AoE Caps Discussion

Cinbri · December 2015

Jhunn wrote: »

6th day and @Wrobel is still permacloaking.

Nerf cloak

Didn't think that cloak op, now i changed my mind.

prootch · December 2015

no one decides who has the burden of proof in a discussion...

ToRelax wrote: »

Well @Prootch told us that zergballs would stack up even more people thus become even more of a problem... wich is ofc a fallacy because stacking up more people to become as strong as they used to be wouldn't actually make the problem worse for anyone

You really don't know that until tested in field. And as I said I would actually favour a real test on a specific server (not pts, full real conditions), as well as a live test with no tornadoe spam and timers on aoe to avoid aoe spam and therefore lower lag (or why not a combination of both, ie aoe decap + reload timer against aoe spam in pvp). Dunno if it's possible dev wise. But decap aoe in similar games means more aoe balls... gw2 stack balls gameplay ftw.

but people like the fabled @Prootch himself who just don't use AoE even when it would be effective. Wich, btw, is complete ***, he is leading a raid on his own and even though I see them spamming less AoE than more effective groups, they are using them.

Who ever said we don't use aoe except your fallacy of an argumentation ?

Of course our group does use aoe, for heals, ultis, controls... We just mostly don't use this vomitive no brain steel tornadoe+deto+pulsar spam gameplay that's about it: we experienced it makes the fights boring, laggy, and low pvp interest.

Of course we - did - also noticed that is makes us less effective in terms of aoe damage stacking than - some - other organized bomsquads (especially in close quarter fights), but that's a fair trade for more fun: our players do dislike lagspamming brainlessly on lead tail and are not so obsessed with all out roxing that they would choose to aoe lagstack voluntarily. So they prefer to play in cells and assist specific targets most of the time.

And... curiously we have very good relationships with most ennemy groups due to this choice

and... less lag in our fights.

The funny part starts when you think about his own proposal, wich is just removing AoE completely, wich is not only unrealistic (wich admittedly he wrote himself), but would also either hurt his own group...

The funniest part is that my group would actually applaude not fighting lag aoe spamballs every evening -even- if it would also "hurt our group". Now totally suppressing aoe is of course not the point. Making aoe less effective than mono targets for organized groups is the point (and yes it would impact our actual gameplay... but probably for the best). From our pov it would both enhance pvp interest and be less damaging to the casual player base (remember, the majority of the guys financing the game). I don't ask you to share that pov ofc, just explaining.

Lagaoe spamballs are mainly organized groups atm. Certainly not pugs or so called "zergs" (who knows what that is exactly btw) as some here would like to sell. Organized groups are the major aoespam lag factor we do encounter. Each time they launch their aoe spam routine our ping soars. We don't face that with pug trains, and we don't face that with less organized raids, even some multiple ald warbands we are fighting theses days (of course we choose also not to fight in eu pc lagzura in prime time where people enjoy their daily 500+ aoe spamlag dose).

Most of these organized aoe spamballs are so obsessed "not losing" a fight that they easely accept to play with this 500+ ping deto+tornadoe aoe spam every evening provided it enables them to successfully farm ap... even in vomitive lag. So knowing this I doubt they would change gameplay with aoe decap, resulting in a full continuation of this bull.*** aoe spamball gameplay ftw.

aoe spamball is the lowest interest gameplay from our pov.

- because enemies stack up more people, to make them ahrder to target - or that would be what he'd do himself, and I just hope no one wants zergballs using single target spells effectively who can't be hit by AoE at all... yeah...

we just hope everyone would like to see less aoe stacks and more mono target fights spread all over the map, instead of aoe spamballs wars to check which organized group will actually stack aoe damages, buffs and heals... better.

I would prefer organized groups to shine with efficient assist (ok it's harder in melee, and that's precisely what it's meant to be in a melee), clever movement tactics, blitzkrieg strats, ambush, ... than to be reknown for being able to efficiently aoespam lagfarm in close quarter all evening long. And I write it well conscious that we actually do farm towers def too when we are outnumbered (using postern def in ressources, funneling ennemies like medieval keeps def used to, just again... avoiding deto+tornadoe brainless spamballs.

PainfulFAFA wrote: »

And yet Steel Tornado is left untouched with its ridiculous range and execute capabilities...

This has obviously been designed for pve boys, totally ignoring it's *** effect in pvp...
I still wonder if the combat mechanism team ever sets foot in pvp.

Sarousse · December 2015

If you want a pratical example, we're having more fun on the non-vet campaign because there are no Steel tornado/bomb/barrier zergballs, and therefore no lag at all, even in battles with hundreds of players.

Another point that I'd like to point out to @Wrobel : why, after monthes of asking from your pvp playerbase, the heals still don't priorize our group ?

As a small group leader (4 to 8), we're suffering from this in every fight against large groups. When I'm tanking in the front line against XXX enemies, and my healer flash heal goes on the player next to me, causing my death, because of your random healing system, you wouldn't want to hear how many insults are thrown to ZoS Devs on teamspeak.

Change this. It's about time. Priorise the groups/raids in the healing system. That would also probably help lag calculations.

prootch · December 2015

Most certainly: limiting heals to group just like they now limit buffs to group.

DisgracefulMind · December 2015

@Wrobel I think it's time you listened to your playerbase on this one. Why don't you remove AoE caps on PTS, and let us go and test it? We will, loads of us will. So where is the harm in that? It's time to swallow your pride and realize that your ideas are NOT working. The state of the PvP in this game is inexcusable, and it is glaringly obvious that what you have implemented now is not working and never will.

There is nothing more for me to say on this topic, because @FENGRUSH and others have already completely covered it.

Listen to your players. For once. This game's PvP is dying. Please start CARING about that.

Xsorus · December 2015

prootch wrote: »

no one decides who has the burden of proof in a discussion...

ToRelax wrote: »

Well @Prootch told us that zergballs would stack up even more people thus become even more of a problem... wich is ofc a fallacy because stacking up more people to become as strong as they used to be wouldn't actually make the problem worse for anyone

You really don't know that until tested in field. And as I said I would actually favour a real test on a specific server (not pts, full real conditions), as well as a live test with no tornadoe spam and timers on aoe to avoid aoe spam and therefore lower lag (or why not a combination of both, ie aoe decap + reload timer against aoe spam in pvp). Dunno if it's possible dev wise. But decap aoe in similar games means more aoe balls... gw2 stack balls gameplay ftw.

but people like the fabled @Prootch himself who just don't use AoE even when it would be effective. Wich, btw, is complete ***, he is leading a raid on his own and even though I see them spamming less AoE than more effective groups, they are using them.

Who ever said we don't use aoe except your fallacy of an argumentation ?

Of course our group does use aoe, for heals, ultis, controls... We just mostly don't use this vomitive no brain steel tornadoe+deto+pulsar spam gameplay that's about it: we experienced it makes the fights boring, laggy, and low pvp interest.

Of course we - did - also noticed that is makes us less effective in terms of aoe damage stacking than - some - other organized bomsquads (especially in close quarter fights), but that's a fair trade for more fun: our players do dislike lagspamming brainlessly on lead tail and are not so obsessed with all out roxing that they would choose to aoe lagstack voluntarily. So they prefer to play in cells and assist specific targets most of the time.

And... curiously we have very good relationships with most ennemy groups due to this choice and... less lag in our fights.

The funny part starts when you think about his own proposal, wich is just removing AoE completely, wich is not only unrealistic (wich admittedly he wrote himself), but would also either hurt his own group...

The funniest part is that my group would actually applaude not fighting lag aoe spamballs every evening -even- if it would also "hurt our group". Now totally suppressing aoe is of course not the point. Making aoe less effective than mono targets for organized groups is the point (and yes it would impact our actual gameplay... but probably for the best). From our pov it would both enhance pvp interest and be less damaging to the casual player base (remember, the majority of the guys financing the game). I don't ask you to share that pov ofc, just explaining.

Lagaoe spamballs are mainly organized groups atm. Certainly not pugs or so called "zergs" (who knows what that is exactly btw) as some here would like to sell. Organized groups are the major aoespam lag factor we do encounter. Each time they launch their aoe spam routine our ping soars. We don't face that with pug trains, and we don't face that with less organized raids, even some multiple ald warbands we are fighting theses days (of course we choose also not to fight in eu pc lagzura in prime time where people enjoy their daily 500+ aoe spamlag dose).

Most of these organized aoe spamballs are so obsessed "not losing" a fight that they easely accept to play with this 500+ ping deto+tornadoe aoe spam every evening provided it enables them to successfully farm ap... even in vomitive lag. So knowing this I doubt they would change gameplay with aoe decap, resulting in a full continuation of this bull.*** aoe spamball gameplay ftw.

aoe spamball is the lowest interest gameplay from our pov.

- because enemies stack up more people, to make them ahrder to target - or that would be what he'd do himself, and I just hope no one wants zergballs using single target spells effectively who can't be hit by AoE at all... yeah...

we just hope everyone would like to see less aoe stacks and more mono target fights spread all over the map, instead of aoe spamballs wars to check which organized group will actually stack aoe damages, buffs and heals... better.

I would prefer organized groups to shine with efficient assist (ok it's harder in melee, and that's precisely what it's meant to be in a melee), clever movement tactics, blitzkrieg strats, ambush, ... than to be reknown for being able to efficiently aoespam lagfarm in close quarter all evening long. And I write it well conscious that we actually do farm towers def too when we are outnumbered (using postern def in ressources, funneling ennemies like medieval keeps def used to, just again... avoiding deto+tornadoe brainless spamballs.

PainfulFAFA wrote: »

And yet Steel Tornado is left untouched with its ridiculous range and execute capabilities...

This has obviously been designed for pve boys, totally ignoring it's *** effect in pvp...
I still wonder if the combat mechanism team ever sets foot in pvp.

GW2 has AOE caps.....Its the only reason people are able to stack in that game..Otherwise you'd get blown up for doing it and stacking more people would not help.

CtrlAltDlt · December 2015

Why is this even a discussion. Get rid of aoe caps already.

Joy_Division · December 2015

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

@Wrobel I think it's time you listened to your playerbase on this one. Why don't you remove AoE caps on PTS, and let us go and test it? We will, loads of us will. So where is the harm in that? It's time to swallow your pride and realize that your ideas are NOT working. The state of the PvP in this game is inexcusable, and it is glaringly obvious that what you have implemented now is not working and never will.

There is nothing more for me to say on this topic, because @FENGRUSH and others have already completely covered it.

Listen to your players. For once. This game's PvP is dying. Please start CARING about that.

Not sure Wrobel had anything to do with the original implementation of AoE caps as that was done under a different regime. As merely a caretaker, he should have no problem ditching them.

Something else to consider, I have heard that the PTS does not nearly have the capacity as do the regular servers, so any mass test on them would unfortunately not prove anything. I remember before the 1.6 release the PvP event hosted there was just a crash-fest.

You are, or course, correct. AoE caps needed to just go away - on the real servers - a long, long time ago.

Efficient · December 2015

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

@Wrobel I think it's time you listened to your playerbase on this one. Why don't you remove AoE caps on PTS, and let us go and test it? We will, loads of us will. So where is the harm in that? It's time to swallow your pride and realize that your ideas are NOT working. The state of the PvP in this game is inexcusable, and it is glaringly obvious that what you have implemented now is not working and never will.

There is nothing more for me to say on this topic, because @FENGRUSH and others have already completely covered it.

Listen to your players. For once. This game's PvP is dying. Please start CARING about that.

Wait, is he listening? I am not sure. Wait, was this a discussion? What happened?

Also, forget the PTS, just remove them. Its better.

mchermie · December 2015

@Wrobel Pretty please. Notice me senpai! Remove the AOE caps

Ara_Valleria · December 2015

mchermie wrote: »

@Wrobel Pretty please. Notice me senpai! Remove the AOE caps

Senpai too busy sleeping to notice

zerosingularity · December 2015

I bet that literally NO ONE would be terribly upset if AoE caps were removed right now to serve as a test, to better gather data prior to the new DLC.

Suru · December 2015

Great to know you guys are looking for feedback caps again. Saying anything on them at this point would be repetitive since we know what people want

Other things to look into would be lowering group sizes to 16 then the current 24 man. I

DisgracefulMind · December 2015

Joy_Division wrote: »

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

@Wrobel I think it's time you listened to your playerbase on this one. Why don't you remove AoE caps on PTS, and let us go and test it? We will, loads of us will. So where is the harm in that? It's time to swallow your pride and realize that your ideas are NOT working. The state of the PvP in this game is inexcusable, and it is glaringly obvious that what you have implemented now is not working and never will.

There is nothing more for me to say on this topic, because @FENGRUSH and others have already completely covered it.

Listen to your players. For once. This game's PvP is dying. Please start CARING about that.

Not sure Wrobel had anything to do with the original implementation of AoE caps as that was done under a different regime. As merely a caretaker, he should have no problem ditching them.

Something else to consider, I have heard that the PTS does not nearly have the capacity as do the regular servers, so any mass test on them would unfortunately not prove anything. I remember before the 1.6 release the PvP event hosted there was just a crash-fest.

You are, or course, correct. AoE caps needed to just go away - on the real servers - a long, long time ago.

You are correct, he didn't have anything to do with them, but he is insisting on hanging on to them, and the system he is hanging on to is not working; that was my point.

PTS is, indeed, unstable; however, it doesn't mean that they cannot gather data and that we, as players, cannot gather opinion if we hop on it and at least try it.

Darnathian · December 2015

Xeven wrote: »

Eric in this thread:

ROFL

Essiaga · December 2015

Having not read thought all 15 pages of replies I'll give my 2 cent ...

Two solid objects (players) can not occupy the same space at the same time. Friendly collision fixes 90% of the issues with Zerging.

The issue isn't the size of the group ... its the lack of common sense tactics against the group. Groups that utilize the "zerg" tactic in this game have no real weakness except a larger group, in which case the smaller group that was the "zerg" is now not the "zerg" but instead they are the "Zergy" if you will.

Just to clarify, a Zerg is not group a certain size. Zerging is a tactic. You can zerg 1 player with 3 or 30 with 40 ... It is the tactic of using superior numbers to overcome an enemy. This says nothing about the skill of the individuals in the groups. Though Zerging does help to cover up the mismatches in player knowledge and skill, as well as class imbalances. Just saying.

So in short a Zerg is a group with more numbers against a group with smaller numbers. We all have been the zerg and we all have been crushed by a zerg. So your all are a bunch of zerging hypocrites, and so am I. Just a matter of whether you enjoy this zerg eat zerg kind a pvp.

In RL you can use the Zerg against it's self because of collision. A human can not travel through another human being to attack another with out harming or KILLING the one in between. Example : Have you you ever tried to stop a fight? You stand between your friend and the guy who either he/she wishes to fight or wishes to fight him/her. You are IN THE WAY. Therefore limiting the attacks that they can do to each other.

A RL"Ball Group" or "Zerg Ball" would be moving really slow because they would be bumping into each other. How long would it take to get people into that tight of a group and then how fast could it possible move? Why don't real armies pack in really tight and run around? Well we don't have AOE H-O-Ts IRL BUT we do have RL AOE attacks such as volley, grenades, machine guns. In short its easier to hurt a lot of people when they pack together and harder to hurt them when the spread out. Perhaps HoTs are part of the problem as well but i'm going to stick with collision for now as AOE would be capped by the number of people you can fit inside the radius of the Healing or Damage effect which right now is the entire population of the campaign.

The people in the back would not be able to attack as easily though their group members (Line of Sight) and they would take less damage as they have some protection. A meat shield, which is something we call tanks in MMO. This is what I'm assuming AOE caps were supposed to simulate. Without having realistic collision in this game we might as well not have AOE caps as it only benefits the many and makes for limiting, and IMHO, lame PVP.

One more thing about Collision ... Gap closers would become harder for a group to pull off. They would have to angle themselves around each other in order to be able to attack with out hitting their ally and still hitting the enemy. This would make escaping a little more easy as the first gap closer would block the rest and cut down on the quick deaths (with recaps that read Ambush from x, Crit charg from y, Ambush from z, Ambush form k, with maybe a camo-hunter proct in there somewhere) that I've grown to know and loath.

This however won't stop the Ambush spamming NB. That would be up to @Wrobel to do something about. Perhaps it should require distance or a cool down, something along the lines of toppling charge. No skills or weapon attacks or blocking for 8-10 secs. I'm really just suggesting a cool down between ambushing, not keeping the Templar from casting another skill for seconds. I meant NB. BTW I've read a ton of Templar Skills are not working properly in the past month or year. Perhaps someone at ZOS would like to throw a /wave at the Templar community.

I DON'T think ZOS will be adding friendly collision ... the next best option is to give an alternative to this ZERG type PVP. ARENAS. Short of that AOE caps should be removed. Zerging makes pvp less fun for everyone but the zergs but the thing about PVP is there has to be P on both sides of the V or other wise we all lose, though i'm sure there are those that get off on taking keeps from NPC while the opposing caption sleep.

Limiting heals and buffs to people in your party only means smaller groups NEED TO ZERG UP! It perpetuates the larger group play. It hurts the Smaller group. Happen upon a fellow faction member in the wood getting attacked ... just keep walking cause you can help him and will only be taking on the fight yourself ... with out his help. He should have zerged up. Whats next only being able to res group members?

# ZERG UP (that should be shirts)

MrDerrikk · December 2015

Why don't they just toggle friendly fire on? I would love to see the chaos and turnaround of tactics that would bring...

MLRPZ · December 2015

This game doesn't need more calculations

prootch · December 2015

MrDerrikk wrote: »

Why don't they just toggle friendly fire on? I would love to see the chaos and turnaround of tactics that would bring...

Would love that too: played with this on daoc camlann/mordred servers (full open pvp), no multi wb stacks and no train: friendly fire except for members of the group. Pure magic.

Derra · December 2015

prootch wrote: »

MrDerrikk wrote: »

Why don't they just toggle friendly fire on? I would love to see the chaos and turnaround of tactics that would bring...

Would love that too: played with this on daoc camlann/mordred servers (full open pvp), no multi wb stacks and no train: friendly fire except for members of the group. Pure magic.

What you mean is not friendly fire but simply ffa pvp. People outside of your grp/guild were not friendly. Friendly fire means you DO hit people of your own grp with aoe.

Efficient · December 2015

Still no response or activity from any green on this topic. This - especially @Wrobel who says he will dedicate a portion of his day to visit the forums.

This is an insult to have no communication with your customers.

Only if we all had the luxury of getting paid and not communicating with our customers, what a great time that would be.

Please start taking action on issues that matter. @ZOS_RichLambert

prootch · December 2015

Derra wrote: »

What you mean is not friendly fire but simply ffa pvp. People outside of your grp/guild were not friendly. Friendly fire means you DO hit people of your own grp with aoe.

Well groups were of 8 persons, my guild over 100 players accounts... + 15 allied guilds with dozens of allied players... so yes... friendly fire. But you could extrapolate that to any zone damage of course.

Darlgon · December 2015

Sorry so late to the party Eric.

My long winded feedback to your post.

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/233820/20151201-darlgon-telvanni-on-aoe-caps-and-siege?new=1

Galalin · December 2015

Darlgon wrote: »

Sorry so late to the party Eric.

My long winded feedback to your post.

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/233820/20151201-darlgon-telvanni-on-aoe-caps-and-siege?new=1

Did you really just say sorry your late to the party to Mr.Wrobel? Do you even see the irony in that?

DK SCRUB OUT

Personofsecrets · December 2015

Lag, @Wrobel , whatever you can do to reduce lag is mandatory. It doesn't matter if that means removing the AOE cap or making the AOE cap more extensive. Lag is the big issue right now when there are huge groups moving around.

babanovac · December 2015

Personofsecrets wrote: »

Lag, @Wrobel , whatever you can do to reduce lag is mandatory. It doesn't matter if that means removing the AOE cap or making the AOE cap more extensive. Lag is the big issue right now when there are huge groups moving around.

If removing every single AoE skill from the game would fix the lag, i would whole heartily support it.

Ara_Valleria · December 2015

Day 9 : @Wrobel is still sleeping.

Derra · December 2015

Ara_Valleria wrote: »

Day 9 : @Wrobel is still sleeping.

Holidays. He´ll chime in next year.

Darnathian · December 2015

Ara_Valleria wrote: »

Day 9 : @Wrobel is still sleeping.

That's what I am saying. He literally made these to appease his bosses. He either has no interest in what we say or is incompetent. I can't believe people still fall for this. It's so blatantly obvious.

There was literally no need for discussion about this. There was another thread already

SO MR WROBEL WHY DONT YOU EXPLAIN TO US WHY YOU PUT THEM IN. Instead of putting these poor players that don't know better on a wild goose chase.

Because your post is a lie. This is not a discussion with you. Hat would require to parties to communicate.

maxjapank · December 2015

Some of you need to get a life. The amount of conspiracy theories some of you come up with is unbelievable. Go for a jog. Watch a movie. Share a moment with that someone special.