I'd wait for some of these fixes - improvements before any changement.

About AoE Caps there are surely interesting pro.
The problem is that there are also some con, since this changement could lead to the opposite of what we would like to achieve.
There could be less zerg but I highly doubt that many ball - bomb groups will change their way to play; on the contrary they would gain also a lot of benefits from the removal of AoE caps.
Some players are used to bomb - ball gameplay, they do just that and hardly they change it because it's easier to lead, easier to follow and easier to recruit (some groups, guilds, not all).
Several changements lately seemed done to satisfy this gameplay and it wouldn't be a surprise if some guilds asked it during some meetings.

Surely, for some reasons, no AoE caps can be better but first other issues should be addressed:

1) Single Target vs AoE damage
2) Targeting
3) Effects, damage and healing of some skills


1) Some AoE skills, as correctly appointed already in this topic, should do less damage.
AoE skills should be situational, not the main and only skill spammed - used.
An increased cost after each use or a cd could be viable options (at least in PvP).
Another solution, to avoid to create issues in PvE, could be AoE damage reduced just in PvP.
For example damage of single target skills could be reduced by 40% and AoE one by 60% or keep the 50% reduction for single target damage and reduce the AoE one to 75%.
Just the AoE dmg from Ultimates should be reduced by the same percentage of single target skills, since Ultimates should be stronger than normal AoE skills.

In this topic I read really interesting suggestions by @prootch (I like your guild's approach) and by @Enodoc .

Another solution can be be remove the AoE cap but add a cap to damage received: a character can not receive damage from up to 4-6 different AoE skills.
This would be quite artificial but it could be an incentive to spread out and to use single target skills more.

On a further note, the spam of skills like Steel Tornado, Impulse and other ones it's also because of the number of active skills and because of the targeting system.
Something I've never liked of TESO is that we have too few active skills. Desing choice or because of consoles and controllers is something debatable. Instead of adding more skills per bar, an additional swap to a weapon already used in one bar could be interesting (for example DW+DW+2H).
Speaking about AoE skills: Magicka Detonation should not be good as single target dmg skill or vs 2-3 targets but it should shine vs many targets; some frontal AoE skills works too well both as single target dmg skill and AoE, so or the single target dmg or the AoE one should be reduced (for example Puncturing Strikes and morphs).

2) targeting system should be reversed to what it was pre IC.
Fighting a zerg or a ball - bomb group is not like it was before since: A) keep targeted an healer is not the same, B ) the single target dmg output is nowadays too low (but for some specific combos or the heavily abused Camouflaged Hunter glitch from sneak).
This is another changement that seems done especially to satisfy this target but with negative consequences for fun and other ways to play.

3) About effects and healing, I agree with several solutions already posted.

Imho the skills granting some healing based on the damage dealt (like Strife + morphs, Puncturing Sweep, Burning Embers, etc.) should be revisited in PvP since they get twice the malus of reduced dmg and reduced healing.

Last but not least, collisions amongst players would be something great.
I got an answer to my question about it during an ESO Live and I know it's a problem, but it would be something good to spread out more players in PvP.

prootch wrote: »

I would love to see a test too ! preferably on azura (eu-pc)

@Erondil
I really doubt aoe decap would do what you intend it to do:

Large aoe lagballs will overstack aoe in a trial to outdamage other aoelagballs... remaining aoe spamballs, and in huge raids (or multiple raids like decimation). They would not spread all over the map also because they just don't have that many leads and coordination capacity... so we would just get all out aoe decaped deto+steel tornadoe lagspam train. Again and again.

The most vomitive gameplay ever.

That's what they're doing right now. That's what they will try to do the first few days without AoE cap. Then a group of 6-8 better and more coordinated player will jump on them with synchronized ultimates and deto, and will destroy them, especially if the removal of AoE cap comes along with a nerf of barrier, purge and manoeuver. After a few wipes, they will try to spread out to not all be destroyed by this group of 8 players, start to use more single target because they won't find that many ennemy ballgroup anymore, and the 8 man group will have to use single target more too because their AoE aren't as effective without cap on a spread group than with AoE cap on a stacked group.

prootch wrote: »

When talons and standard were not capped and batswarm was bugged, you could see raids full of uncaped dks aoe, but they did not kill aoe lagtrains trend (remember pryda's lagspamball vids). Your offer "summarized" is to stack decaped aoe damage to kill bigger aoe lagstacks... I see a logic failure there.

No, DK vamp even with their OP abilities at the time couldn't kill alone a full 24-man raid stacked together, simply because they couldn't outdps the healing springs spam of 6 healers. And that's not what I'm asking for, nor what would happen without AoE cap. However a coordinated good group of 4-5 players could wipe those ballgroup thanks to no AoE cap and dynamic ult generation, just because they were better and were playing more smartly. Those ballgroups became the meta when they capped AoE, as Pryda himself shows and perfectly knows that without AoE cap, such ballgroup could be wiped by a 6 man group. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hyK9tLzG5o[MEDIA]

prootch wrote: »

I doubt aoe decap would settle lag on it's own, or zos would already have applied it.

We all here miss the stats of server use to have any certitude in it. The sheer number of server calculation access not being enough : it highly depends on the weight of each type of access. Yet aoe creating mechanically more calculation access than monotarget anyway, making sure aoe gameplay is not op anymore would mechanically lower calculation access volume.

I doubt it too, and that's not my main argument to ask for AoE decap, but it will certainly decrease the amount of calculation needed by the server by quite a lot (and thus hopefully reduce the lag).
The calculation that the server has to make with AoE cap, for an instant damage AoE (simplified):
-1,0x damages dealt to 6 nearest targets
-If more than 6 targets in range, 0,5x damages dealt to the 24 next targets
-If more than 30 targets in range, 0,25x damages dealt to the 30 next targets
-If more than 60 targets in range, 0 damage dealt to the farthest targets
The calculation that the server has to make without AoE cap, for an instant damage AoE (simplified):
-Is target in range? Yes>Apply x damages to the target

prootch wrote: »

While with aoe decap, groups like yours will continue to open nightclubs with limited space and access, and go on aoe farming. Including farming aoe stack lagballs which outdamage you atm: everyone would still lag as hell (before one of the aoe groups gets a sort of "instant" death). So I understand perfectly that you ask for it, but I doubt there are any advantages in it for the vast majority of players, including lagwise. And do you need this edge to score ? I don't think so.

By the way as you mentioned our group: it already aims at spreading in assist cells to avoid aoe lagspamballs (provided the lag level still enables to cast of course), so it wouldn't theorically impact our gameplay. But I remember with nostalgy fighting your op group in small scale when tarnum was emp: it was a lot more fun than since some began to slot deto and tornadoe.

No everyone wouldn't lag as hell because those ballgroups would die instantly if they were stacked like monkeys, so either they would spread out, either they would die instantly. In both case no lag, lag starts to appear when a big ballgroup stays alive and hit stuff with AoE for quite some time, not when they hit nothing nor when they die instantly.
We were already pretty much all using deto when Tarnum was emp, we started to use it and coordinate it in the first months of 1.6. We also already had 1-2 ST user, which is pretty much the same amount than today. Only thing that changed is due to the meta shift we had to increase our groupsize a bit post 1.7 (we used to be 10-12, now mostly 12-14 sometimes 16) and the new deto is easier to use (though not more efficient) which makes it a bit less interesting imo.

prootch wrote: »

Also i'm quite sure instant mass chain killing of pugs with unlimited aoe will certainly not encourage a majority of casual players to remain in pvp. Your view is maybe a bit too much self centered and certainly missing marketing insight. Getting all the casuals to drop the game in the end because of mass aoe chain kills by a few op groups, really ? guess what... the mass of pugs/casual are actually financing this game.

Again, it wouldn't help us much to kill pugs because those are usually spread out ( my sap essence rarely hits more than 5 targets when we fight pugs) even in outpost or keeps (most stay outside and use sieges). Only times I feel AoE cap is when we fight organized bombgroup of 12+ really, never agaisnt pugs. In fact, in fight agaisnt pugs, removal of AoE cap would probably benefit more pugs than us because, when we're 12, we already benefit of a 25% damage reduction from AoE cap, and their sieges/AoE would hurst us way more.

Rune_Relic wrote: »

Jhunn wrote: »

Rune_Relic wrote: »

I know removing AoE caps will mean the server will instantly crash the 1st time players try to take down a large ball group.
If the servers cant cope with a 60 man cap, there is no way they will cope with no cap.
But 1vX and destroying Ball groups appears to be far more important than server performance.

Million calculations vs no calculations. How should that make server perfomance worse?

Ahh! so you are going to ONE SHOT that zerg ball with your small group.....and not actually be hitting all the other players..repeatedly...upto the unlimted cap.... because the caps have been raised.

Or do you means you are going to hit them for
24x100% damage with your unlimited caps....rather than ...
6x100 + 18x50 = 24x 64% damage.
Because that 36% more damage is really going to make that zergball crumble....and start trembling.

The Zergball will cary on regardless with your pitiful increase in damage.
The server will crumble under all the unlimited collateral players being hit by the unlimited caps.

I cant wait for this.

This game is NOT DAOC
This game is NOT WoW
This game is NOT GW2
This game is NOT LoTRO

this game uses a completely unique combat system calculations and using other games as evidence rather than historical fact from within this game..ESO...is nothing but projection and wishful thinking.

We KNOW what happended when caps went from 6 to 60.
There was NEVER a time when ESO had NO CAPS...other than a couple of limited skills.
The same skills that caused the LAG issues.

AoE cap is 4* more calculations than no AoE Cap. Also, yeah 37.5% more damage will make a huge difference. 37.5% damage reduction is like if the 24-man group was always moving in a Veil of Blade and a Circle of Protection. If you think its nothing... you have no clue.

Rune_Relic wrote: »

Ahh! so you are going to ONE SHOT that zerg ball with your small group.....and not actually be hitting all the other players..repeatedly...upto the unlimted cap.... because the caps have been raised.

Or do you means you are going to hit them for
24x100% damage with your unlimited caps....rather than ...
6x100 + 18x50 = 24x 64% damage.
Because that 36% more damage is really going to make that zergball crumble....and start trembling.

The Zergball will cary on regardless with your pitiful increase in damage.
The server will crumble under all the unlimited collateral players being hit by the unlimited caps.

I cant wait for this.

This game is NOT DAOC
This game is NOT WoW
This game is NOT GW2
This game is NOT LoTRO

this game uses a completely unique combat system calculations and using other games as evidence rather than historical fact from within this game..ESO...is nothing but projection and wishful thinking.

We KNOW what happended when caps went from 6 to 60.
There was NEVER a time when ESO had NO CAPS...other than a couple of limited skills.
The same skills that caused the LAG issues.

I don't know if you got what I meant, I was a bit DISTRACTED while reading your POST because of your CONSTANT use of CAPS.

I go in with steel tornado and hit 60 people:
1) I hit 6 with 100% damage. Next 24 will receive 50% damage. Final 30% will get 25% damage.
2) I hit 60 people with full damage.

Which do you think requires the most calculations?

Rune_Relic wrote: »

You seriously think the ball group cant adapt to soak up that damage ?
Yeah its a help.
Yeah its fairer.
But damn man....prepare for that gorgeous lag.

60 players caps is 10x mpre calculaitons and client updates than 6 player cap.
We have the added lag to prove it when we went to 1.6
Whats your point ?
if I hit 6 people that's 6 client updates from the server across the network.
If I hit 60 people that's 60 client updates from the server across the network.

If the AoE cap was 1 there would be no lag... so again whats your point ?

I fail to see your point. Make zergs stronger?

Kas wrote: »

Slightly offtopic:
I would still prefer abilities with HUGE impact that can be interrupted over the current meta.
Skill spamming is crazy effective for both, group/zerg pvp and even 1v1's. Sure, better players will mix in LA's - and depending ont he build - cancle skills with bashes. But the overall concept is stil: get as little damage spells as necessary and as many buffs and utility as possible and then fight the right moment to spam your damage spell. The same goes for defense in zergs: imho it still makes sense to split it and have a dk with ignenous spam all the springs, DD's with bastion provide barriers and templars spam BoL. The main reason this is not happening too much, imho, is denial: the good players don't want to accept that only spamming one skill could be even more effective than playing "good". Instead think of abilities like the most effective heals, wrecking blow, steel tornado or hardend ward in even stronger versions, but all of them interruptable.


Now, to go back to the AoE cap, I think it is a dangerous thing. You can basically control the duration of fights with it. However, the biggest ball (in terms of #players * equip * doing the right things) will still win. Both, prox det and especially steel tornado have an incredible range. Single target abilities are not option to go up against them and will never be. So you might fix the lag, but probably not the fight/fun. Instead of lag, the fight will be over - with probably the same outvcome, just a little quicker. Not fun.

I loved DAoC, but i strongly disagree with those saying that strong (PB)AoE punished zergs. AoE mezzes and the fact that AoE damage was also an AoE interrupt did. Otherwise your zerg blob would have only needed a few bombers themselves. CC and interrupting by starting first did the trick.

In general, I think the most effective way is to punish grouping up - from range. Siege weapons did that for a short time, but at the same time, the took the fun out of the combat. Controlling a siege is terribly boring if you do it often. Further, spreading out doesn't help if a huge enemy force can put up many sieges. Your probably still best of to move as a blob, it's just harder to move properly and you maybe need to react to a missstep (clean + barrier).

imho, there is little reason to leave steel tornado and prox det AoE as big as it is. As logn as you can neither escape nor touch these balls, they will be super effective. imho inevitabel (and prox) det are a great start. Especially ievitable. However, I think both should deal less damage but scale more strongly with the number of players. If 30+ ball up and see the red circlle (maybe give it a special color), I don't think getting 1hit would be undeserved.

The interrupts on AOEs helped when you were attacking from Range (Think Spears from Runemaster for example) and Mez of course was always super useful... But you have to remember this is a game that didn't have stealth for everyone and didn't have instant gap closers..It did have super speed and such you generally had to pray that no one saw ya coming from behind to ball mez...But interrupts itself did not matter when bombing with PBAE on a bomb.. and i'll tell ya why.

Because if you're getting bombed in DAOC....Your first response is to do one thing, and one thing only...MOVE OUT OF RANGE. You had probably less then 3 seconds to live otherwise....PBAE itself could hit for 800+ damage on people; in a game where casters had around 1600 health; and tanks about 2200+. 2 or 3 PBAE users meant instant death in mere seconds and you simply didn't have time to cast anything anyway other then hauling your ass away from the death circle.

usmcjdking wrote: »

PainfulFAFA wrote: »

prootch wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Pulsar and Batswarm both had caps
There were a few abilities that did not have caps at the beginning of the game; Talons and Standard for example..and you most certainly could not stand in Talons or Standard back then and live... In fact just having 2 DKs drop that on a stack of players and pop the synergies would kill loads of people.

Yeah I could have spoken of Talons
And batswarm was utterly bugged for a long time

All of this missing the point: massively decrease aoe damage and go for a far better gameplay instead of asking for aoe damage decap that will cause more problems than if solves.

lol. just lol

Running in ball groups already gives zerglings artificial mitigation (because of AoE Caps) on top of all the healing and YOU WANT AOE DMG NERFED? just lol no comment wont waste time arguing you.

Please take some time to read post # 28 and while you're at it, take a listen to what the people from the We Are ESO podcasts argue about the state of PvP. I challenge you to come up with an eleborate counter arguement to what those players have raised about the state of PvP, instead of just stating something for the heck of it without doing some research first.

The We Are ESO Podcast, to put it kindly, is a huge waste of time. I think that it is good that they are getting together and putting together something else that lets ZOS know we are currently unpleased...but other than that it's wasting time. None of these guys have any business prosing major design changes to the game because their experience in MMO game design and retention is limited to their personal play time and experience with playing the game.

These are not the type of people you want designing a game that requires an active and growing userbase.

Anyways, a few good suggestions in here IRT AOE caps. I think the winner-winner-chicken-dinner suggestion was for the 5M AOE radius cap. Worth testing IMO.

Your posts unkindly put are a waste of time. Were experienced vets in PvP getting together to talk about the problems with the game and what needs to change to improve PvP. Somehow you feel these credentials actually work against knowing what changes need to be put in place to improve PvP and performance.

Lets take for example one of your other posts where you suggested they implement a skill like earthshaker ult because you saw it in one of your favorite plays in dota 2 (which is laughable because the only part of that play that mattered was the money on the line rather than the fact that 5 people actually attempted to do a blind rosh while the opposing team had vision). But lets entertain your idea of implementing a skill with 'reverberating effects'. This means damage would go out (as AOE does now) and then impact again based on numbers hit to all target with the reverberating effect. You know what this means? A whole hell of a lot more calculations. And you have the audacity to post about making suggestions for PvP when you want an idea that would absolutely slaughter a netcode that already cannot stand on its own feet. Sounds like a great suggestion from someone that is off in dreamland rather than trying to sensibly propose solutions that actually reduce the stress the server.

Given that Ive already had an opportunity to work in game development, Ill just leave off that I have a great job in a growing industry and happy to be where Im at. You are probably as bad at dota as you are in ESO and you share the same opinion as anyone who is afraid of facing skilled players on equal footing.


Ultimately, the devs are likely aware as we are that removing AOE caps would help performance - its not the debate at all. It would actually improve cyro compared to what we have today in that sense. Their concern is for the mild hearted player that will get blasted off the map while running in ball groups because 'that is how we mass pvp'. Time to remove caps and for players to learn there is more to PvP than following a crown.

This isnt for the 1vXer, this is for changing Cyro in a way that makes it more tolerable. The added benefit is really performance, but the ultimate goal is to change how the game works: numbers win. And that is because AOE caps handicap the primary tool you would use on massive groups in a small radius.

prootch wrote: »

Do you have any proof of the contrary ?
Without access to detailled server stats it's impossible to state.
Only zos have this information, and if they have not already done this quite simple move of decap aoe, despites hundreds of posts on forums, I doubt they consider aoe decaps are the main cure to lag.

The number of calculation access will still be heavy wether you have aoe caps or not.
People will go on spaming while moving, wether you have aoe caps of not.
We usually get heavy lag even before actual contact with some spamballs: it seems the sheer number of spams are already producing lag, even before impact.

Most pugs and less organized groups will be instant wiped in the process.
This would be counter productive both from a population point of view, and most probably from a lag point of view.

Now I agree only a live test on a server could proove it right or wrong.
And without precise data to support it, I remain doubtfull and... I dislike the aoe meta.

Do you have data to prove otherwise? How are we going to collect data? The only data we have is that there was less lag before ball groups were in Cyro. Once there were ball groups running together 24/7 hitting eachother with mass springs/purge/heal effects - lag kicked up.

That is about as strong as your data will get. Is it going to fix lag, as in it will go away entirely? No. Will fights last as long when 2 large groups clash? No, one will die sooner. Is this the only way to PvP in the game? No it isnt, you can actually have a group with 20+ people that arent all within 5m of each other to PvP. Would it be better on performance if some groups learned to PvP without being stacked on each other through the entire duration of their hours of PvPing? Yes it would.

Not sure what youve been arguing for throughout this post. Youre telling people to provide data on something when you have no data yourself to counteract what youre asking for. Just give it up. There will be shorter fights if people stick to playing how they want to play today - that is a positive change for lag. There will be less calculations when the server has to go through picking targets to reduce damage for instead of delivering it flat across the area - thats a positive for lag.

Can you make any type of strong argument?

So while we're at throwing around assumptions, here are my 2 cents.

Currently the AOE caps work as follows:

First 6 targets: 100%
Next 24: 50%
Next 30: 25%
Rest: 0%

I'm going to compare this to the following scenario:
No AOE caps

I'm assuming that additional calculations mean more lag.

So let's take a look at what the server has to calculate in both scenarios:
A:Less than 60 targets

With AOE caps
1. Determine first 6 targets
2. Determine next 24 targets
3. Determine next 30 targets
4. Apply damage to first 6 targets
5. Calculate x0.5 damage of next 24 targets
6. Calculate x2.5 damage of remaining 30 targets

Without AOE caps
1. Apply damage to all targets (<60)

B: more than 60 targets

With AOE caps
1. Determine first 6 targets
2. Determine next 24 targets
3. Determine next 30 targets
4. Apply damage to first 6 targets
5. Calculate x0.5 damage of next 24 targets
6. Calculate x2.5 damage of remaining 30 targets

Without AOE caps
1. Apply damage to all targets (>60)

So let's compare the two implementations:
Additional calculations if AOE caps are on:

• It has to be determined which target recieves 100%, which one 50% and which one 25%
• the damage numbers calculated have to be multiplied by 0.5 or 0.25

Additional calculations if AOE caps are off:

• if more than 60 targets are hit, the damage they take has to be calculated based on the attackers TT and the defenders resistances. (for the first 60 targets those have to be calculated if AOE caps are on as well)

From that it can be concluded quite easily, that AOE caps most likely start to be better from ~70 targets on. However, these days hitting 70 targets with an AOE pretty much impossible, since the the population cap is around 150 per alliance.

FENGRUSH wrote: »

usmcjdking wrote: »

PainfulFAFA wrote: »

prootch wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Pulsar and Batswarm both had caps
There were a few abilities that did not have caps at the beginning of the game; Talons and Standard for example..and you most certainly could not stand in Talons or Standard back then and live... In fact just having 2 DKs drop that on a stack of players and pop the synergies would kill loads of people.

Yeah I could have spoken of Talons
And batswarm was utterly bugged for a long time

All of this missing the point: massively decrease aoe damage and go for a far better gameplay instead of asking for aoe damage decap that will cause more problems than if solves.

lol. just lol

Running in ball groups already gives zerglings artificial mitigation (because of AoE Caps) on top of all the healing and YOU WANT AOE DMG NERFED? just lol no comment wont waste time arguing you.

Please take some time to read post # 28 and while you're at it, take a listen to what the people from the We Are ESO podcasts argue about the state of PvP. I challenge you to come up with an eleborate counter arguement to what those players have raised about the state of PvP, instead of just stating something for the heck of it without doing some research first.

The We Are ESO Podcast, to put it kindly, is a huge waste of time. I think that it is good that they are getting together and putting together something else that lets ZOS know we are currently unpleased...but other than that it's wasting time. None of these guys have any business prosing major design changes to the game because their experience in MMO game design and retention is limited to their personal play time and experience with playing the game.

These are not the type of people you want designing a game that requires an active and growing userbase.

Anyways, a few good suggestions in here IRT AOE caps. I think the winner-winner-chicken-dinner suggestion was for the 5M AOE radius cap. Worth testing IMO.

Your posts unkindly put are a waste of time. Were experienced vets in PvP getting together to talk about the problems with the game and what needs to change to improve PvP. Somehow you feel these credentials actually work against knowing what changes need to be put in place to improve PvP and performance.

Lets take for example one of your other posts where you suggested they implement a skill like earthshaker ult because you saw it in one of your favorite plays in dota 2 (which is laughable because the only part of that play that mattered was the money on the line rather than the fact that 5 people actually attempted to do a blind rosh while the opposing team had vision). But lets entertain your idea of implementing a skill with 'reverberating effects'. This means damage would go out (as AOE does now) and then impact again based on numbers hit to all target with the reverberating effect. You know what this means? A whole hell of a lot more calculations. And you have the audacity to post about making suggestions for PvP when you want an idea that would absolutely slaughter a netcode that already cannot stand on its own feet. Sounds like a great suggestion from someone that is off in dreamland rather than trying to sensibly propose solutions that actually reduce the stress the server.

Given that Ive already had an opportunity to work in game development, Ill just leave off that I have a great job in a growing industry and happy to be where Im at. You are probably as bad at dota as you are in ESO and you share the same opinion as anyone who is afraid of facing skilled players on equal footing.


Ultimately, the devs are likely aware as we are that removing AOE caps would help performance - its not the debate at all. It would actually improve cyro compared to what we have today in that sense. Their concern is for the mild hearted player that will get blasted off the map while running in ball groups because 'that is how we mass pvp'. Time to remove caps and for players to learn there is more to PvP than following a crown.

This isnt for the 1vXer, this is for changing Cyro in a way that makes it more tolerable. The added benefit is really performance, but the ultimate goal is to change how the game works: numbers win. And that is because AOE caps handicap the primary tool you would use on massive groups in a small radius.

Congratulations you are good at a game with a decent job? Didn't ask nor do I care what your background is as it's very blantant you aren't any good at MMO design (which is a people business) since you can't seemingly deal with an ounce of criticism without wailing away at your keyboard uncontrollably. A constantly living game requires a strong revenue stream. A strong revenue stream requires a) multiple sales b) subscriptions - if design changes do not cater to the side of being noob friendly which promotes those two aspects of longevity then the game goes to the financial graveyard.

In addition, CDEC was getting plastered by Sumail. Sumail died by being lazy and they absolutely had to regain control and tempo. Killing Sumail then resuming farm or charging into a next tier tower to get stalemated by an ES/AA combo is what would have gone through a pubs brain as I assume yours. Rosh or smoke was their only option and IIRC they had already blown 3 of their smokes. Not a bad decision, just a desperate one that didn't pay off at all. The only misplay there was them sitting in the ice vortex which made the echo slam hit like a freight train while the PL stayed in the back (largely due to muscle memory to keep Rosh from using his AOE).

And you are 100% right. In my current employment I got VERY lucky and have free access to thinks that I cannot afford e.g., a nutritionist who cooks all my meals for me and a massage therapist who charges triple digits per hour. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't P2W in my current employment.

And finally netcode, is a made up word for a whole bunch of stuff that is not even in the same departmental field. Let's refrain from using made up words like netcode. That's like talking about Muay Thai in the Floyd Mayweather vs. Manny Pacquiao fight. Related because combat sport, but (per your usual) completely irrelevant to the task at hand.

usmcjdking wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

usmcjdking wrote: »

PainfulFAFA wrote: »

prootch wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Pulsar and Batswarm both had caps
There were a few abilities that did not have caps at the beginning of the game; Talons and Standard for example..and you most certainly could not stand in Talons or Standard back then and live... In fact just having 2 DKs drop that on a stack of players and pop the synergies would kill loads of people.

Yeah I could have spoken of Talons
And batswarm was utterly bugged for a long time

All of this missing the point: massively decrease aoe damage and go for a far better gameplay instead of asking for aoe damage decap that will cause more problems than if solves.

lol. just lol

Running in ball groups already gives zerglings artificial mitigation (because of AoE Caps) on top of all the healing and YOU WANT AOE DMG NERFED? just lol no comment wont waste time arguing you.

Please take some time to read post # 28 and while you're at it, take a listen to what the people from the We Are ESO podcasts argue about the state of PvP. I challenge you to come up with an eleborate counter arguement to what those players have raised about the state of PvP, instead of just stating something for the heck of it without doing some research first.

The We Are ESO Podcast, to put it kindly, is a huge waste of time. I think that it is good that they are getting together and putting together something else that lets ZOS know we are currently unpleased...but other than that it's wasting time. None of these guys have any business prosing major design changes to the game because their experience in MMO game design and retention is limited to their personal play time and experience with playing the game.

These are not the type of people you want designing a game that requires an active and growing userbase.

Anyways, a few good suggestions in here IRT AOE caps. I think the winner-winner-chicken-dinner suggestion was for the 5M AOE radius cap. Worth testing IMO.

Your posts unkindly put are a waste of time. Were experienced vets in PvP getting together to talk about the problems with the game and what needs to change to improve PvP. Somehow you feel these credentials actually work against knowing what changes need to be put in place to improve PvP and performance.

Lets take for example one of your other posts where you suggested they implement a skill like earthshaker ult because you saw it in one of your favorite plays in dota 2 (which is laughable because the only part of that play that mattered was the money on the line rather than the fact that 5 people actually attempted to do a blind rosh while the opposing team had vision). But lets entertain your idea of implementing a skill with 'reverberating effects'. This means damage would go out (as AOE does now) and then impact again based on numbers hit to all target with the reverberating effect. You know what this means? A whole hell of a lot more calculations. And you have the audacity to post about making suggestions for PvP when you want an idea that would absolutely slaughter a netcode that already cannot stand on its own feet. Sounds like a great suggestion from someone that is off in dreamland rather than trying to sensibly propose solutions that actually reduce the stress the server.

Given that Ive already had an opportunity to work in game development, Ill just leave off that I have a great job in a growing industry and happy to be where Im at. You are probably as bad at dota as you are in ESO and you share the same opinion as anyone who is afraid of facing skilled players on equal footing.


Ultimately, the devs are likely aware as we are that removing AOE caps would help performance - its not the debate at all. It would actually improve cyro compared to what we have today in that sense. Their concern is for the mild hearted player that will get blasted off the map while running in ball groups because 'that is how we mass pvp'. Time to remove caps and for players to learn there is more to PvP than following a crown.

This isnt for the 1vXer, this is for changing Cyro in a way that makes it more tolerable. The added benefit is really performance, but the ultimate goal is to change how the game works: numbers win. And that is because AOE caps handicap the primary tool you would use on massive groups in a small radius.

Congratulations you are good at a game with a decent job? Didn't ask nor do I care what your background is as it's very blantant you aren't any good at MMO design (which is a people business) since you can't seemingly deal with an ounce of criticism without wailing away at your keyboard uncontrollably. A constantly living game requires a strong revenue stream. A strong revenue stream requires a) multiple sales b) subscriptions - if design changes do not cater to the side of being noob friendly which promotes those two aspects of longevity then the game goes to the financial graveyard.

Wrong. Being too casual friendly is just as deadly as being too hardcore is. When there is nothing a player can strive to achieve most won´t bother to participate - people persuing personal goals are mostly hardcore on a topic and inspire other people. Also those people make great antagonists.
If you shift the balance too far into one direction or the other (which is currently the case as everything favors numbers over actual competence atm) things go downhill pretty fast.
Apart from that a state of pvp where you´re only able to compete with grps of 20+ people is highly discouraging for any new player in the game - people don´t feel like they matter in such a setting.

Also monetary aspect in general has nothing to do in this equasion imho. PvP is a shiny figurehead pulling people to the game (twitch, youtube etc.). That´s why developers should care. Cash in eso is earned with other things (or should be as the cashshop is terrrrrrrible).

usmcjdking wrote: »

This veiled [snip] of 'calculations' is getting slightly irritating. A potato server with a capped 450 connections is not going to struggle unless it's some macro-folding project over a satellite. When a server struggles, it crashes gloriously. In the event that a specific VM requires more processing power, it will start siphoning from the other VMs which causes a chain reaction of coffee and system admins getting yelled at. Kinda like hypereutectic pistons #gripe.

Has anyone posted any network statistics between the authentication and PVP servers? They have to go through the same gateway. Does anyone know what QOS they are using for the multi-threading between servers and client (or, to be more accurate, multi-processing)? Did they generate it themselves or are they using some cut & pasted generic QOS settings? Is the dude in charge of making heads or tails of their interior network protocol (probs EIGRP) running into issues? [snip] I know I promised a specific user I would do some testing last night (I didn't), but I will do it tonight. [snip]

Which is exactly, why I'd like to get a official response from ZOS.

[edited to remove quote]

FENGRUSH wrote: »

prootch wrote: »

Do you have any proof of the contrary ?
Without access to detailled server stats it's impossible to state.
Only zos have this information, and if they have not already done this quite simple move of decap aoe, despites hundreds of posts on forums, I doubt they consider aoe decaps are the main cure to lag.

The number of calculation access will still be heavy wether you have aoe caps or not.
People will go on spaming while moving, wether you have aoe caps of not.
We usually get heavy lag even before actual contact with some spamballs: it seems the sheer number of spams are already producing lag, even before impact.

Most pugs and less organized groups will be instant wiped in the process.
This would be counter productive both from a population point of view, and most probably from a lag point of view.

Now I agree only a live test on a server could proove it right or wrong.
And without precise data to support it, I remain doubtfull and... I dislike the aoe meta.

Do you have data to prove otherwise? How are we going to collect data? The only data we have is that there was less lag before ball groups were in Cyro. Once there were ball groups running together 24/7 hitting eachother with mass springs/purge/heal effects - lag kicked up.

That is about as strong as your data will get. Is it going to fix lag, as in it will go away entirely? No. Will fights last as long when 2 large groups clash? No, one will die sooner. Is this the only way to PvP in the game? No it isnt, you can actually have a group with 20+ people that arent all within 5m of each other to PvP. Would it be better on performance if some groups learned to PvP without being stacked on each other through the entire duration of their hours of PvPing? Yes it would.

Not sure what youve been arguing for throughout this post. Youre telling people to provide data on something when you have no data yourself to counteract what youre asking for. Just give it up. There will be shorter fights if people stick to playing how they want to play today - that is a positive change for lag. There will be less calculations when the server has to go through picking targets to reduce damage for instead of delivering it flat across the area - thats a positive for lag.

Can you make any type of strong argument?

Its pointless to argue against that one. Read all of his previous posts... laughable.
We all know the damage that AoE caps brought to this game and theres a reason THE MAJORITY of PvPers agree with many of the points raised in We Are ESO. It was about time players got together to bring change to this game and voice they're concerns.

Continue blasting fools like this I've no time nor patience to argue against mentalities like that lol