AoE Caps Discussion

MrGrimey · December 2015

timidobserver wrote: »

jrkhan wrote: »

@Rune_Relic
I think most people would be happy with an AOE cap where the first 60 people took full damage.

I would be happy with 20 taking full damage and with a buff to the partial damage.

But then that's a buff to groups larger than 20 and further encourages stacking. There is really no way they can have AOE caps without buffing Zergs and stacking.

If this game had structured pvp, then caps wouldn't be a problem since teams would be even. But in a game where 6 can find themselves against 60, there should not be any mechanical advantages to the 60 besides having 10x the amount of players that the 6 have

timidobserver · December 2015

MrGrimey wrote: »

timidobserver wrote: »

jrkhan wrote: »

@Rune_Relic
I think most people would be happy with an AOE cap where the first 60 people took full damage.

I would be happy with 20 taking full damage and with a buff to the partial damage.

But then that's a buff to groups larger than 20 and further encourages stacking. There is really now way the can do AOE caps without buffing Zergs and stacking.

If this game had structured pvp, then caps wouldn't be a problem since teams would be even. But in a game when 6 can find themselves against 60, there should not be any mechanical advantage to the 60 besides have 10x the amount of players that the 6 have

Yeh it isn't perfect, but it is a waste of time to lobby for no caps or huge caps. If you read Wrobel's last post and read between the lines, you can tell that he would have to be forced into removing AoE caps or making them something huge by someone above him. So, the next best approach is to try to find some middle ground.

20 full damage and then buffing the partial damage is acceptable to me. Though I can definitely respect the all or nothing people.

Sord · December 2015

Why can't damage simply disperse over space vs number of people? For example I set off an AoE at my feet it has a max radius of 20m anyone within the first 5 meters takes 100% damage no matter the number those withing the 6-10m range take 75% damage 11-15m take 50% and those with 16-20m take 25% damage?

PS I don't have time to read 20 pages to see if someone else posted this idea but from what I read I haven't seen this idea said or posted, sorry if I missed it.

MrGrimey · December 2015

TBH, all AOEs should work like proxy det, the more players it hits, the more damage it should do... This will encourge players to stop stacking and to spread out.

Probably too extreme of a measure to take, but atleast get rid of AOE caps, Zergs don't need mechanical advantages assisting them when they already have numbers in their favor.

Common sense guys, why is this being discussed?

Joy_Division · December 2015

Words cannot express my disappointment that the one response we receive from Zenimax does not even mention the words "AoE caps" despite that ostensibly what this thread is about.

The burden of proof should *not* lay with us with despise them and want their removal, rather with those who feel they make positively contribute to the PvP experience. This link demonstrates that the PvP community overwhelming expressed the desire never to have AoE caps in the game in the first place: Please click on this link http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/88049/do-you-think-there-should-be-an-aoe-cap

Yet there were introduced anyway. Things might be different if the 87% were proven wrong or inaccurately predicted the blob group meta that plagues PvP - something the Zenimax itself has acknowledged. But that's not the case. Those who disliked AoE caps were proven to be prescient. How is it even possible the burden of proof lays with us?

Get rid of the caps already. We never wanted them and we know they tank the server.

****
Also, what's up with the sudden anti-healing bias? Do I have to remind people the very reason we have this band-aid Battle Spirit measure that has made siege pointless in the first place was because damage was too high. Now you are thinking about making healing break rapid maneuvers? That's going way too far. Are you nuts? Or by healers do you mean "templars," because there is no way stamina players will ever stand for their vigor and rally HoTs breaking rapid maneuvers. But if those pesky templars dare use their class abilities to survive through this OP damage, siege debuffs, and unprugable effects, well screw them, we going to make it so they get snared there in a breech and die.

Barrier and purge does not equal healing. Anyone who thinks actual healing is over the top does not play a healer and does not know the mechanics behind breath of life. I don't just press a button and someone gets healed for 18K, that's not how the ability works. Not by a long shot.

Talcyndl · December 2015

Joy_Division wrote: »

Also, what's up with the sudden anti-healing bias?

I don't think it's bias against healers. It is a bias against the Blob groups.

It is simply a recognition that the Blob groups are able to run around healing (and purging), while being able to cast maneuvers to maintain immunity to cc. That is one of the main contributors to the success of such groups - much more so IMO than the AoE caps.

Joy_Division · December 2015

Talcyndl wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Also, what's up with the sudden anti-healing bias?

I don't think it's bias against healers. It is a bias against the Blob groups.

It is simply a recognition that the Blob groups are able to run around healing (and purging), while being able to cast maneuvers to maintain immunity to cc. That is one of the main contributors to the success of such groups - much more so IMO than the AoE caps.

Well, I wouldn't exactly call it objective analysis based on a full consideration of the facts.

So, just because blobs run around healing and purging means I got to get Rekt because I'm not in a blob? Once again, poorly thought out blanket measures that fail to address to actual problem. Get back to me when there are well-thought out proposals that take into consideration all players and all play styles or when the Beta for Camelot Unchained comes out.

This is ridiculous. Removing AoE caps won't kill me, but these blanket anti-healing measures will.

Talcyndl · December 2015

Joy_Division wrote: »

Well, I wouldn't exactly call it objective analysis based on a full consideration of the facts.

So, just because blobs run around healing and purging means I got to get Rekt because I'm not in a blob? Once again, poorly thought out blanket measures that fail to address to actual problem. Get back to me when there are well-thought out proposals that take into consideration all players and all play styles or when the Beta for Camelot Unchained comes out.

This is ridiculous. Removing AoE caps won't kill me, but these blanket anti-healing measures will.

Don't disagree - although as a selfish matter I prefer the current Developer approach that at least recognizes the issue with Blobs.

How about having a morph of maneuvers that is self only but allows healing (and maybe even DoTs to tick) without losing the cc immunity?

ToRelax · December 2015

Joy_Division wrote: »

Talcyndl wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Also, what's up with the sudden anti-healing bias?

I don't think it's bias against healers. It is a bias against the Blob groups.

It is simply a recognition that the Blob groups are able to run around healing (and purging), while being able to cast maneuvers to maintain immunity to cc. That is one of the main contributors to the success of such groups - much more so IMO than the AoE caps.

Well, I wouldn't exactly call it objective analysis based on a full consideration of the facts.

So, just because blobs run around healing and purging means I got to get Rekt because I'm not in a blob? Once again, poorly thought out blanket measures that fail to address to actual problem. Get back to me when there are well-thought out proposals that take into consideration all players and all play styles or when the Beta for Camelot Unchained comes out.

This is ridiculous. Removing AoE caps won't kill me, but these blanket anti-healing measures will.

@Derra had suggested to let maneuvers break on non HoT heals I think... wich would leave Vigor and Rally untouched with the exception of the Rally burstheal.

jim.chronous_ESO · December 2015

What about removing AOE caps for damage based on proximity. For example Steel Tornado does damage to a radius of 12.5 meters. Everyone within 6 meters gets 100% damage while those further away get reduced damage. Same with healing, with Grand Heal the closer a player is to the center of the cast gets more healing then those at the exterior ring. This could be an interesting compromise having a type AOE caps and removing them completely.

MrGrimey · December 2015

jim.chronous_ESO wrote: »

What about removing AOE caps for damage based on proximity. For example Steel Tornado does damage to a radius of 12.5 meters. Everyone within 6 meters gets 100% damage while those further away get reduced damage. Same with healing, with Grand Heal the closer a player is to the center of the cast gets more healing then those at the exterior ring. This could be an interesting compromise having a type AOE caps and removing them completely.

I think that would require even more calculations on the server end, thus causing more lag

MrGrimey · December 2015

Rune_Relic wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Rune_Relic wrote: »

Jhunn wrote: »

Rune_Relic wrote: »

[
So you have 100 people all within the same healing circle (your targeted area) and you think 4 players are going to kill anyone with smart heals going off ?
Especially if your 4 strikes land over 4 ticks instead of 1 tick with the lag affecting different players latency in different ways.

I really cant believe anything anyone says if they think more players hit does not equal more server calculations and client updates to make.
Clearly they have never coded anything in their life.
Its really such a no brainer its not even worthy of discussion.

Probably why wrobel hasn't even merited the discussion with a response TBH.

Stop using 100 people as an example. You'll never have 100 enemies in an AOE area in this game. You'll never have more than 60 people, which is the current cap. You understand this, yes? Removal of AOE caps won't make you hit 'more people', because there will simply not be more than 60 people to hit at once, that will never happen. You understand if you hit 60 people right now, yes, where 6/24/30 people has to take calculated damage? For every AOE? Yes? With no AOE cap you'll hit all 60 people without any need for extra calculations? Yes?

[snip]

You'll never have more than 60 people.

Gross assumption on your part. [snip]
You haven't been in the campaigns I have and seen the people standing on keep flags.
And what happens if PVP gets really silly and does have 100 people all balling up like some games ?
What happens if ball groups keep getting more and more popular and bigger and bigger to WIN ?
There is absolutely NOTHING stopping ball groups being any size they want other than the Campaign POP CAP.

Removal of AoE caps wont make you hit more people.

Your 4 man group could only hit 24 people at one time.....now you can potentially hit 240 at once.
1.6 increased the potential calcs 10 fold.... and everyone paid the price when 1.6 dropped.
This needs reversing and the cap reduced until its suitable for the number of players on screen.

Answer the question instead of swerving it every single time.....WHY DID ZOS REPEATEDLY REDUCE CAMPAIGN SIZE AND TELL EVERYONE TO SPREAD OUT AFTER 1.6 DROPPED ?
I assume you know the answer but just refuse to accept it....aka denial.

With no AOE cap you'll hit all 60 people without any need for extra calculations?

You'll hit any one and everyone that's crammed in the AoE radius (how big they get is an assumption).
And how many are in the AoE radius is defined by the ball group size and not the label on the skill info (carpet bombing).
A 24 man coordinated group can carpet bomb a massive area and hit everyone in a keep in one tick
How much those selection circles overlap determine the damage multiplyer.
There is NO LIMIT on how many players can stand in this area ...except Population Caps (if you remove AoE caps).

[snip]

[snip]

The problem is that I'm on Azura's right now on ps4... Even with nobody around me, within a keep's range, the lag is unbearable.

[edited to remove quote]

Joy_Division · December 2015

ToRelax wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Talcyndl wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Also, what's up with the sudden anti-healing bias?

I don't think it's bias against healers. It is a bias against the Blob groups.

It is simply a recognition that the Blob groups are able to run around healing (and purging), while being able to cast maneuvers to maintain immunity to cc. That is one of the main contributors to the success of such groups - much more so IMO than the AoE caps.

Well, I wouldn't exactly call it objective analysis based on a full consideration of the facts.

So, just because blobs run around healing and purging means I got to get Rekt because I'm not in a blob? Once again, poorly thought out blanket measures that fail to address to actual problem. Get back to me when there are well-thought out proposals that take into consideration all players and all play styles or when the Beta for Camelot Unchained comes out.

This is ridiculous. Removing AoE caps won't kill me, but these blanket anti-healing measures will.

@Derra had suggested to let maneuvers break on non HoT heals I think... wich would leave Vigor and Rally untouched with the exception of the Rally burstheal.

K, I'll get right on stacking these (good) stamina heals on my magicka characters who won't have any stam after getting hit with an oil pot. So these classes and archetypes who are not "healers" can somehow maintain their health while under rapid maneuvers, while the actual healer gets screwed. People are not considering the whole perspective, they are just overreacting to a meta they don't like and are throwing spaghetti at a wall desperately hoping something sticks and it will go away.

Maybe ZoS has it right all along to ignore the myopic and fickle feedback we send them.

Jaronking · December 2015

I have to ask @Wrobel why do you want ESO PVP to die?We waited 2 weeks for you to say something and what you posted had nothing to do with the Topic of discussion.We all love ESo and want it to flourish can you please just talk to us like
@ZOS_BrianWheeler does in his thread.

Legedric · December 2015

Ok so let's sum things up for now:

1. A developer that wasn't existing at all on the forums for over a year (and is probably the most criticised dev after all) now opens a thread about AoE caps
2. Many well thought and good minded posts were made by players providing constructive feedback and ideas on topic
3. Mentioned developer takes about two weeks time before he replies again (which is ok if you ask me)
4. The developer dodges his very own topic entirely talking just the same nonsense we are used to hear from his stream appearances
5. The crowd is even angrier than before taking Wrobel's behaviour as a clear evidence that he is not reading/listening at all or just not able to understand the written lines

Well, if you ask me, I always thought my picture about @Wrobel couldn't get any worse but this thread proved me wrong. Sad enough... I had hope after the topic came up but reading the past 21 pages, including his very own response just leaves me here with a big huge: You've got to be kidding me, right?

Derra · December 2015

Joy_Division wrote: »

Also, what's up with the sudden anti-healing bias? Do I have to remind people the very reason we have this band-aid Battle Spirit measure that has made siege pointless in the first place was because damage was too high. Now you are thinking about making healing break rapid maneuvers? That's going way too far. Are you nuts?

Healing was never weak compared to dmg. The problem in 1.6 was not healing being weak but the HP pools compared to dmg numbers were too small making healing obsolete in some instances.

Joy_Division wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Talcyndl wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Also, what's up with the sudden anti-healing bias?

I don't think it's bias against healers. It is a bias against the Blob groups.

It is simply a recognition that the Blob groups are able to run around healing (and purging), while being able to cast maneuvers to maintain immunity to cc. That is one of the main contributors to the success of such groups - much more so IMO than the AoE caps.

Well, I wouldn't exactly call it objective analysis based on a full consideration of the facts.

So, just because blobs run around healing and purging means I got to get Rekt because I'm not in a blob? Once again, poorly thought out blanket measures that fail to address to actual problem. Get back to me when there are well-thought out proposals that take into consideration all players and all play styles or when the Beta for Camelot Unchained comes out.

This is ridiculous. Removing AoE caps won't kill me, but these blanket anti-healing measures will.

@Derra had suggested to let maneuvers break on non HoT heals I think... wich would leave Vigor and Rally untouched with the exception of the Rally burstheal.

K, I'll get right on stacking these (good) stamina heals on my magicka characters who won't have any stam after getting hit with an oil pot. So these classes and archetypes who are not "healers" can somehow maintain their health while under rapid maneuvers, while the actual healer gets screwed. People are not considering the whole perspective, they are just overreacting to a meta they don't like and are throwing spaghetti at a wall desperately hoping something sticks and it will go away.

Maybe ZoS has it right all along to ignore the myopic and fickle feedback we send them.

Actually my proposal was that every heal initiated breaks rapid (especially vigor). Already running hots should not break maneuver.
Imho maneuver and purge are the biggest "enablers" for blob groups. Rapid being worse than purge from my pov (movement is still key for staying alive - maneuverability being the key thing where smaller numbers should have an advantage over big grps but haven´t due to rapid).

But I also think every alliance war skill should have a self and a grp morph - so who am i to ask.

Legedric wrote: »

Ok so let's sum things up for now:

1. A developer that wasn't existing at all on the forums for over a year (and is probably the most criticised dev after all) now opens a thread about AoE caps
2. Many well thought and good minded posts were made by players providing constructive feedback and ideas on topic
3. Mentioned developer takes about two weeks time before he replies again (which is ok if you ask me)
4. The developer dodges his very own topic entirely talking just the same nonsense we are used to hear from his stream appearances
5. The crowd is even angrier than before taking Wrobel's behaviour as a clear evidence that he is not reading/listening at all or just not able to understand the written lines

Well, if you ask me, I always thought my picture about @Wrobel couldn't get any worse but this thread proved me wrong. Sad enough... I had hope after the topic came up but reading the past 21 pages, including his very own response just leaves me here with a big huge: You've got to be kidding me, right?

Why would he listen?
#wrobelknowsbest

Jura23 · December 2015

Derra wrote: »

Well on topic @Wrobel would you mind explaining what people should do against being outnumbered in places where there is no siege available? Like the whole "pvp" DLC you´ve just released three months ago?

Still waiting for a reply of @FENGRUSH but i guess the noble orc just commited seppuku when he read the whipped nonsense the lead combat designer had to add to this topic (aoe caps won´t go but i´ll nerf your steeltornado - eat that greenskin ).

Did you try to focus single targets until you are not outnumbered?

ToRelax · December 2015

jim.chronous_ESO wrote: »

What about removing AOE caps for damage based on proximity. For example Steel Tornado does damage to a radius of 12.5 meters. Everyone within 6 meters gets 100% damage while those further away get reduced damage. Same with healing, with Grand Heal the closer a player is to the center of the cast gets more healing then those at the exterior ring. This could be an interesting compromise having a type AOE caps and removing them completely.

Makes little sense to me... Steel Tornado is about the only AoE that I could agree on that has a too large radius. And that is probably getting reduced anyway.

ToRelax · December 2015

Joy_Division wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Talcyndl wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Also, what's up with the sudden anti-healing bias?

I don't think it's bias against healers. It is a bias against the Blob groups.

It is simply a recognition that the Blob groups are able to run around healing (and purging), while being able to cast maneuvers to maintain immunity to cc. That is one of the main contributors to the success of such groups - much more so IMO than the AoE caps.

Well, I wouldn't exactly call it objective analysis based on a full consideration of the facts.

So, just because blobs run around healing and purging means I got to get Rekt because I'm not in a blob? Once again, poorly thought out blanket measures that fail to address to actual problem. Get back to me when there are well-thought out proposals that take into consideration all players and all play styles or when the Beta for Camelot Unchained comes out.

This is ridiculous. Removing AoE caps won't kill me, but these blanket anti-healing measures will.

@Derra had suggested to let maneuvers break on non HoT heals I think... wich would leave Vigor and Rally untouched with the exception of the Rally burstheal.

K, I'll get right on stacking these (good) stamina heals on my magicka characters who won't have any stam after getting hit with an oil pot. So these classes and archetypes who are not "healers" can somehow maintain their health while under rapid maneuvers, while the actual healer gets screwed. People are not considering the whole perspective, they are just overreacting to a meta they don't like and are throwing spaghetti at a wall desperately hoping something sticks and it will go away.

Maybe ZoS has it right all along to ignore the myopic and fickle feedback we send them.

Vigor is a group heal (wich I don't like). If you play a magicka build and then get hit by an oil catapult you're probably out of stamina already... if you have a friend who plays stam, he can use both maneuver and vigor on you.
And that is to argue going from "HoTs don't break meneuver", Derra corrected that anyway.

If heals initiated break maneuver, then Vigor falls out anyway.

FENGRUSH · December 2015

Derra wrote: »

Well on topic @Wrobel would you mind explaining what people should do against being outnumbered in places where there is no siege available? Like the whole "pvp" DLC you´ve just released three months ago?

Still waiting for a reply of @FENGRUSH but i guess the noble orc just commited seppuku when he read the whipped nonsense the lead combat designer had to add to this topic (aoe caps won´t go but i´ll nerf your steeltornado - eat that greenskin ).

I had typed a reply - a really long one.... a couple times, then edited it, then did that a few times.. and... I didnt even post it because I reread @Wrobel reply a few times and so disappointed Im not sure theres any value in it. I think my comments were reflected a bit on the podcast and while they probably werent entirely clear, it shows how I really feel - confused and forsaken? And somehow I ended up typing a completely new reply just now.

@Wrobel made a thread and made the communication with the community worse so far. You can actually make things worse when attempting to communicate by showing 1) were going to show you that we know we should listen and 2) were going to show you that we have no interest in doing it though.

That is what weve been shown so far. Can @ZOS_RichLambert or something please help? Where do we even go when nobody cares?

@Wrobel started talking about other mechanical issues which should be considered off topic by their very nature in this thread which goes to show he himself will literally talk about anything other than AOE caps. There is a reason caps are in place, and ZOS doesnt want to communicate it. The reason they dont want to communicate it is because the reason is not something they want shared. Its my strong opinion that AOE caps are largely in place for the casual player base to do ball group mentality and have a place in the world. If you remember at release, people were slaughtered in mass by players that understood the ult gen system and ripped through fields of inexperienced players that didnt know what was going on.

AOE caps werent the problem here, it was a broken ult gen system. And yet ZOS is trying to avoid that issue by keeping AOE caps in place.

That is the best conclusion I can draw from what Ive read and the experiences Ive had in this game. Ultimately, it shows me @Wrobel doesnt have a good handle on what is actually going on in the PvP world - and that isnt meant to be insulting, its meant to be a telling issue of why we cant get positive progress in Cyrodiil despite such a widely-agreed on community effort. This is me being as constructive as possible, and unfortunately, @ZOS will be insulted by this paragraph and as a result they will not acknowledge my point of view and likely deny this as being the reason and just isolate themselves into silence and ultimately continue to fail over the same problems.

Nobody is here posting all of this over and over just to insult though. Its not even meant to be insulting. Its just what it is - and were here waiting to be proven wrong with reasons why things are the way they are - and not changing.

Jhunn · December 2015

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Its my strong opinion that AOE caps are largely in place for the casual player base to do ball group mentality and have a place in the world. If you remember at release, people were slaughtered in mass by players that understood the ult gen system and ripped through fields of inexperienced players that didnt know what was going on.

AOE caps werent the problem here, it was a broken ult gen system. And yet ZOS is trying to avoid that issue by keeping AOE caps in place.

I agree. But you know what the weird thing is? I was one of the scrubs who got farmed by ground oils and permabats DK, and back then the game was still much more enjoyable for me than it is now. I really enjoyed PVP'ing. Now I don't remember the last time I really had fun in PVP.

Jura23 · December 2015

Personally I think vast majority of so called casuals dont even know AoE caps exist. Sticking to other ppl for more safety is just natural reflex, I dont think it has much to do with AoE caps. And if they were removed, these ppl wouldnt change the way they play.

Organized raids of course, thats something completely different. Those are taking advantage of caps on purpose, no doubt about that.

Ara_Valleria · December 2015

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Well on topic @Wrobel would you mind explaining what people should do against being outnumbered in places where there is no siege available? Like the whole "pvp" DLC you´ve just released three months ago?

Still waiting for a reply of @FENGRUSH but i guess the noble orc just commited seppuku when he read the whipped nonsense the lead combat designer had to add to this topic (aoe caps won´t go but i´ll nerf your steeltornado - eat that greenskin ).

This is me being as constructive as possible, and unfortunately, @ZOS will be insulted by this paragraph and as a result they will not acknowledge my point of view and likely deny this as being the reason and just isolate themselves into silence and ultimately continue to fail over the same problems.

Nobody is here posting all of this over and over just to insult though. Its not even meant to be insulting.

#TruthHurts

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Bashing]

FENGRUSH · December 2015

Jura23 wrote: »

Personally I think vast majority of so called casuals dont even know AoE caps exist. Sticking to other ppl for more safety is just natural reflex, I dont think it has much to do with AoE caps. And if they were removed, these ppl wouldnt change the way they play.

Organized raids of course, thats something completely different. Those are taking advantage of caps on purpose, no doubt about that.

I agree - I dont think many casual players know that AOE caps exist. But they join a group and thats how the group is run and they do what they know/told to do in the group. They wouldnt change their playstyle at first, they would complain - and then change their style, or conform to something new that develops.

Either way it will be better.

maxjapank · December 2015

FENGRUSH wrote: »

There is a reason caps are in place, and ZOS doesnt want to communicate it. The reason they dont want to communicate it is because the reason is not something they want shared. Its my strong opinion that AOE caps are largely in place for the casual player base to do ball group mentality and have a place in the world..

There very well may be a reason. And I understand that with no explanation, you can only speculate. But that's all you can do. You really can't claim a "strong opinion" as if it's fact. You do that and then you'll start to believe that there is no other answer except for what you wanna believe. But I do understand the want for clarification.

Jura23 · December 2015

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Jura23 wrote: »

Personally I think vast majority of so called casuals dont even know AoE caps exist. Sticking to other ppl for more safety is just natural reflex, I dont think it has much to do with AoE caps. And if they were removed, these ppl wouldnt change the way they play.

Organized raids of course, thats something completely different. Those are taking advantage of caps on purpose, no doubt about that.

I agree - I dont think many casual players know that AOE caps exist. But they join a group and thats how the group is run and they do what they know/told to do in the group. They wouldnt change their playstyle at first, they would complain - and then change their style, or conform to something new that develops.

Either way it will be better.

Yeah. I think this makes sense.

jayburna688 · December 2015

Enodoc wrote: »

Wrobel wrote: »

We want AoE abilities to be useful in PvP. That being said, we don’t want them to be the end all be all - single target abilities should also be useful. The intention of the caps and falloff is that AoE damage will be able to outpace healing in large group battles, but not dominate it. Healing abilities currently cap at 6 targets, where damage can hit up to 60 targets (100% to the first 6, 50% to the next 24, and 25% to the last 30).

Someone who PvPs a lot will have to say whether this would make sense or not, but how about considering this the other way around? Currently, the more enemies there, the less damage is effectively done. Why not increase the damage done based on the number of players hit? So 25% to the first 6, 50% to the next 24, and 100% to the last 30. That way, the AoE abilities are good against large groups, but single-target spells remain useful in 1-on-1 situations. Zergs spamming the AoEs wouldn't be very effective, as they will be up against a smaller number, and healers wouldn't be able to heal the zerg as effectively because more people will have taken more damage.

I like the direction this comment is going. Makes the most sense so far. Reward the person doing damage to a big group and make it harder for the healer that is protected by a big group to heal them easily. Brilliant.

Saint314Louis1985 · December 2015

MrGrimey wrote: »

@wrobel

Magicka det is essential for some builds, Single target damage is fine, it's the multiplier and AOE range that needed increasing. The single target damage is fine, especially considering that you either need to be close range with a 8 second det time or have a 1.8 second cast time.

the single target dmg is NOT fine. it is an aoe skill. its meant to combat groups only.

and to those who say hes not addressing aoe caps, he actually is just not as cut and slash and you would like it.

by increasing prox det on multiple targets and siege dmg, they are trying to force people to spread out which hopefully will eliminate the zerg balls which roll around destroying everything. if you successfully force groups to spreadout, by default you are eliminating the aoe cap simply because they are not all bunched together. it is a more casual approach to it rather than complete removal of the cap.

he also mentioned how they are trying to make small changes and evaluate the impact, which sums up his reasoning for not jumping to complete removal of the aoe cap itself. going off of his "top posts" mentioned, he does not want whole groups wiped in 8 secs with prox det because of no aoe cap. his goal seems to be large, spread out battles with an equal ttk for BOTH sides, with positioning and tactics making a difference rather than who is the biggest zerg ball.

Joy_Division · December 2015

Derra wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Also, what's up with the sudden anti-healing bias? Do I have to remind people the very reason we have this band-aid Battle Spirit measure that has made siege pointless in the first place was because damage was too high. Now you are thinking about making healing break rapid maneuvers? That's going way too far. Are you nuts?

Healing was never weak compared to dmg. The problem in 1.6 was not healing being weak but the HP pools compared to dmg numbers were too small making healing obsolete in some instances.

Joy_Division wrote: »

ToRelax wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Talcyndl wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Also, what's up with the sudden anti-healing bias?

I don't think it's bias against healers. It is a bias against the Blob groups.

It is simply a recognition that the Blob groups are able to run around healing (and purging), while being able to cast maneuvers to maintain immunity to cc. That is one of the main contributors to the success of such groups - much more so IMO than the AoE caps.

Well, I wouldn't exactly call it objective analysis based on a full consideration of the facts.

So, just because blobs run around healing and purging means I got to get Rekt because I'm not in a blob? Once again, poorly thought out blanket measures that fail to address to actual problem. Get back to me when there are well-thought out proposals that take into consideration all players and all play styles or when the Beta for Camelot Unchained comes out.

This is ridiculous. Removing AoE caps won't kill me, but these blanket anti-healing measures will.

@Derra had suggested to let maneuvers break on non HoT heals I think... wich would leave Vigor and Rally untouched with the exception of the Rally burstheal.

K, I'll get right on stacking these (good) stamina heals on my magicka characters who won't have any stam after getting hit with an oil pot. So these classes and archetypes who are not "healers" can somehow maintain their health while under rapid maneuvers, while the actual healer gets screwed. People are not considering the whole perspective, they are just overreacting to a meta they don't like and are throwing spaghetti at a wall desperately hoping something sticks and it will go away.

Maybe ZoS has it right all along to ignore the myopic and fickle feedback we send them.

Actually my proposal was that every heal initiated breaks rapid (especially vigor). Already running hots should not break maneuver.
Imho maneuver and purge are the biggest "enablers" for blob groups. Rapid being worse than purge from my pov (movement is still key for staying alive - maneuverability being the key thing where smaller numbers should have an advantage over big grps but haven´t due to rapid).

But I also think every alliance war skill should have a self and a grp morph - so who am i to ask.

But now you are asking for a blanket measure that does not just target blob groups. Some individuals and small-groups use retreating maneuvers to do just that, retreat, and now those that are injured and still in range of enemies (or ironically a blob) would then be paying the the price you intended to extract from these ball-groups. Maybe that's acceptable in your opinion.

But shouldn't these blanket measures that affect everybody be held off until we evaluate how the measures specifically aimed at lessening the potency of these blob groups work out? AoE caps is something I hardly ever benefit but is always abused by these stack on crown guilds. Removing them is a discriminatory measure that targets the very people who are abusing them. I would prefer an approach such as this that limits collateral damage.

Derra · December 2015

That´s why i said i´d rework the skills entirely. WIth a single/self targetted morph for each and one for grps.

I also believe that becoming immune to snare and roots for an extended period of time is just too powerful of an effect in general. Snares and roots are more powerful than a hard cc in most cases atm. Yet to get a comparable timeframe of immunity there you have to use a potion CD.