[POLL] What should barrier be capped at?

Rune_Relic · January 2016

4

PvE dungeons is 4 Player Groups
PvP is 6x 4 player groups.
That's for AoE in general.

As an ultimate....depends on the spammability.
So less targets, low cost spammable vs many targets, hi cost and not spammable.

I have similar ideas to @vortexman11 anyway.
So his idea is fine.

frozywozy · January 2016

18

FENGRUSH wrote: »

I think end goal should be breaking up 24 people groups, or at least changing the fighting style from 24 people fighting within 5-7meters of each other. Barrier is the biggest F U we have numbers ult in the game.

Lets say your barrier does 30k and youre hitting 24 people:

720,000 potential shielding on top of the fact that its not crittable and 75% of the damage you do in AOE format will be halved while attempting to burn that damage off without crit?

Oh they popped another barrier... Cool, only 1.45 million AOE damage to do through AOE caps.

This comfort needs to go, along with purge, in a huge way. Yea big groups will get plowed at some point, but I think thats the point - to have a sort of *risk*. Agreed it shouldnt be big groups hiding everywhere to blow up the other one, but this is where you need better distance counters instituted through ranged AOE, as suggested by ZOS that they want to do. That is non-siege ranged AOE..

Could not have said it better! Cheers lord

Satiar · January 2016

24

FENGRUSH wrote: »

I think end goal should be breaking up 24 people groups, or at least changing the fighting style from 24 people fighting within 5-7meters of each other. Barrier is the biggest F U we have numbers ult in the game.

Lets say your barrier does 30k and youre hitting 24 people:

720,000 potential shielding on top of the fact that its not crittable and 75% of the damage you do in AOE format will be halved while attempting to burn that damage off without crit?

Oh they popped another barrier... Cool, only 1.45 million AOE damage to do through AOE caps.

This comfort needs to go, along with purge, in a huge way. Yea big groups will get plowed at some point, but I think thats the point - to have a sort of *risk*. Agreed it shouldnt be big groups hiding everywhere to blow up the other one, but this is where you need better distance counters instituted through ranged AOE, as suggested by ZOS that they want to do. That is non-siege ranged AOE..

If you don't think there is already a risk then I dunno what to tell you.

I'm trying to figure out how I would take a keep against strong defense without barrier and purge. The group stacked inside behind LoS doesn't really need barriers or purge, you just wait until the enemy pushes your fortified position and dump ultis on them because they can't maneuver, can't mitigate, and have no way to recover from that.

If the heavy nerfs to barrier and purge go through I think we will just see a lot more defense. I love to be front lines, pushing and attacking, but when you do that you are heavily exposed and to survive you must be able to have some kind of emergency mitigation. It's not so much a nerf to groups as it is a massive buff to playing safe and defense: to tower farm groups, groups turtling on the Inside of keeps (which causes huge lag) or groups sitting safely in stealth to bomb.

In the end, burst in this game is already high. Removing mitigation will turn it into "bomb them before they bomb us", and I don't like where that leads

FENGRUSH · January 2016

Yea the way to take keeps I think is flawed - and disappointed we havent seen proposed changes to moving things around in the keeps. They literally havent changed them at all since forever. People are encouraged to pile up on flags. Youre right about this though, defense is already going to get boosted heavily from the siege and forced fights that will occur after breaching and clashing with stam burns.

These solutions arent simple - but I think the players have the best ideas on how to fix things together, not the devs (alone). More collaboration would be better at this point, and they shouldnt be offended by that. Just giving feedback on huge changes which (any huge change put in motion) will stay in motion - doesnt do much good.

PosternHouse · January 2016

24

So instead of full raid groups running barrier rotations, coordinating proximity detonations, timing ultimate dumps, and using pbaoe skills we're going to have one of two styles of play. Option A: full raid groups kiting around with bombard, retreating maneuvers, and caltrops until they can concentrate siege on a clump of bad guys to kill them. They can dump meteors from a distance too. Option B: full raid groups of vampires with devouring swarm (since barrier will be useless and people need to sustain) and stamina DPS (since the new oil catapults take off like 5k stam, which hurts magicka builds WAY more than stamina builds) that LoS, bomb, LoS, bomb, LoS, bomb until they kill everything or die to the attrition of dozens of players on them.

Maybe the two can be combined for a third option of kite + conal AoE + siege and bomb with pbaoe to finish. But full raid groups are not going to unstack and they're not going to suffer for it. All these changes are going to do is reward having a massive amount of numbers who while generally unstacked, are still going to lag you out.

Groups are still going to stack. Their tactics will just evolve. Instead of stacking on things (to get annihilated by siege), they'll just run around as a DPS choo choo train, never stopping, until all the things die or they die. Then everyone's gonna whine about this too. Eventually, we will be left with light attacks, heavy attacks, and siege because people refuse to adapt to their situation and demand that their situation change to suit their desires. GG Elder Nerf Everything Online, GG.

OdinForge · January 2016

4

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Yea the way to take keeps I think is flawed - and disappointed we havent seen proposed changes to moving things around in the keeps. They literally havent changed them at all since forever. People are encouraged to pile up on flags. Youre right about this though, defense is already going to get boosted heavily from the siege and forced fights that will occur after breaching and clashing with stam burns.

These solutions arent simple - but I think the players have the best ideas on how to fix things together, not the devs (alone). More collaboration would be better at this point, and they shouldnt be offended by that. Just giving feedback on huge changes which (any huge change put in motion) will stay in motion - doesnt do much good.

They did mention adding more flags around resources and stuff, what if they did that with keeps as well. Flags in the corner towers, if flipped generate strong NPC allies (damage and healers) and other benefits to help you maintain a position inside a keep without owning the entire keep yet.

*Edit, This would add more layers to keep defense and offense, one guild probably couldn't maintain every corner of the keep at the same time. It might give smaller groups a purpose, in both attacking and defending towers for the good of your faction.

You wouldn't need to take every tower to flip a keep, but they could serve as steps to help.

Satiar · January 2016

24

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Yea the way to take keeps I think is flawed - and disappointed we havent seen proposed changes to moving things around in the keeps. They literally havent changed them at all since forever. People are encouraged to pile up on flags. Youre right about this though, defense is already going to get boosted heavily from the siege and forced fights that will occur after breaching and clashing with stam burns.

These solutions arent simple - but I think the players have the best ideas on how to fix things together, not the devs (alone). More collaboration would be better at this point, and they shouldnt be offended by that. Just giving feedback on huge changes which (any huge change put in motion) will stay in motion - doesnt do much good.

Agreed. Barrier and purge nerfs don't bother me too much open field cuz it's more about kiting and maneuvering than anything else. Work keeps, siege changes + purge + barrier nerfs is gonna be the nightmare. Like, I don't need barriers to defend. I'll set oil cats, meatbags, and just stack out of LoS. Barrier is the only mobile mitigation, and without it you're forced to just run through a crazy amount of damage while I sit safe... and than I bomb you and that's it.

This will encourage people to bring down multiple walls, Swiss cheese a keep. Which isn't in itself bad but once people catch onto that they'll start bringing the numbers to do it effectively. And than we are in a situation where we gotta stack groups to take keep and the server dies.

I really dunno. I feel like every big change they've made just dumbs the game down and a change like this would be in the same vein. If barrier is nerfed below 12, if purge doesn't cure siege, than I can't stand still in ground mitigation and I can't maneuver with mobile mitigation-- I feel like there is literally no reason to not just run bats

Daveheart · January 2016

12

I think they should simply start by making barrier and purge hit only group members and capping at 24. Institute that and the proposed siege damage increase first then see where we are. If things are still not working, add in the proposed secondary effect changes/unpurgeable to siege and evaluate again. If it's still not working, reduce the cap on purge and barrier to 12. The developers continue to get into trouble and break more than they fix because they alter too many variables at once.

Regardless of all the rest, if they just absolutely must put a low cap on barrier, I don't feel it should ever go lower than 12. While it's not really necessary for any of the current end game pve raids, it could be necessary in the future. 6 is just so low that nobody should bother running it at all for anything. As said earlier, if you must change it, replace the ult return on replenishing barrier with something else.

booksmcread · January 2016

24

Barrier is one of the few things in the game right now that makes fights last longer than just a couple seconds. With the changes coming to the game, all we'll have left is solo players in stealth with bows and 3-shot builds. At that point we can just change the graphics and play Call of Duty: Tamriel Unlimited.

The forthcoming change to barrier is what happens when you listen to 1% of the player base instead of actually playing the game, using proper assessment tools and metrics, and paying attention to how the majority of players play and enjoy the game.

Cinbri · January 2016

4

johan.danielsson1994b16_ESO wrote: »

12, to not make barrier useless for PvE.

12 won't make it useless for pve, but will definetly will still allow it to use for pve trains in Cyro.

BRogueNZ · January 2016

12

12 to me seems to be fair enough, there will be more than one person using it.

if AOE caps are removed and but then applied to cleansing and mitigation then it could get interesting.

add the new siege damage.

I like the idea mentioned elsewhere in the thread that it depended on how charged the ult was

frozywozy · January 2016

18

Keeps are a joke to capture at the moment. Siege is just slightly going to increase the chances to defend. The only thing siege changes will bring on keep defenses (if siege changes proposed are tweaked properly), will be to force the attacking forces to bring down an additional wall in case of a strong defense. Btw, lot of people seem to generalize and consider this change as an ultimate factor to counter group stacking and make keep captures harder. This change is just a minor detail which will contribute in countering the 24men ball groups. It is a work in progress.

Zheg · January 2016

18

Satiar wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Yea the way to take keeps I think is flawed - and disappointed we havent seen proposed changes to moving things around in the keeps. They literally havent changed them at all since forever. People are encouraged to pile up on flags. Youre right about this though, defense is already going to get boosted heavily from the siege and forced fights that will occur after breaching and clashing with stam burns.

These solutions arent simple - but I think the players have the best ideas on how to fix things together, not the devs (alone). More collaboration would be better at this point, and they shouldnt be offended by that. Just giving feedback on huge changes which (any huge change put in motion) will stay in motion - doesnt do much good.

Agreed. Barrier and purge nerfs don't bother me too much open field cuz it's more about kiting and maneuvering than anything else. Work keeps, siege changes + purge + barrier nerfs is gonna be the nightmare. Like, I don't need barriers to defend. I'll set oil cats, meatbags, and just stack out of LoS. Barrier is the only mobile mitigation, and without it you're forced to just run through a crazy amount of damage while I sit safe... and than I bomb you and that's it.

This will encourage people to bring down multiple walls, Swiss cheese a keep. Which isn't in itself bad but once people catch onto that they'll start bringing the numbers to do it effectively. And than we are in a situation where we gotta stack groups to take keep and the server dies.

I really dunno. I feel like every big change they've made just dumbs the game down and a change like this would be in the same vein. If barrier is nerfed below 12, if purge doesn't cure siege, than I can't stand still in ground mitigation and I can't maneuver with mobile mitigation-- I feel like there is literally no reason to not just run bats

Bats for everyone! Can't stand still in a dmg mitigation ult like nova or veil because of the super cereal siege changes, barrier is worthless below 12, and only bought you about a second of breathing room as it was when being bombed.

Negates will also suffer from a loss of effectiveness because again, standing still. Sooo, with the exception of nb who want to run soul siphon/tether, who in their right mind would run anything other than bats?

Is the meta going to just be bats on everybody and/or armies of stam dk's running corrosive?both sound silly.

For the people who voted for barrier to hit 4, at that point just pop bone shield and have people synergize it. Reducing an ult to the same effectiveness as a bad undaunted skill hopefully puts things in perspective a bit more.

Fengrush, you mentioned a 30k barrier in your other post, and that's faaaaar higher than what you'd fight against in pvp. For perspective, when my temp was built for strong barriers, I'd hit a 20k baseline as a healer, and most healers don't run anywhere near as high spell dmg and magicka. It's certainly possible to hit a 30k barrier, but it would be on a very gimped and vulnerable build.

Barrier nerfs are fine, IF damage overall wasn't just bomb and done. The upcoming meta is significantly going to be lacking in realistic mitigation.

Satiar · January 2016

24

30k Barrier is basically an emp barrier. I managed to get 25k by maxing out Bastion and speccing *hard* into high damage. I had no regen or sustain and was basically useless. I see most barriers between 18-23k

booksmcread · January 2016

24

I'm almost starting to miss Paul Sage.

timidobserver · January 2016

4

If it would help with lag in Cyrodiil, I would be okay with capping every buff/debuff in the game at 4.

frozywozy · January 2016

18

Zheg wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Yea the way to take keeps I think is flawed - and disappointed we havent seen proposed changes to moving things around in the keeps. They literally havent changed them at all since forever. People are encouraged to pile up on flags. Youre right about this though, defense is already going to get boosted heavily from the siege and forced fights that will occur after breaching and clashing with stam burns.

These solutions arent simple - but I think the players have the best ideas on how to fix things together, not the devs (alone). More collaboration would be better at this point, and they shouldnt be offended by that. Just giving feedback on huge changes which (any huge change put in motion) will stay in motion - doesnt do much good.

Agreed. Barrier and purge nerfs don't bother me too much open field cuz it's more about kiting and maneuvering than anything else. Work keeps, siege changes + purge + barrier nerfs is gonna be the nightmare. Like, I don't need barriers to defend. I'll set oil cats, meatbags, and just stack out of LoS. Barrier is the only mobile mitigation, and without it you're forced to just run through a crazy amount of damage while I sit safe... and than I bomb you and that's it.

This will encourage people to bring down multiple walls, Swiss cheese a keep. Which isn't in itself bad but once people catch onto that they'll start bringing the numbers to do it effectively. And than we are in a situation where we gotta stack groups to take keep and the server dies.

I really dunno. I feel like every big change they've made just dumbs the game down and a change like this would be in the same vein. If barrier is nerfed below 12, if purge doesn't cure siege, than I can't stand still in ground mitigation and I can't maneuver with mobile mitigation-- I feel like there is literally no reason to not just run bats

Bats for everyone! Can't stand still in a dmg mitigation ult like nova or veil because of the super cereal siege changes, barrier is worthless below 12, and only bought you about a second of breathing room as it was when being bombed.

Negates will also suffer from a loss of effectiveness because again, standing still. Sooo, with the exception of nb who want to run soul siphon/tether, who in their right mind would run anything other than bats?

Is the meta going to just be bats on everybody and/or armies of stam dk's running corrosive?both sound silly.

For the people who voted for barrier to hit 4, at that point just pop bone shield and have people synergize it. Reducing an ult to the same effectiveness as a bad undaunted skill hopefully puts things in perspective a bit more.

Fengrush, you mentioned a 30k barrier in your other post, and that's faaaaar higher than what you'd fight against in pvp. For perspective, when my temp was built for strong barriers, I'd hit a 20k baseline as a healer, and most healers don't run anywhere near as high spell dmg and magicka. It's certainly possible to hit a 30k barrier, but it would be on a very gimped and vulnerable build.

Barrier nerfs are fine, IF damage overall wasn't just bomb and done. The upcoming meta is significantly going to be lacking in realistic mitigation.

Bone shield is a great skill seriously. I'm happy you're not using it tho

30k or 20k barriers, the numbers brought by Fengrush still stand. Doesn't make much of a difference.

Ghost-Shot · January 2016

18

WRX wrote: »

OdinForge wrote: »

vortexman11 wrote: »

I chose 12 because it seems like the most balanced between 24 and 4. But I think I should of chosen other...

To me the ideal barrier would scale based on the amount of ultimate built up, starting at 200, all the way up to 1000. At 200 ultimate it would effect 4 people, then every 40 more ultimate allows it to hit one more person, up to 24 when 1000 ultimate is built up.

I actually like this idea a lot.

But the value of ultimate / additional player would need to be thoroughly tested.

Na, no way. Then you just have people sitting tagging PvE mobs for 5 minutes to get a full barrier? I understand the idea of being rewarded for extra ulti, but this is not how to do it.

@Ghost-Shot I think the smart targeting and group only effect is a given at this point. Just the direction the game is headed. I think its a good feel actually.

I really want to think its a given, but at this point i have no faith and i don't see barrier even being worth spending skill points on. I wouldn't be happy about it but it would be acceptable IF smart targeting will be addressed so you can coordinate in a 24 man that these 2 healers will barrier going through the breach and those 2 will barrier at the top of the stairs.

Manoekin · January 2016

6

booksmcread wrote: »

The forthcoming change to barrier is what happens when you listen to 1% of the player base instead of actually playing the game, using proper assessment tools and metrics, and paying attention to how the majority of players play and enjoy the game.

The game we have now and will continue to have is because they listened to the "99%". I voted 6 because I agree with the change, but 12 or having it scale on ultimate charge is perfectly fine with me. Your posts are the very definition of hyperbole.

As for the rest of the thread... people are looking at this as if they are only making this one change in the next patch. No one has all of the facts yet.

Ghost-Shot wrote: »

WRX wrote: »

OdinForge wrote: »

vortexman11 wrote: »

I chose 12 because it seems like the most balanced between 24 and 4. But I think I should of chosen other...

To me the ideal barrier would scale based on the amount of ultimate built up, starting at 200, all the way up to 1000. At 200 ultimate it would effect 4 people, then every 40 more ultimate allows it to hit one more person, up to 24 when 1000 ultimate is built up.

I actually like this idea a lot.

But the value of ultimate / additional player would need to be thoroughly tested.

Na, no way. Then you just have people sitting tagging PvE mobs for 5 minutes to get a full barrier? I understand the idea of being rewarded for extra ulti, but this is not how to do it.

@Ghost-Shot I think the smart targeting and group only effect is a given at this point. Just the direction the game is headed. I think its a good feel actually.

I really want to think its a given, but at this point i have no faith and i don't see barrier even being worth spending skill points on. I wouldn't be happy about it but it would be acceptable IF smart targeting will be addressed so you can coordinate in a 24 man that these 2 healers will barrier going through the breach and those 2 will barrier at the top of the stairs.

My impression is that's how it will be done. It's the smart way to do it.

frozywozy · January 2016

18

It's funny how you guys think that veils and negate will be useless because you cannot stand still. You are over exaggerating and getting a bit ridiculous here. The time it takes usually to wipe an enemy group with a well done negate is a matter of a few seconds. Standing still for a few seconds or moving constantly won't change much against one or two siege volleys. lol

Anyway, the way the game works right now, with a 24men ball group roaming inside a keep , most sieges don't even work. So I would not worry too much about sieges until they fix performances.

Satiar · January 2016

24

frozywozy wrote: »

It's funny how you guys think that veils and negate will be useless because you cannot stand still. You are over exaggerating and getting a bit ridiculous here. The time it takes usually to wipe an enemy group with a well done negate is a matter of a few seconds. Standing still for a few seconds or moving constantly won't change much against one or two siege volleys. lol

Anyway, the way the game works right now, with a 24men ball group roaming inside a keep , most sieges don't even work. So I would not worry too much about sieges until they fix performances.

Even as it is now, against any force worth fighting standing still is death. Buffing damage and siege while taking away mobility enhances that to a rediculous degree.

@Manoekin Would you elaborate why you feel barriers should be at 6? With the coming changes I'm really surprised you're on that side of the argument, I'd love to hear your PoV on this.

KenaPKK · January 2016

It should hit all allies around you, but the size of the shield should diminish with more players hit (just not too much).

Maybe you could make the shield stronger with more ultimate saved up, but I see this being either too strong or completely not worth the investment. Clutch in-fight Barriers being cast right as they come up are exciting and effective uses of the skill. If Barrier were so small at 250 ult that you needed to save up ultimate in order for it to be worth using (have an Igneous Shield everyone!), then you might as well just increase the cost...because no one will use it below its threshold of "usefulness." No one is going to save up that much ult in a close fight, though. They'll just resort to using other ults. And if the size of the shield were strong enough at 250 ult to be useful, then saving up more ult would be either op (if it scales high) or worthless (if a 1000 ult Barrier isn't op in size).

Having Barrier only hit a random subset of your group makes it inconsistent, and inconsistent mechanics are not used in the top tier of competitive PvP games. I know; I played Master/Challenger League of Legends for about a year. The part of your group that the Barrier does not hit, even if it's just 4/24 people, can and will eventually (in some fights) still be bursted down. This defeats the purpose of using Barrier at all. If Barrier is ever made to affect a flat number of people that is smaller than a group's size, that group will eventually (through playtesting and refinement) either run Barrier as a back bar skill used at the beginnings of fights by a few members, or just resort to having good reflexes with Nova/Veil mitigation drops instead of running Barrier at all.

TLDR: Groups who really really want to run larger than a flat Barrier cap will just learn to play without it.

edit: Maybe if it were just smaller overall... I can hit a 21.5k Barrier on my Nightblade with no points in Bastion, which I think is dumb on anyone, 4 or 24 people.

hammayolettuce · January 2016

12

12 allows it to be viable for PvE along with smaller groups, It also allows for the larger groups to hit all their members with just 1 other person using it.

*

Zheg · January 2016

18

Manoekin wrote: »

booksmcread wrote: »

The forthcoming change to barrier is what happens when you listen to 1% of the player base instead of actually playing the game, using proper assessment tools and metrics, and paying attention to how the majority of players play and enjoy the game.

The game we have now and will continue to have is because they listened to the "99%". I voted 6 because I agree with the change, but 12 or having it scale on ultimate charge is perfectly fine with me. Your posts are the very definition of hyperbole.

As for the rest of the thread... people are looking at this as if they are only making this one change in the next patch. No one has all of the facts yet.

Ghost-Shot wrote: »

WRX wrote: »

OdinForge wrote: »

vortexman11 wrote: »

I chose 12 because it seems like the most balanced between 24 and 4. But I think I should of chosen other...

To me the ideal barrier would scale based on the amount of ultimate built up, starting at 200, all the way up to 1000. At 200 ultimate it would effect 4 people, then every 40 more ultimate allows it to hit one more person, up to 24 when 1000 ultimate is built up.

I actually like this idea a lot.

But the value of ultimate / additional player would need to be thoroughly tested.

Na, no way. Then you just have people sitting tagging PvE mobs for 5 minutes to get a full barrier? I understand the idea of being rewarded for extra ulti, but this is not how to do it.

@Ghost-Shot I think the smart targeting and group only effect is a given at this point. Just the direction the game is headed. I think its a good feel actually.

I really want to think its a given, but at this point i have no faith and i don't see barrier even being worth spending skill points on. I wouldn't be happy about it but it would be acceptable IF smart targeting will be addressed so you can coordinate in a 24 man that these 2 healers will barrier going through the breach and those 2 will barrier at the top of the stairs.

My impression is that's how it will be done. It's the smart way to do it.

People are entitled to their opinions, even moreso when theyre experienced pvpers talking about pvp. But 6 makes it worthless, and as one of the better raid leads, I'll be surprised if you have people running that in your raid over what will easily be better options for ults. Going from 24 to 6 is reducting the effectiveness to 25% of what it currently is, in a single patch, coupled with massive other changes that will diminish TTK. No nerf should be that heavy handed, especially in a single blow.

Brian and wroebl have put forward significant dmg increases and survivability nerfs, I really haven't seen them talk about counter improvements for mitigation and survivability. If anyone thinks that all of the proposed changes coupled together isn't going to result in players just being blown up quicker for every playstyle and group size, I question their capacity for foresight.

Satiar · January 2016

24

KenaPKK wrote: »

It should hit all allies around you, but the size of the shield should diminish with more players hit.

Having Barrier only hit a random part of your group makes it inconsistent, and inconsistent mechanics are not used in competitive PvP games. The part of your group that it does not hit, even if it's just 4/24 people, can and will eventually (in some fights) still be bursted down. This defeats the purpose of using Barrier at all. If Barrier is ever made to affect a flat number of people that is smaller than a group's size, that group will eventually (through playtesting and refinement) resort to having good reflexes with Nova/Veil mitigation drops instead of running Barrier at all.

TLDR: Groups who really really want to run larger than a flat Barrier cap will just learn to play without it.

I really enjoy Nova, I run it religiously, especially against bomb groups that have thier sorcs run bats. But in a keep situation where you are outnumbered and pushing into rediculous damage you * need* mobile mitigation. Or you die. It is just math

KenaPKK · January 2016

WRX wrote: »

OdinForge wrote: »

vortexman11 wrote: »

I chose 12 because it seems like the most balanced between 24 and 4. But I think I should of chosen other...

To me the ideal barrier would scale based on the amount of ultimate built up, starting at 200, all the way up to 1000. At 200 ultimate it would effect 4 people, then every 40 more ultimate allows it to hit one more person, up to 24 when 1000 ultimate is built up.

I actually like this idea a lot.

But the value of ultimate / additional player would need to be thoroughly tested.

Na, no way. Then you just have people sitting tagging PvE mobs for 5 minutes to get a full barrier? I understand the idea of being rewarded for extra ulti, but this is not how to do it.

*cough* Overload.

FENGRUSH · January 2016

PosternHouse wrote: »

Option B: full raid groups of vampires with devouring swarm (since barrier will be useless and people need to sustain)

Confirmed 2h cleave now procs camo hunter 100% with 15m radius

KenaPKK wrote: »

It should hit all allies around you, but the size of the shield should diminish with more players hit (just not too much).

Crown zerg detected!

Ankael07 · January 2016

6

Recremen wrote: »

12 would be cool, but I'd only want that if it was "smart", in that it gives a barrier to those who don't have one/have the lowest total shield in your group. That way you can still cover the raid with barriers if you really feel like spending two ultimates for it, and need way more coordination/dedicated barrier casters to keep everyone in shields for long. Then people are forced to make tougher decisions regarding how many DPS ultimates to slot, which ones, if anyone's running War Horn or Negate, etc.

too much calculating.it wont be good for server

Satiar · January 2016

24

I mean, worst comes to worst I'll just play more defens I guess. It will be kinda fun just mowing raids in the breach like pugs, because they can't move, can't heal, can't mitigate. Siege and barrier changes OP

Manoekin · January 2016

6

Satiar wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

It's funny how you guys think that veils and negate will be useless because you cannot stand still. You are over exaggerating and getting a bit ridiculous here. The time it takes usually to wipe an enemy group with a well done negate is a matter of a few seconds. Standing still for a few seconds or moving constantly won't change much against one or two siege volleys. lol

Anyway, the way the game works right now, with a 24men ball group roaming inside a keep , most sieges don't even work. So I would not worry too much about sieges until they fix performances.

Even as it is now, against any force worth fighting standing still is death. Buffing damage and siege while taking away mobility enhances that to a rediculous degree.

@Manoekin Would you elaborate why you feel barriers should be at 6? With the coming changes I'm really surprised you're on that side of the argument, I'd love to hear your PoV on this.

I'll be able to mitigate siege damage with my build. I was already preparing for the next patch using Siege shield and it works great. My group already runs a low amount of barriers, too. Half the time I call for them I don't get one. Hell half of the time we only have like 2 healers. We are still learning, but we go in and out of our bombs a lot now to make up for not having a bunch of barriers. We know we can't just stand there and hope to wipe numbers double our size because we can't rotate mitigation and heals. TBH I like it more that way. When we had a full raid defending our guildmate's Emp it was boring for me. I didn't have to worry about anything, and not even lag really. I could just go out in the lag and come back basically unscathed.

IMO Barrier the way it is now (even though I love it) dumbs the game down and doesn't encourage people in the group to be more than just a cog in the machine. That's not even me hating on large groups, just how barrier works for groups of any size I feel like.

I would still use it at 6cap, just differently. 12 would be a good middle ground though.

Also, with the purge change I can't see them keeping siege effects unpurgeable. I also expect them to do something about the low TTK that somewhat balances with this change, and helps improve capabilities that certain classes have with survival.