't find mention of permablocking being an issue on these forums until after Eric Wrobel made those bold words about tanking during ESO Live 21.

Several people have said that permablockers are getting huge damage for example. I can't imagine that being an observation in anywhere except PVP and I really have to question what "huge damage" means and why nobody could counter said high dps permablocker with various abilities and plays tyles.

I know that many babies have been born on the account of "trust me."

That being said, take it from someone who has PvPed enough to have three characters of the colonel rank in each alliance that "perma-blocking" drew much ire from the PvP community before 1.6. It had a particular (and unfair) association with DKs, probably because everyone looked for a reason to complain about DKs.

1.6 was suppose to alleviate the "perma-blocking" problem by making the costs more prohibitive. While it put an end to the nonsense of light armored templars taping down their right mouse button, as you know, anyone who dedicated some resources to blocking would run out of health long before they ran out of stamina by holding block.

I can't prove it and ZoS can deny it, but the genesis of the perma-blocking change came from PvP. The developers may have, across the way, realized that actually fulfilling the role of tanking in PvE was trivial (something quite different than doing it effectively) and justified the changed to make PvE, what was their words, more "exciting"?

I would have made the game more "exciting" and "interesting" by limiting the neigh unlimited resources that all players have at their disposal, even without equipping any gear devoted to resource regeneration, but they don't pay me to make such decisions.

Thank you for keeping me informed about PVP.

The one wonder I have is why countering permablocking isn't a principle valued when countering and adapting is something that so many hold in such high regard.

I think Bowmanz stated that we can expect the developers to start targeting other roles for nerfs, something that you would do to make the game more exciting, but I'm not sure if the developers will. I made a thread about changing Puncturing Sweep & Biting Jabs with a resource regeneration penalty and people flipped the table.

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Sensesfail13 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

Here is the state of a guild that USED TO HAVE GUILD TALKS with ZOS.

Sorry about that. my guild is currently 475 strong and has talks with the devs also. we have an inactive policy of 10 days and usaully about 50-75 memebrs on at any time. Our sister guild we started to take our overflow is about 250 strong with about 40-50 active at any time. so perhaps there is a problem with the recruting.

First off, Its a sad day when someone like you is having chats with ZoS for the "betterment" of the game seeing as I have read nothing but drivel from your posts.
Secondly, quality over quantity and quality is few and far between in this game anymore. We have a low population player base, I have yet to read a valid argument

Darnathian wrote: »

When 1.6 came we lost a LOT of players. I don't think as many will leave this time but a lot will if this hits live as is

If DPS builds get their way and this nerf goes through, and the only reason I have heard is because it's annoying and lacks skill, then a lot more will leave.

It is a different play style not to mention latency sucks in this game so you can't pick when to block if your a tank. That latency when you go to press block with a incoming frag for example can decide a fight. So this will make it extremely difficult to play

To see the game live right now in PVP and to decide this is the problem, not the sorc shield stacking meta, or insane DPS from fear using nb's, is irresponsible

This permablocking "problem" has been around since launch. It has not made players leave. The only complaints have been things said like lack of skill. Like Pressing two shields is hard.

Careful what you wish for. Pvp is only fun if you have others to fight. Dk and temars are being made to be impossible to use in pvp outside of group play. So more zergs and less small group play. Overall less players shortly after.

There is no adjustment to be made here. Will be even more DPS builds. Unfortunately for a dk its all dot based. So either stam build using non class skills or go home.

Congrats sorcs and nb's you win. The game is yours.

THANK YOU! and Thank you @Personofsecrets for being a voice of reason in this continued argumentative debacle all over the forums. It is truly amazing the stupidity that abounds upon these forums and any time something goes against the GM's opinions is immediately edited or the person is banned. Ive been sticking with this game since early BETA and as much as I will stick around and give the new update a chance with these changes I am not being very optimistic that it will eventually turn out for the best.

I love how you think, along with the others after your post quoted above, that because you and s9me other people do not like the change that it is the majority opinion on what is happen8ng. Scratch that, how you believe your opinion is better than mine. These are simply all of our opinions based on our experiences and no one is better than another. The things I state come straight from my experience in game along with feedback I have heard from friends of mine in game. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument. I too have been in this game since beta and have been subbed every day and will continue to do so. There have been changes in this game that I have agreed and disagreed with and this is one I agree with. This happens to be one you disagree with. It happens.

I think most of the people against the nerf are informed about the developers data that there are 50% for and 50% against.

While there are some people who are for the change that I think have decent points, many of them have been stooges (pvp players, not tanks, proud of their ability to 'adapt') giving (false) positives or just repeating the red herring that tanking is not really that fun and not really that interactive. The people who are for the nerf are even split on their opinions of what tanks should do and how the nerf will effect them. Some say tanks should be interacting more, some say tanks "should just tank," some say that tanks will no longer be able to "just hold block," while others insist that "just holding block" is still capable and justifies the nerf.

The fors aren't really cohesive in their thoughts, haven't been intellectually honest, and have never really refuted the ideas of the against. The strongest debate tactic the fors even have is that they get to say the change is happening regardless of what the against want because the developers are on the fors side.

And what are the pros to changing it back? Infinite stamina regen while holding block and mitigating crazy amounts of damage way our of proportion for what gets dealt out with zero downside? The fact is that there is enough information out there to show the pros and cons of BOTH sides. Just as the player base is split 50/50 so are the pros and cons of both. So, it comes down to a matter of opinion which is a 50/50 split. This leaves zos as the tie-breaker. They were ultimately of the opinion that it was better. If they had decided it was not good they still would have had hate from 50 percent of ppl.

Don't think that all opinions are equal.

Look at your opinion that stamina regeneration is "infinite." Please check you character sheet. You will see a number there and not a sideways figure 8.

Since you seem to be for the change, I suppose it makes sense that you would set up such a silly straw man argument for yourself to easily burn down. Your "zero downside" comment is even more telling that your not super knowledgeable about what is going on with tanking and drives home the point that not all opinions are equal. That is because some opinions are bad, wrong, incorrect, flawed, etc, etc.

You do realize they are called perma-dodgers and perma-blockers cause they can do both forever right. Yes there is a number. A number that is higher than what it cost to block or dodge. Therefore, it refills quicker than it depletes making it infinite. I see this in pve and pvp. The zero downside refers to downside of using that mechanic as a tank. I obviously understand that they lose out on dps for instance when doing something like this but that is what being a tank is. A tank can pull of mitigating a ridiculous amount of damage without depleting that resource they pull from to do so. They never have to stop blocking and can cause sustained damage while doing so. A dps on the other hand has to dodge and use higher cost attacks eventually depleting the resource you pull from. It is all relative to the build. So again the zero downside refers to zero downside relative to your build.

Additionally, you continue to make open ended remarks complain about my uninformed opinion about the game. However,you have yet to give me an substantive feedback yourself. You talk about how my zero downside remark or infinite remark are simply wrong, but do not offer a rebutted of any sort. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

That was the rebuttal.

You said that everyone has their opinions.

I say that the weight of opinions are different.

The proof to back up my claim was to show how two of your opinions of your post are misleading. That is under the assumption that we value changes being made to the game under opinions that are informed by facts and not over exaggerations, caricatures, red herrings, and straw man arguments.

What specific thing do you want me give 'substantive feedback' on? What rebuttal do you expect from me when you privilege the opinions of those who are for the nerf by stating untruths about the tank role?

You say my response was misleading assumptions based on uninformed exaggerated facts that others make. I stated how my comment of infinite and zero down side contained informed factual information about the current state of the game. I ask, how is my information I'll informed and misleading or even exaggerated? I am also curious what exactly it is you don't like about the nerf? I have stated why I like it. In fact, I enjoy to here the different opions and experiences from the other side. If nothing more, it sheds light on the other side of the issue so at least I can better understand your side. I may still not agree, but that does not mean that I think your opinion is invalid. Heck, it may not even be that the points you make or state are wrong. It may simply be that although those points are valid concerns, that I think the good outweighs the bad for keeping it in place. Just as you have heard many of the same straw man arguments, so have i. So let's discuss in more detail rather than going back and forth on these perceived straw man arguments.

You called stamina regeneration infinite. That is a hand waving over exaggeration if I have ever heard one. You can back peddle on your statements and try to uncover a reason as to why they are informed, but your attempt to sound more reasonable comes off as a double downing on the statements I called you out for. Running out of stamina is a real issue for certain builds and is widely considered to be a resource requiring very close attentions, for tanks or otherwise, in PVP.

How do you expect me to continue to engage with you in discussion when you made those fatal errors and are sticking by them?

Let's discuss my 'infinite' stamina regeneration in AA. You can find the the link in my signature. Not only do I have to build, gear wise for that, but it also takes very specific skill use and champion point allotment. My stamina stamina pool also depends on how well I keep my resources balanced and how the fight proceeds. By the way, a downside of the build is that I don't have much magic to spare. And that is not a "downside relative to my build?" What does that even mean?

Now the point of that AA example is the following. Even if I concede to you that stamina for tanks is 'infinite' and with 'zero downsides,' which anyone can tell you it is not, you are yet to persuade anyone that tanks do not deserve their stamina regeneration, you have not shown that tanks aren't having fun with their stamina regeneration, and you aren't showing that tanking isn't interactive with that stamina regeneration. Just to be clear, the reason I bring up what is fun and interactive is because the ideas of fun and interactivity are the stated reason, by the developers, for designing of the nerf.

First, I am not back peddling on any statement. I am merely describing what is meant by my infinite statement which is that based on the amount of regen versus cost of blocking. There was no back peddling. It was simply me explaining why my statement was correct and not at all an exaggeration. You call yourself an experienced player and that what i say is wrong. however, you fail to realize that it is the truth which is why this even happened in the first place. you say it is a problem for certain builds. well ya a build that is not properly specced out to tank. i have never been in a run in any trial or dungeon where a tank needs to lift up that block button even once. is there a build out there that might run out of stamina..sure..that is by far the minority in this game and not a properly specced tank.

additionally, you have made my argument for me in your build you suggested i look at. You state, " I estimate that I lose 1000 stamina every 2 seconds from blocking. So that means my stamina regeneration has to be at least 1000 plus the costs of pierce armor..." i mean lol. you are yelling at me about points i have made and how i exagerrate and all that good stuff. This is exactly my infinite argument! you state that you lose 1,000 stamina and that you stamina regen has to be more than this and the cost of the ability you use. That my friend is called infinite stamina while blocking and have come from the words you have written. not to mention this is a basic, cookie cutter build you use. this is the build that many people run. again, a propely specced tank (which woukd be the majority of tanks) has no problems. in fact in your build, each screenshot shows you blocking, or block casting, and yet still have over 80% stam. you have literally made the argument for me!

as for the interactive argument...yes having to do more in a fight (which is the prduct of this chnage), by definition is more interactive. you can not objectively measure fun since it is a subjective feeling. fun is a matter of opinion, so proving or disproving that depends on the person.

as to the downside relative to the build. that means that if i am a stamina dps, for instance, my downside is lack of magika and damage mitigation. likewise, if i am a tank focused on stamina, then my downside is going to be magika. every build has an inherent downside to it. so, my point on zero-downside is tied into what the build does. For instance, a build that is specced out in stamina recovery and blocking has zero-downside to perma-blocking cause it is infinite. That is what i mean by zero-downside realtive to the build as opposed to the inherent down-sides of the build. a tank has no reason not to be speccing into those two categories. in fact, that is their role. so, when a tank is blocking and holding aggro, they have done their job and fullfilled their role. however, they do so without running out of stamina by simply holding down one button and getting agrro. what is the downside? there is none. your out regening your cost and therfore have no downside in your role.

now, you constantly keep saying the same things to me. you have yet to actually dissect anything i say. you just pass them over and say that i am making blanket statements without giving any information while responding with statements that just say that i am making blanket statements. you have yet to make any statments yourself outside of saying what i am saying is basically wrong and generalized. you have yet to give me any informed or relative information on this matter. in fact, you start your last response by telling me my information is exaggerated after i have shown why they are not. you provide no information to rebut what i said. In fact, you gave me information that furthered my argument. you go on to say that i provide no reason for tanks not to have their stamina regen. i did state why. There is no downside to them holding block while throwing in an block-casting taunt. they take all damage while not losing anything. this is the reason why i like this change. you then finish by arguing a point i have not even brought up since we have been talking. (the interactivity). in fact, you are the one that keeps bringing this argument up. as mentioned above, the inherent nature of this nerf does increase interactivity. However, this is merely a secondary argument to the nerf. this is not the core reason for it, but merely a reason that supplements the reason for the change. you have continuously ignored my reasoned arguments w/o providing any sound arguments of your own. you merely attack my reasons by calling them blanket statements, try to attack by credibility by trying to say i dont know what i am talking about, and then you finish trying to counter my argument with a secondary argument that was not even core to our "debate." You have continuously provided nothing new to this discussion while supplementing an argument i made with your build. I have tried to have a meaningful conversation with you, but to no avail. In fact, i have encouraged you to provide some information and clarification on your side, yet have received none.

Again Bowmanz, you are just sticking to your silly comments about "infinite stamina" and "zero downsides." If you can't get past making those mistakes, then we can't have a real conversation about tanking.

You are merely generalizing the points I made without looking at the underlying understanding of what I said. You also, yet again, continue to provide these generalized notions of what I am saying and undermine my points by tossing them aside into those genralizedwords that I used which w ere discussed on my meaning. You also, yet again, continue to provide no information which rebut what I am trying to say. You simple hide behind yhe curtain of tossing me into a group of people that don't know what I am talking about without providing any justification for doing so. In fact, I provided many reasons behind my words which shed a light on the fact that I do understand what I am talking about. After about 17 months in the game and over 2,000 hours logged I would say I have an understanding of the mechanics and the nuances of this game.

You understand nuances of the game yet come to totally wrong outcomes.

Tell me, what role doesn't strive fore "infinite resources" as you put it? What good players aren't keeping their resources balanced so that they are able to keep up their rotations, 'doing what they should be doing,' and having those "infinite resources" regardless of their role?

That is another thing, you think that tanks have completed their job when they are just holding aggro. Really? I've got news for you, that is incredibly wrong. Nobody that doesn't want the nerf thinks like that. We all accept that tanks should be (and do) much more than just taunting and holding block. We aren't just dinking around and nerfing us doesn't mystically give us the ability to do more.

In your 2000 hours of game time you have developed a caricature view of tanking and that view is causing you to believe that tanking needs an extreme nerf to be fun and interactive.

You have changed the argument slightly in your first point. We are talking about a specific problem in this thread, not the infinite resource problem in general. I do think that it is a general problem for all. Steps have been taken ito rectify that in the form of dodgeroll. Thus is by no means where they end with dealing with the issue in general. Going to joy-divisions point, blocking was just the biggest problem right now. In the future others will complain about other resource managment nerfs. Especially as more and more ppl get champ points making it even more of a problem. But, in this thread we are discussing the specific issue of blocking.

I by no means think there job is over.but they can do that job while continually blocking no problem and receiving no detriment for doing so. Tanking is like an offensive lineman in football, no one ever talks about them, they don't get front page news, but without them and all the work they do on the front line, everything's fails. Yet again at the end of your post you fall back on the interactivity argument which Is not the core argument here. For someone who insisted that my side of the debate uses that as a crutch argument, you sure do fall back on it a lot.

I also know for a fact that my experiences shape MG understanding of how tanks operate. The thing is I have a lot of experience. That said, I do not think my experience is the end all be all either. As I stated before, I am very happy to listen to your experiences. In fact I encourage it. This is how ones knowledge epands. I also said that you may have valid points, but I may decide that the good outweighs the bad. I still respect your desicio s based on your experience.

That is where we differ. I have provided an outline of my experience. You have not done so. Simply saying you will not engage in discussion with me on that experience is wrong. In fact, with idling that experience that you base your decision on is contributing to the problem for the your side. You refuse to engage with debate with someone because you feel that they have no idea what they ate talking about. Instead if enlightening them on the issues associated with their outlook and provide someone with more knowledge on the situation, you disregard them. This not only leaves that persons side Un rebutted, but leaves your voice out of the discussion. Additionally, the other person leaves the debate arena with no new knowledge of the situation based on someone else's expereience.

Please I would be more than happy to read a longer post based on your experience. Make me better understand your side. Don't just sweep it under the rug. Don't refrain from sharing cause you feel I am unworthy. Please share with me. I genuinely want to hear it. It is the only way we go as a community.

Why would I discuss a view that is wrong?

I had a similar discussion with another player who insisted that the nerf wouldn't be that bad because it would cause tanks to light attack, which, according to that player, tanks should already have been doing for ultimate generation purposes. I went as far as making a video to show them that their idea was wrong and that tanks don't need to light attack for ultimate generation purposes. They insisted on their claim, we had no fruitful discussion, and the only thing to do at that point was to question if someone who is wrong in their opinion about what tanks do should be part of the discussion on how how tanks should be.

This is a similar discussion. You want more proof than my AA build as to how tanks discuss stamina? Then go to my VDSA build. My post, post number 22, discussed how not having a balanced stamina stat became problematic for the build and why I therefore made adjustments to the build. How is that for enlightenment?

So there you have it, again, nobody has infinite stamina. Players have to build and play in a certain way to reach stamina equilibrium and, even then, that is just an equilibrium which can allow for stamina to drop well below the equilibrium point. Your attempt to redefine what infinite means doesn't change that tanks don't have infinite stamina nor what tanks do in order to keep balanced resources.

The same goes for your 'zero downside' remark. You redefine what zero downside means, but even under your definition, nobody is playing in a 'I'm perfectly fine just holding block' way and even if you found a player that did such a thing, then everyone who is against the nerf would agree that the player is doing things wrong.

Just like the past discussion that I referenced, I can point out how someone is wrong in their analysis of what tanks do and why they should therefore rethink their opinion on the stamina regeneration nerf, but that person remains staunch in their view and persists in misinforming about tanking.

come on. the first sentence... really? I mean failing to discuss something cause you dont agree. we all have opinions.

I could not find your post. in this thread or vdsa. is the comment number right? I would like to visit that to see more of your view. the difference between me and that guy is that I am willing to hear and understand the other side. I just have not heard mush at all from you. Again, I am actually interested. Based on the two articles you have linked me you obviously undertstand what you are saying, I just dont know the depths of what that is cause you lumped me with that other guy you spoke too who wouldnt listen. That said, tanking seems to be the strongest point of your playstyle based on the amoutn of time you have dedicated to writing about it, This is great. But with it comes a bias view. (which we all have). There is nothing wrong with that just as long as someone understands that they may have those bias feelings and still puts up a sound argument.

That said, you vdsa build does not rely on on holding blocking. (or so it seems based on your stats.). That build should be relatively uneffected by the update. That is not the type of build this nerf was meant to hit. It was for the builds that require holding block the whole time. The build you posted seems meant for timed blocking while being able to put out some damage. (kind of tinkering on the edge of a tank/dps build).

if you have other discussion discussing this same topic i am more then happy to follow a link or be told where to look. no reason to rewrite them. or even copy and post them. Again, I am more open. I may concede a point or two. I may not. Your VDSA build seems uneffected whereas your other one on AA will have some trouble since it seemed to rely on dodge more than anything.

I would also be curious on some of your feedback from IC experience.

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Sensesfail13 wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

Here is the state of a guild that USED TO HAVE GUILD TALKS with ZOS.

Sorry about that. my guild is currently 475 strong and has talks with the devs also. we have an inactive policy of 10 days and usaully about 50-75 memebrs on at any time. Our sister guild we started to take our overflow is about 250 strong with about 40-50 active at any time. so perhaps there is a problem with the recruting.

First off, Its a sad day when someone like you is having chats with ZoS for the "betterment" of the game seeing as I have read nothing but drivel from your posts.
Secondly, quality over quantity and quality is few and far between in this game anymore. We have a low population player base, I have yet to read a valid argument

Darnathian wrote: »

When 1.6 came we lost a LOT of players. I don't think as many will leave this time but a lot will if this hits live as is

If DPS builds get their way and this nerf goes through, and the only reason I have heard is because it's annoying and lacks skill, then a lot more will leave.

It is a different play style not to mention latency sucks in this game so you can't pick when to block if your a tank. That latency when you go to press block with a incoming frag for example can decide a fight. So this will make it extremely difficult to play

To see the game live right now in PVP and to decide this is the problem, not the sorc shield stacking meta, or insane DPS from fear using nb's, is irresponsible

This permablocking "problem" has been around since launch. It has not made players leave. The only complaints have been things said like lack of skill. Like Pressing two shields is hard.

Careful what you wish for. Pvp is only fun if you have others to fight. Dk and temars are being made to be impossible to use in pvp outside of group play. So more zergs and less small group play. Overall less players shortly after.

There is no adjustment to be made here. Will be even more DPS builds. Unfortunately for a dk its all dot based. So either stam build using non class skills or go home.

Congrats sorcs and nb's you win. The game is yours.

THANK YOU! and Thank you @Personofsecrets for being a voice of reason in this continued argumentative debacle all over the forums. It is truly amazing the stupidity that abounds upon these forums and any time something goes against the GM's opinions is immediately edited or the person is banned. Ive been sticking with this game since early BETA and as much as I will stick around and give the new update a chance with these changes I am not being very optimistic that it will eventually turn out for the best.

I love how you think, along with the others after your post quoted above, that because you and s9me other people do not like the change that it is the majority opinion on what is happen8ng. Scratch that, how you believe your opinion is better than mine. These are simply all of our opinions based on our experiences and no one is better than another. The things I state come straight from my experience in game along with feedback I have heard from friends of mine in game. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument. I too have been in this game since beta and have been subbed every day and will continue to do so. There have been changes in this game that I have agreed and disagreed with and this is one I agree with. This happens to be one you disagree with. It happens.

I think most of the people against the nerf are informed about the developers data that there are 50% for and 50% against.

While there are some people who are for the change that I think have decent points, many of them have been stooges (pvp players, not tanks, proud of their ability to 'adapt') giving (false) positives or just repeating the red herring that tanking is not really that fun and not really that interactive. The people who are for the nerf are even split on their opinions of what tanks should do and how the nerf will effect them. Some say tanks should be interacting more, some say tanks "should just tank," some say that tanks will no longer be able to "just hold block," while others insist that "just holding block" is still capable and justifies the nerf.

The fors aren't really cohesive in their thoughts, haven't been intellectually honest, and have never really refuted the ideas of the against. The strongest debate tactic the fors even have is that they get to say the change is happening regardless of what the against want because the developers are on the fors side.

And what are the pros to changing it back? Infinite stamina regen while holding block and mitigating crazy amounts of damage way our of proportion for what gets dealt out with zero downside? The fact is that there is enough information out there to show the pros and cons of BOTH sides. Just as the player base is split 50/50 so are the pros and cons of both. So, it comes down to a matter of opinion which is a 50/50 split. This leaves zos as the tie-breaker. They were ultimately of the opinion that it was better. If they had decided it was not good they still would have had hate from 50 percent of ppl.

Don't think that all opinions are equal.

Look at your opinion that stamina regeneration is "infinite." Please check you character sheet. You will see a number there and not a sideways figure 8.

Since you seem to be for the change, I suppose it makes sense that you would set up such a silly straw man argument for yourself to easily burn down. Your "zero downside" comment is even more telling that your not super knowledgeable about what is going on with tanking and drives home the point that not all opinions are equal. That is because some opinions are bad, wrong, incorrect, flawed, etc, etc.

You do realize they are called perma-dodgers and perma-blockers cause they can do both forever right. Yes there is a number. A number that is higher than what it cost to block or dodge. Therefore, it refills quicker than it depletes making it infinite. I see this in pve and pvp. The zero downside refers to downside of using that mechanic as a tank. I obviously understand that they lose out on dps for instance when doing something like this but that is what being a tank is. A tank can pull of mitigating a ridiculous amount of damage without depleting that resource they pull from to do so. They never have to stop blocking and can cause sustained damage while doing so. A dps on the other hand has to dodge and use higher cost attacks eventually depleting the resource you pull from. It is all relative to the build. So again the zero downside refers to zero downside relative to your build.

Additionally, you continue to make open ended remarks complain about my uninformed opinion about the game. However,you have yet to give me an substantive feedback yourself. You talk about how my zero downside remark or infinite remark are simply wrong, but do not offer a rebutted of any sort. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

That was the rebuttal.

You said that everyone has their opinions.

I say that the weight of opinions are different.

The proof to back up my claim was to show how two of your opinions of your post are misleading. That is under the assumption that we value changes being made to the game under opinions that are informed by facts and not over exaggerations, caricatures, red herrings, and straw man arguments.

What specific thing do you want me give 'substantive feedback' on? What rebuttal do you expect from me when you privilege the opinions of those who are for the nerf by stating untruths about the tank role?

You say my response was misleading assumptions based on uninformed exaggerated facts that others make. I stated how my comment of infinite and zero down side contained informed factual information about the current state of the game. I ask, how is my information I'll informed and misleading or even exaggerated? I am also curious what exactly it is you don't like about the nerf? I have stated why I like it. In fact, I enjoy to here the different opions and experiences from the other side. If nothing more, it sheds light on the other side of the issue so at least I can better understand your side. I may still not agree, but that does not mean that I think your opinion is invalid. Heck, it may not even be that the points you make or state are wrong. It may simply be that although those points are valid concerns, that I think the good outweighs the bad for keeping it in place. Just as you have heard many of the same straw man arguments, so have i. So let's discuss in more detail rather than going back and forth on these perceived straw man arguments.

You called stamina regeneration infinite. That is a hand waving over exaggeration if I have ever heard one. You can back peddle on your statements and try to uncover a reason as to why they are informed, but your attempt to sound more reasonable comes off as a double downing on the statements I called you out for. Running out of stamina is a real issue for certain builds and is widely considered to be a resource requiring very close attentions, for tanks or otherwise, in PVP.

How do you expect me to continue to engage with you in discussion when you made those fatal errors and are sticking by them?

Let's discuss my 'infinite' stamina regeneration in AA. You can find the the link in my signature. Not only do I have to build, gear wise for that, but it also takes very specific skill use and champion point allotment. My stamina stamina pool also depends on how well I keep my resources balanced and how the fight proceeds. By the way, a downside of the build is that I don't have much magic to spare. And that is not a "downside relative to my build?" What does that even mean?

Now the point of that AA example is the following. Even if I concede to you that stamina for tanks is 'infinite' and with 'zero downsides,' which anyone can tell you it is not, you are yet to persuade anyone that tanks do not deserve their stamina regeneration, you have not shown that tanks aren't having fun with their stamina regeneration, and you aren't showing that tanking isn't interactive with that stamina regeneration. Just to be clear, the reason I bring up what is fun and interactive is because the ideas of fun and interactivity are the stated reason, by the developers, for designing of the nerf.

First, I am not back peddling on any statement. I am merely describing what is meant by my infinite statement which is that based on the amount of regen versus cost of blocking. There was no back peddling. It was simply me explaining why my statement was correct and not at all an exaggeration. You call yourself an experienced player and that what i say is wrong. however, you fail to realize that it is the truth which is why this even happened in the first place. you say it is a problem for certain builds. well ya a build that is not properly specced out to tank. i have never been in a run in any trial or dungeon where a tank needs to lift up that block button even once. is there a build out there that might run out of stamina..sure..that is by far the minority in this game and not a properly specced tank.

additionally, you have made my argument for me in your build you suggested i look at. You state, " I estimate that I lose 1000 stamina every 2 seconds from blocking. So that means my stamina regeneration has to be at least 1000 plus the costs of pierce armor..." i mean lol. you are yelling at me about points i have made and how i exagerrate and all that good stuff. This is exactly my infinite argument! you state that you lose 1,000 stamina and that you stamina regen has to be more than this and the cost of the ability you use. That my friend is called infinite stamina while blocking and have come from the words you have written. not to mention this is a basic, cookie cutter build you use. this is the build that many people run. again, a propely specced tank (which woukd be the majority of tanks) has no problems. in fact in your build, each screenshot shows you blocking, or block casting, and yet still have over 80% stam. you have literally made the argument for me!

as for the interactive argument...yes having to do more in a fight (which is the prduct of this chnage), by definition is more interactive. you can not objectively measure fun since it is a subjective feeling. fun is a matter of opinion, so proving or disproving that depends on the person.

as to the downside relative to the build. that means that if i am a stamina dps, for instance, my downside is lack of magika and damage mitigation. likewise, if i am a tank focused on stamina, then my downside is going to be magika. every build has an inherent downside to it. so, my point on zero-downside is tied into what the build does. For instance, a build that is specced out in stamina recovery and blocking has zero-downside to perma-blocking cause it is infinite. That is what i mean by zero-downside realtive to the build as opposed to the inherent down-sides of the build. a tank has no reason not to be speccing into those two categories. in fact, that is their role. so, when a tank is blocking and holding aggro, they have done their job and fullfilled their role. however, they do so without running out of stamina by simply holding down one button and getting agrro. what is the downside? there is none. your out regening your cost and therfore have no downside in your role.

now, you constantly keep saying the same things to me. you have yet to actually dissect anything i say. you just pass them over and say that i am making blanket statements without giving any information while responding with statements that just say that i am making blanket statements. you have yet to make any statments yourself outside of saying what i am saying is basically wrong and generalized. you have yet to give me any informed or relative information on this matter. in fact, you start your last response by telling me my information is exaggerated after i have shown why they are not. you provide no information to rebut what i said. In fact, you gave me information that furthered my argument. you go on to say that i provide no reason for tanks not to have their stamina regen. i did state why. There is no downside to them holding block while throwing in an block-casting taunt. they take all damage while not losing anything. this is the reason why i like this change. you then finish by arguing a point i have not even brought up since we have been talking. (the interactivity). in fact, you are the one that keeps bringing this argument up. as mentioned above, the inherent nature of this nerf does increase interactivity. However, this is merely a secondary argument to the nerf. this is not the core reason for it, but merely a reason that supplements the reason for the change. you have continuously ignored my reasoned arguments w/o providing any sound arguments of your own. you merely attack my reasons by calling them blanket statements, try to attack by credibility by trying to say i dont know what i am talking about, and then you finish trying to counter my argument with a secondary argument that was not even core to our "debate." You have continuously provided nothing new to this discussion while supplementing an argument i made with your build. I have tried to have a meaningful conversation with you, but to no avail. In fact, i have encouraged you to provide some information and clarification on your side, yet have received none.

Again Bowmanz, you are just sticking to your silly comments about "infinite stamina" and "zero downsides." If you can't get past making those mistakes, then we can't have a real conversation about tanking.

You are merely generalizing the points I made without looking at the underlying understanding of what I said. You also, yet again, continue to provide these generalized notions of what I am saying and undermine my points by tossing them aside into those genralizedwords that I used which w ere discussed on my meaning. You also, yet again, continue to provide no information which rebut what I am trying to say. You simple hide behind yhe curtain of tossing me into a group of people that don't know what I am talking about without providing any justification for doing so. In fact, I provided many reasons behind my words which shed a light on the fact that I do understand what I am talking about. After about 17 months in the game and over 2,000 hours logged I would say I have an understanding of the mechanics and the nuances of this game.

You understand nuances of the game yet come to totally wrong outcomes.

Tell me, what role doesn't strive fore "infinite resources" as you put it? What good players aren't keeping their resources balanced so that they are able to keep up their rotations, 'doing what they should be doing,' and having those "infinite resources" regardless of their role?

That is another thing, you think that tanks have completed their job when they are just holding aggro. Really? I've got news for you, that is incredibly wrong. Nobody that doesn't want the nerf thinks like that. We all accept that tanks should be (and do) much more than just taunting and holding block. We aren't just dinking around and nerfing us doesn't mystically give us the ability to do more.

In your 2000 hours of game time you have developed a caricature view of tanking and that view is causing you to believe that tanking needs an extreme nerf to be fun and interactive.

You have changed the argument slightly in your first point. We are talking about a specific problem in this thread, not the infinite resource problem in general. I do think that it is a general problem for all. Steps have been taken ito rectify that in the form of dodgeroll. Thus is by no means where they end with dealing with the issue in general. Going to joy-divisions point, blocking was just the biggest problem right now. In the future others will complain about other resource managment nerfs. Especially as more and more ppl get champ points making it even more of a problem. But, in this thread we are discussing the specific issue of blocking.

I by no means think there job is over.but they can do that job while continually blocking no problem and receiving no detriment for doing so. Tanking is like an offensive lineman in football, no one ever talks about them, they don't get front page news, but without them and all the work they do on the front line, everything's fails. Yet again at the end of your post you fall back on the interactivity argument which Is not the core argument here. For someone who insisted that my side of the debate uses that as a crutch argument, you sure do fall back on it a lot.

I also know for a fact that my experiences shape MG understanding of how tanks operate. The thing is I have a lot of experience. That said, I do not think my experience is the end all be all either. As I stated before, I am very happy to listen to your experiences. In fact I encourage it. This is how ones knowledge epands. I also said that you may have valid points, but I may decide that the good outweighs the bad. I still respect your desicio s based on your experience.

That is where we differ. I have provided an outline of my experience. You have not done so. Simply saying you will not engage in discussion with me on that experience is wrong. In fact, with idling that experience that you base your decision on is contributing to the problem for the your side. You refuse to engage with debate with someone because you feel that they have no idea what they ate talking about. Instead if enlightening them on the issues associated with their outlook and provide someone with more knowledge on the situation, you disregard them. This not only leaves that persons side Un rebutted, but leaves your voice out of the discussion. Additionally, the other person leaves the debate arena with no new knowledge of the situation based on someone else's expereience.

Please I would be more than happy to read a longer post based on your experience. Make me better understand your side. Don't just sweep it under the rug. Don't refrain from sharing cause you feel I am unworthy. Please share with me. I genuinely want to hear it. It is the only way we go as a community.

Why would I discuss a view that is wrong?

I had a similar discussion with another player who insisted that the nerf wouldn't be that bad because it would cause tanks to light attack, which, according to that player, tanks should already have been doing for ultimate generation purposes. I went as far as making a video to show them that their idea was wrong and that tanks don't need to light attack for ultimate generation purposes. They insisted on their claim, we had no fruitful discussion, and the only thing to do at that point was to question if someone who is wrong in their opinion about what tanks do should be part of the discussion on how how tanks should be.

This is a similar discussion. You want more proof than my AA build as to how tanks discuss stamina? Then go to my VDSA build. My post, post number 22, discussed how not having a balanced stamina stat became problematic for the build and why I therefore made adjustments to the build. How is that for enlightenment?

So there you have it, again, nobody has infinite stamina. Players have to build and play in a certain way to reach stamina equilibrium and, even then, that is just an equilibrium which can allow for stamina to drop well below the equilibrium point. Your attempt to redefine what infinite means doesn't change that tanks don't have infinite stamina nor what tanks do in order to keep balanced resources.

The same goes for your 'zero downside' remark. You redefine what zero downside means, but even under your definition, nobody is playing in a 'I'm perfectly fine just holding block' way and even if you found a player that did such a thing, then everyone who is against the nerf would agree that the player is doing things wrong.

Just like the past discussion that I referenced, I can point out how someone is wrong in their analysis of what tanks do and why they should therefore rethink their opinion on the stamina regeneration nerf, but that person remains staunch in their view and persists in misinforming about tanking.

come on. the first sentence... really? I mean failing to discuss something cause you dont agree. we all have opinions.

I could not find your post. in this thread or vdsa. is the comment number right? I would like to visit that to see more of your view. the difference between me and that guy is that I am willing to hear and understand the other side. I just have not heard mush at all from you. Again, I am actually interested. Based on the two articles you have linked me you obviously undertstand what you are saying, I just dont know the depths of what that is cause you lumped me with that other guy you spoke too who wouldnt listen. That said, tanking seems to be the strongest point of your playstyle based on the amoutn of time you have dedicated to writing about it, This is great. But with it comes a bias view. (which we all have). There is nothing wrong with that just as long as someone understands that they may have those bias feelings and still puts up a sound argument.

That said, you vdsa build does not rely on on holding blocking. (or so it seems based on your stats.). That build should be relatively uneffected by the update. That is not the type of build this nerf was meant to hit. It was for the builds that require holding block the whole time. The build you posted seems meant for timed blocking while being able to put out some damage. (kind of tinkering on the edge of a tank/dps build).

if you have other discussion discussing this same topic i am more then happy to follow a link or be told where to look. no reason to rewrite them. or even copy and post them. Again, I am more open. I may concede a point or two. I may not. Your VDSA build seems uneffected whereas your other one on AA will have some trouble since it seemed to rely on dodge more than anything.

I would also be curious on some of your feedback from IC experience.

A player wrote the following to me

2.) You're obviously a much better tank than I am, but I don't understand how you can possibly run with under 10k Stam and little to no block cost reduction. Just blocking and roll-dodging alone is such a drain. Aren't you constantly running out of Stam? I know GDB works wonders for that, but is there some other Stam management tricks you could share? I can't seem to get away with less than 16-17k Stam. Do you have never-ending shard spam in your group?

I responded with the following points about stamina management

I have switched back to tri stat food for VDSA so that I can be more consistent in having stamina for shield bashes and pierce armor. I enjoyed testing low stamina as it was interesting to see the dilemmas that occur when a stat so low. On the other hand, now I am testing about 21k health and 31k magic.

There is a rare templar shard that I will synergize with, but that is usually before rounds start. I don't like using that synergy at other times because I know that the stamina DPS in my group can usually use it. There is a repentance that gets frequently used in my group by the templar healer. You may want to see if your healer can use that skill (if they are a templar) as it will restore your stamina. I also use Tripotions rather than Panacea of Spell Critical if I find my stamina being low.

Points being that mileage varies on stamina management. Just look at the player who wrote to me. They run with 17k stam and couldn't imagine using less. The other point is that even if tanks have infinite stamina, even by your definition, there are valuable skills and testing that go into stamina equilibrium.

As far as that VDSA build, I do block quite often. Certain waves, such as boss wave round 8 can run me dry on all resources. From this point my experience in VDSA ties into my time in Imperial City. The reason I can get away with a low stamina build and assist on DPS while the player who discussed stamina with me wouldn't be able to imagine running less stamina, I suspect, is due to group DPS.

The sewers PVE dungeon I thought wasn't particularly interesting on normal mode. I could have been doing anything and succeeding. My time in veteran white gold tower was a little bit different and you can find my opinion about it here. To make a long story short, my time in White Gold Tower wasn't that great and part of the reason why is because I find that dungeon, similarly to the stamina regeneration nerf, poorly designed with respect to tanking. The fights where about having high DPS so that a mechanic wouldn't eventually wipe the group due to inevitability. One of my runs through White Gold Tower was with a low DPS player and the whole thing was a nightmare for everyone.

I happened to complete a VDSA run on the PTS and that was interesting with respect to the stamina regeneration nerf. There were some fights that were more tough, but I'm lucky to play with groups that burn down enemies so fast as that prevents me from having to block and not having stamina regeneration for too long. In the end, that is the moral of the story. If tanking is not really that fun and not really that interactive, then that is a function of skipping mechanics, burning, and playing content that has been out leveled a long time ago. From that point of view the nerf reinforced my groups need to burn fast.

Thank you for providing this. Ultimately though when your discussing your vdsa run you talked about testing and changing your approach to the boss. I do believe that if you try to use many builds currently on live you may find yourself having trouble. That sa8d, I expected a learning curve. Giwever, I think once it has been adjusted and the new tanking builds are done, that it will be better for the game. This is what I think lambert was talking about when he states for the health of the game. Yes, there will be problems in the short term while ppl adjust. Out as we always do, we will figure it out and be better for it.

Also, if there are situations in which tanking is not really necessary, eh not through on some backup gear in your inventory to help dps more?