Manoekin wrote: »

Soulac wrote: »

Manoekin wrote: »

Soulac wrote: »

Are there Vicious Death RINGS?

It comes in every piece. So you don't even have to wear an armor piece if you don't want to.

I need proof of it, otherwise I can´t plan ahead

I have 2 rings and a neck, plus two swords and even a shield I'm not using. The jewelry seems to always be arcane, but the armor/weapons come in random traits (though I haven't seen a single piece of sturdy/well-fitted).

Satiar wrote: »

Crown wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

These changes aren't random. Its targeted destruction of group play...........It is ZoS orienting thier game. I don't doubt certain people are going to be very happy about it. I hate it though.

@Satiar I agree - the social aspect of group play (such as doing a shot every time Sarenvog swears) is the most fun that a lot of us have. Since the last major patch, @Lightingale only comes on to play for a few hours during "Drunk Victorem Raid Night" as the rest of the time it's not as much fun. For me, while it is entertaining running 2-6 person groups for a couple hours, it gets old very quickly without the bantering among the groups of 15 odd old timers who have all been friends for years. You can't do that when multiple groups are making different calls and both need battle comms in the same TS channel.

That's what's frustrating to me. There are so many games that cater to small teams, little elite groups of 4-8. There are so few quality games like this where you can have a big team.

This patch, I get the picture. ZoS doesn't want big groups. Message received, not welcome. Ok. It's sickening, though. There are so few games that had the promise this one did, and to me this really feels like the end as far as large group gameplay. I don't doubt I'll stick around for a while, but the moment CU beta drops or hell BDO, I'm done. Time to find a game that actually wants me in it.

As far as I'm concerned, they are so tangled up in amateur coding and lag problems they can't fix they've decided to turn on the player base they advertised to in the first place in a last ditch effort to make thier game halfway playable. And to all the players like me that hung on and convinced their guild and friends to hope for an eventual light at the end of the tunnel...well, there's the door. Goddammit

I sympathize with this line of thinking more than people may think I do. However, I don't necessarily see it the same way. IMO there's nothing in this patch that says don't play as a large group. All I see is them telling us not to pack everyone into super tight balls. The only issue I have is one you've brought up before, and that's assaulting defended keeps. The camp radius is so small it won't reach the outer wall of the keep from a resource. The only people who will be able to use camps are defenders which is a huge advantage to the players that already have the advantage of defending. Disregarding that though, I want to see how it will work. All these new sets work just as well for the people attacking a keep as they do the people defending. I'm sure there's something that can be done about it, but just the camp issue for me is enough to make me not siege any keeps anymore.

Ghost-Shot wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Crown wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

These changes aren't random. Its targeted destruction of group play...........It is ZoS orienting thier game. I don't doubt certain people are going to be very happy about it. I hate it though.

@Satiar I agree - the social aspect of group play (such as doing a shot every time Sarenvog swears) is the most fun that a lot of us have. Since the last major patch, @Lightingale only comes on to play for a few hours during "Drunk Victorem Raid Night" as the rest of the time it's not as much fun. For me, while it is entertaining running 2-6 person groups for a couple hours, it gets old very quickly without the bantering among the groups of 15 odd old timers who have all been friends for years. You can't do that when multiple groups are making different calls and both need battle comms in the same TS channel.

That's what's frustrating to me. There are so many games that cater to small teams, little elite groups of 4-8. There are so few quality games like this where you can have a big team.

This patch, I get the picture. ZoS doesn't want big groups. Message received, not welcome. Ok. It's sickening, though. There are so few games that had the promise this one did, and to me this really feels like the end as far as large group gameplay. I don't doubt I'll stick around for a while, but the moment CU beta drops or hell BDO, I'm done. Time to find a game that actually wants me in it.

As far as I'm concerned, they are so tangled up in amateur coding and lag problems they can't fix they've decided to turn on the player base they advertised to in the first place in a last ditch effort to make thier game halfway playable. And to all the players like me that hung on and convinced their guild and friends to hope for an eventual light at the end of the tunnel...well, there's the door. Goddammit

Rofl....

You think CU is going to cater to your large group?

.......

First of all..The game is going to end up with around 6-8 people as its group cap

Second of all

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI250gU4Ct8

yea...don't get your hopes up on that.

Oh good, I was anxiously holding my breath waiting for you to turn this into a DaoC thread. Also until you have factual evidence that the group cap in CU will be 6-8, you may want to avoid getting you're hopes up there and remember how many times Mark Jacobs has stated that CU is not a reboot of DaoC. Now do you have anything relevant to add to this discussion?

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Crown wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

These changes aren't random. Its targeted destruction of group play...........It is ZoS orienting thier game. I don't doubt certain people are going to be very happy about it. I hate it though.

@Satiar I agree - the social aspect of group play (such as doing a shot every time Sarenvog swears) is the most fun that a lot of us have. Since the last major patch, @Lightingale only comes on to play for a few hours during "Drunk Victorem Raid Night" as the rest of the time it's not as much fun. For me, while it is entertaining running 2-6 person groups for a couple hours, it gets old very quickly without the bantering among the groups of 15 odd old timers who have all been friends for years. You can't do that when multiple groups are making different calls and both need battle comms in the same TS channel.

That's what's frustrating to me. There are so many games that cater to small teams, little elite groups of 4-8. There are so few quality games like this where you can have a big team.

This patch, I get the picture. ZoS doesn't want big groups. Message received, not welcome. Ok. It's sickening, though. There are so few games that had the promise this one did, and to me this really feels like the end as far as large group gameplay. I don't doubt I'll stick around for a while, but the moment CU beta drops or hell BDO, I'm done. Time to find a game that actually wants me in it.

As far as I'm concerned, they are so tangled up in amateur coding and lag problems they can't fix they've decided to turn on the player base they advertised to in the first place in a last ditch effort to make thier game halfway playable. And to all the players like me that hung on and convinced their guild and friends to hope for an eventual light at the end of the tunnel...well, there's the door. Goddammit

Rofl....

You think CU is going to cater to your large group?

.......

First of all..The game is going to end up with around 6-8 people as its group cap

Second of all

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI250gU4Ct8

yea...don't get your hopes up on that.

Derra wrote: »

Ghost-Shot wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Crown wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

These changes aren't random. Its targeted destruction of group play...........It is ZoS orienting thier game. I don't doubt certain people are going to be very happy about it. I hate it though.

@Satiar I agree - the social aspect of group play (such as doing a shot every time Sarenvog swears) is the most fun that a lot of us have. Since the last major patch, @Lightingale only comes on to play for a few hours during "Drunk Victorem Raid Night" as the rest of the time it's not as much fun. For me, while it is entertaining running 2-6 person groups for a couple hours, it gets old very quickly without the bantering among the groups of 15 odd old timers who have all been friends for years. You can't do that when multiple groups are making different calls and both need battle comms in the same TS channel.

That's what's frustrating to me. There are so many games that cater to small teams, little elite groups of 4-8. There are so few quality games like this where you can have a big team.

This patch, I get the picture. ZoS doesn't want big groups. Message received, not welcome. Ok. It's sickening, though. There are so few games that had the promise this one did, and to me this really feels like the end as far as large group gameplay. I don't doubt I'll stick around for a while, but the moment CU beta drops or hell BDO, I'm done. Time to find a game that actually wants me in it.

As far as I'm concerned, they are so tangled up in amateur coding and lag problems they can't fix they've decided to turn on the player base they advertised to in the first place in a last ditch effort to make thier game halfway playable. And to all the players like me that hung on and convinced their guild and friends to hope for an eventual light at the end of the tunnel...well, there's the door. Goddammit

Rofl....

You think CU is going to cater to your large group?

.......

First of all..The game is going to end up with around 6-8 people as its group cap

Second of all

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI250gU4Ct8

yea...don't get your hopes up on that.

Oh good, I was anxiously holding my breath waiting for you to turn this into a DaoC thread. Also until you have factual evidence that the group cap in CU will be 6-8, you may want to avoid getting you're hopes up there and remember how many times Mark Jacobs has stated that CU is not a reboot of DaoC. Now do you have anything relevant to add to this discussion?

While he stated multiple times it´s not a reboot of daoc - i highly doubt they will provide and environment where numbers trump brains or coordination in the same way GW2 or ESO did.

It was announced to be developed with the ideas present in daoc in mind - that´s why it made it through kickstarter in the first place.

WRX wrote: »

Yeah, CU will absolutely not be 24+ man groups, and stacking will be crazy bad. Just from a CC and healing perspective, that'd be a no go.

I will say, at least in a duel setting, nightblades are still really having issues. I don't think I have lost a duel to one yet, magicka ones feel alot more tanky and and their dps is on par with magicka because of the cp trees.

Manoekin wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Manoekin wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

Lots of great changes, but unreflectable meteor? Barrier only hitting 6? Both terrible ideas. Other ultimates have a way to avoid them, but Meteor is just gonna happen, no matter what? With its buggy CC, high initial damage, DoT component, etc., I'm incredibly skeptical that this is going to be a positive change. And barrier only hitting 6 is a nerf too far, I think. I'm all for it hitting fewer people, but 12 would have been a better balance point, I think.

Meteor did have a counter and viable rotation for it to hit. Unexpected buff tbh.

@Minno

Not sure what you mean by a "viable rotation for it to hit." Meteor is not currently guaranteed to hit specifically because it is reflectable. It might hit the target, it might hit the caster, it really depends on who has a reflect and who has ranged attacks to eat through an enemy's reflect pool so that they still get hit by the meteor. It's way too strong if it's unreflectable.

Tell that sorcs templars and NBs who had no reliable way of countering a DKs meteor. You´ll eventually learn to block it too.

@Derra I already do block it when I'm out of magical, I'm not an idiot. And people used to be able to re-reflect it back, which was cool and kept me on my toes. NB and Sorc can slot shield for the reflect. Not to mentioned if you see them flap you can just get off some other reflectable ranged attacks to seat through the reflect pool.

With the change to pts so projectiles can no longer be re-reflected it´s only logical to make meteor not reflectable. It´s a mandatory change because slotting a shield and reflecting that meteor back where it was intended to go is no longer an option (kind of sad bc with the changes on pts sorcs would finally have been able to run vaible 1h + shield builds).

But lets not make it a build discussion. I´m sure people will adapt eventually. A change they could do is increase dot dmg and reduce initial hit dmg.

@Derra I agree regarding the lamentable changes to number of reflects, but it still stands that neither reflect is guaranteed, provided you have other ranged abilities on your bar to soak up the opponent's reflect pool. In any case, though, the fact that it isn't reflectable now indicates to me that it needs some other counter, such as the initial hit being dodgeable. Having only block as an option is pretty terrible.

I´ve only ever blocked meteor on my chars - too much of a risk to reflect it back and get doublereflected for more dmg.

I don´t think an ultimate should be easily counterable when it comes with a cost of 200 ultimate. Maybe they should reduce the initial hit dmg a little bit and increase the dot but dodging a one time use ultimate with that much of a cost investment is pretty much unacceptable.

I can't think of another ultimate that is completely unavoidable (unless you're a nightblade since you can still cloak meteor apparently).The ones you could make an argument for require placement by the player instead of just fire and forget. Someone really just did not think this through at all.

The ones requiring placement by the player are not blockable, offer secondary effects and have a larger aoe radius on most of them though.

Also dawnbreaker of smiting is completely unavoidable and dirtcheap while doing the same burstdmg without the option to avoid the damage over time by walking out of it (the only time i´m gonna slot meteor over dawnbreaker in the next patch is when fighting a large organized force -for everything else dawnbreaker is superior simply bc it does not have a giant >>blocknow<< around the enemies feet with some sound effect).

You can miss your dawnbreaker. I see it happen a lot. The other person can dodge it if they know it's coming. It's just a cone ability, not a guaranteed hit.

Minno wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Manoekin wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

Lots of great changes, but unreflectable meteor? Barrier only hitting 6? Both terrible ideas. Other ultimates have a way to avoid them, but Meteor is just gonna happen, no matter what? With its buggy CC, high initial damage, DoT component, etc., I'm incredibly skeptical that this is going to be a positive change. And barrier only hitting 6 is a nerf too far, I think. I'm all for it hitting fewer people, but 12 would have been a better balance point, I think.

Meteor did have a counter and viable rotation for it to hit. Unexpected buff tbh.

@Minno

Not sure what you mean by a "viable rotation for it to hit." Meteor is not currently guaranteed to hit specifically because it is reflectable. It might hit the target, it might hit the caster, it really depends on who has a reflect and who has ranged attacks to eat through an enemy's reflect pool so that they still get hit by the meteor. It's way too strong if it's unreflectable.

Tell that sorcs templars and NBs who had no reliable way of countering a DKs meteor. You´ll eventually learn to block it too.

@Derra I already do block it when I'm out of magical, I'm not an idiot. And people used to be able to re-reflect it back, which was cool and kept me on my toes. NB and Sorc can slot shield for the reflect. Not to mentioned if you see them flap you can just get off some other reflectable ranged attacks to seat through the reflect pool.

With the change to pts so projectiles can no longer be re-reflected it´s only logical to make meteor not reflectable. It´s a mandatory change because slotting a shield and reflecting that meteor back where it was intended to go is no longer an option (kind of sad bc with the changes on pts sorcs would finally have been able to run vaible 1h + shield builds).

But lets not make it a build discussion. I´m sure people will adapt eventually. A change they could do is increase dot dmg and reduce initial hit dmg.

@Derra I agree regarding the lamentable changes to number of reflects, but it still stands that neither reflect is guaranteed, provided you have other ranged abilities on your bar to soak up the opponent's reflect pool. In any case, though, the fact that it isn't reflectable now indicates to me that it needs some other counter, such as the initial hit being dodgeable. Having only block as an option is pretty terrible.

I´ve only ever blocked meteor on my chars - too much of a risk to reflect it back and get doublereflected for more dmg.

I don´t think an ultimate should be easily counterable when it comes with a cost of 200 ultimate. Maybe they should reduce the initial hit dmg a little bit and increase the dot but dodging a one time use ultimate with that much of a cost investment is pretty much unacceptable.

I can't think of another ultimate that is completely unavoidable (unless you're a nightblade since you can still cloak meteor apparently).The ones you could make an argument for require placement by the player instead of just fire and forget. Someone really just did not think this through at all.

The ones requiring placement by the player are not blockable, offer secondary effects and have a larger aoe radius on most of them though.

Also dawnbreaker of smiting is completely unavoidable and dirtcheap while doing the same burstdmg without the option to avoid the damage over time by walking out of it.

Its conal at least. Meteor still shouldn't be reflected:

- most spells with an object dropping from sky with AOE are not reflectable (standard, nova,).
- meteor's AOE is easily avoidable.
- 15k average dmg, that can be negated by entirely block (which costs around roughly 4k stam)
- costs 200 ultimate (Templar price is 190ish)
- take flight is not reflectable, and now targets. Does equal if not more dmg.

-Standard and Nova are ground target abilities, and I'm almost 100% sure you can block the synergies which for Nova is the main damaging part/stun. You're not guaranteed to hit anything because the other player can just choose not to stand/move there.
-The dot is not the issue.
-Still more than Nova (for more damage and now a guaranteed hit)
-Take Flight is not a spell projectile, it's a gap closer and ZOS sees it that way too which is why they added the slow to it.

Ghost-Shot wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Ghost-Shot wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Crown wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

These changes aren't random. Its targeted destruction of group play...........It is ZoS orienting thier game. I don't doubt certain people are going to be very happy about it. I hate it though.

@Satiar I agree - the social aspect of group play (such as doing a shot every time Sarenvog swears) is the most fun that a lot of us have. Since the last major patch, @Lightingale only comes on to play for a few hours during "Drunk Victorem Raid Night" as the rest of the time it's not as much fun. For me, while it is entertaining running 2-6 person groups for a couple hours, it gets old very quickly without the bantering among the groups of 15 odd old timers who have all been friends for years. You can't do that when multiple groups are making different calls and both need battle comms in the same TS channel.

That's what's frustrating to me. There are so many games that cater to small teams, little elite groups of 4-8. There are so few quality games like this where you can have a big team.

This patch, I get the picture. ZoS doesn't want big groups. Message received, not welcome. Ok. It's sickening, though. There are so few games that had the promise this one did, and to me this really feels like the end as far as large group gameplay. I don't doubt I'll stick around for a while, but the moment CU beta drops or hell BDO, I'm done. Time to find a game that actually wants me in it.

As far as I'm concerned, they are so tangled up in amateur coding and lag problems they can't fix they've decided to turn on the player base they advertised to in the first place in a last ditch effort to make thier game halfway playable. And to all the players like me that hung on and convinced their guild and friends to hope for an eventual light at the end of the tunnel...well, there's the door. Goddammit

Rofl....

You think CU is going to cater to your large group?

.......

First of all..The game is going to end up with around 6-8 people as its group cap

Second of all

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI250gU4Ct8

yea...don't get your hopes up on that.

Oh good, I was anxiously holding my breath waiting for you to turn this into a DaoC thread. Also until you have factual evidence that the group cap in CU will be 6-8, you may want to avoid getting you're hopes up there and remember how many times Mark Jacobs has stated that CU is not a reboot of DaoC. Now do you have anything relevant to add to this discussion?

While he stated multiple times it´s not a reboot of daoc - i highly doubt they will provide and environment where numbers trump brains or coordination in the same way GW2 or ESO did.

It was announced to be developed with the ideas present in daoc in mind - that´s why it made it through kickstarter in the first place.

I don't think anyone wants a game where numbers matter more than anything, if we did we wouldn't be anxiously awaiting CU and we would continue playing this. I'm an officer in a guild that runs 24 man groups every night and balls up as tight as possible and I can honestly say that the meta of balling up is stupid but its effective, that's why we do it.

I have no doubt that the group size will be smaller than ESO but I HIGHLY doubt it will be 6-8, that doesn't make any sense for a game where a major selling point is hundreds pf players on screen at once. I'm guessing the cap will be around 16 but lets be honest, anytime we throw those numbers out we are just talking out of our asses.

Derra wrote: »

Ghost-Shot wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Ghost-Shot wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Crown wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

These changes aren't random. Its targeted destruction of group play...........It is ZoS orienting thier game. I don't doubt certain people are going to be very happy about it. I hate it though.

@Satiar I agree - the social aspect of group play (such as doing a shot every time Sarenvog swears) is the most fun that a lot of us have. Since the last major patch, @Lightingale only comes on to play for a few hours during "Drunk Victorem Raid Night" as the rest of the time it's not as much fun. For me, while it is entertaining running 2-6 person groups for a couple hours, it gets old very quickly without the bantering among the groups of 15 odd old timers who have all been friends for years. You can't do that when multiple groups are making different calls and both need battle comms in the same TS channel.

That's what's frustrating to me. There are so many games that cater to small teams, little elite groups of 4-8. There are so few quality games like this where you can have a big team.

This patch, I get the picture. ZoS doesn't want big groups. Message received, not welcome. Ok. It's sickening, though. There are so few games that had the promise this one did, and to me this really feels like the end as far as large group gameplay. I don't doubt I'll stick around for a while, but the moment CU beta drops or hell BDO, I'm done. Time to find a game that actually wants me in it.

As far as I'm concerned, they are so tangled up in amateur coding and lag problems they can't fix they've decided to turn on the player base they advertised to in the first place in a last ditch effort to make thier game halfway playable. And to all the players like me that hung on and convinced their guild and friends to hope for an eventual light at the end of the tunnel...well, there's the door. Goddammit

Rofl....

You think CU is going to cater to your large group?

.......

First of all..The game is going to end up with around 6-8 people as its group cap

Second of all

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI250gU4Ct8

yea...don't get your hopes up on that.

Oh good, I was anxiously holding my breath waiting for you to turn this into a DaoC thread. Also until you have factual evidence that the group cap in CU will be 6-8, you may want to avoid getting you're hopes up there and remember how many times Mark Jacobs has stated that CU is not a reboot of DaoC. Now do you have anything relevant to add to this discussion?

While he stated multiple times it´s not a reboot of daoc - i highly doubt they will provide and environment where numbers trump brains or coordination in the same way GW2 or ESO did.

It was announced to be developed with the ideas present in daoc in mind - that´s why it made it through kickstarter in the first place.

I don't think anyone wants a game where numbers matter more than anything, if we did we wouldn't be anxiously awaiting CU and we would continue playing this. I'm an officer in a guild that runs 24 man groups every night and balls up as tight as possible and I can honestly say that the meta of balling up is stupid but its effective, that's why we do it.

I have no doubt that the group size will be smaller than ESO but I HIGHLY doubt it will be 6-8, that doesn't make any sense for a game where a major selling point is hundreds pf players on screen at once. I'm guessing the cap will be around 16 but lets be honest, anytime we throw those numbers out we are just talking out of our asses.

I´m gonna be honest: I´ve played daoc with my guild since EU launch and we´ve all backed CU because of that on the first kickstarter day.
Most of those people will never ever touch that game if they implement grp sizes bigger than 8 into the games pvp. It was one of daocs defining rvr features to be balanced around the max grpsize and creating vaible synergies in that grp. This feeling is only generated if the grps are small enough to NOT have redundant positions to fill. If you made the decision to run a third healer it was sth. that significantly impacted grp performance.
I can´t see that happening in grps with more slots than there are classes and from the bottom of my heart hope there will be less slots in a grp than there are classes to choose from (because that´s what creates interesting theorycrafting - having to choose because you can´t fit in all available options).

Recremen wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

Lots of great changes, but unreflectable meteor? Barrier only hitting 6? Both terrible ideas. Other ultimates have a way to avoid them, but Meteor is just gonna happen, no matter what? With its buggy CC, high initial damage, DoT component, etc., I'm incredibly skeptical that this is going to be a positive change. And barrier only hitting 6 is a nerf too far, I think. I'm all for it hitting fewer people, but 12 would have been a better balance point, I think.

Meteor did have a counter and viable rotation for it to hit. Unexpected buff tbh.

@Minno

Not sure what you mean by a "viable rotation for it to hit." Meteor is not currently guaranteed to hit specifically because it is reflectable. It might hit the target, it might hit the caster, it really depends on who has a reflect and who has ranged attacks to eat through an enemy's reflect pool so that they still get hit by the meteor. It's way too strong if it's unreflectable.

Tell that sorcs templars and NBs who had no reliable way of countering a DKs meteor. You´ll eventually learn to block it too.

@Derra I already do block it when I'm out of magical, I'm not an idiot. And people used to be able to re-reflect it back, which was cool and kept me on my toes. NB and Sorc can slot shield for the reflect. Not to mentioned if you see them flap you can just get off some other reflectable ranged attacks to seat through the reflect pool.

With the change to pts so projectiles can no longer be re-reflected it´s only logical to make meteor not reflectable. It´s a mandatory change because slotting a shield and reflecting that meteor back where it was intended to go is no longer an option (kind of sad bc with the changes on pts sorcs would finally have been able to run vaible 1h + shield builds).

But lets not make it a build discussion. I´m sure people will adapt eventually. A change they could do is increase dot dmg and reduce initial hit dmg.

@Derra I agree regarding the lamentable changes to number of reflects, but it still stands that neither reflect is guaranteed, provided you have other ranged abilities on your bar to soak up the opponent's reflect pool. In any case, though, the fact that it isn't reflectable now indicates to me that it needs some other counter, such as the initial hit being dodgeable. Having only block as an option is pretty terrible.

I´ve only ever blocked meteor on my chars - too much of a risk to reflect it back and get doublereflected for more dmg.

I don´t think an ultimate should be easily counterable when it comes with a cost of 200 ultimate. Maybe they should reduce the initial hit dmg a little bit and increase the dot but dodging a one time use ultimate with that much of a cost investment is pretty much unacceptable.

I don't mean dodge it such that it doesn't hit the area it's supposed to land on, I mean dodge it so that you, the target, don't get the CC, don't stand in the DoT, and don't get the initial burst damage, same as for any other ultimate. It just occupies such a unique space in combat due to its instant CC, high damage, DoT, and ability to fire from the safety of range. Every other ultimate does only a couple of those things.

Nova hits from a range but you have to activate its synergy to do burst damage and CC component, for which you need to be standing in it. That gives opponents plenty of time to escape unless you're already right inside them and dropping it on yourself. Costs 50 more ultimate than Meteor and can be pretty much completely avoided beyond a couple ticks from the DoT.

Negate is ranged but does no damage, it only stops spells from going off, and it can be broken free from, granting actual CC immunity. Costs 25 more ultimate than Meteor.

DK Standard: DoT damage, caster-centered so you're at risk if you're using it, synergy allows immobilize, way different from a stun. 50 more ultimate than Meteor.

DK Leap: single-target AoE like Meteor is now, great damage, AoE knockup like Meteor, but is completely avoidable by dodging, doesn't hit if you try to use it against moving enemies from far away, no DoT component, literally takes you from the safety of range and lands you in the center of everything bad. Cheap as hell to compensate for some of those drawbacks, maybe too cheap but that could be adjusted.

Dawnbreaker: cone AoE damage, to be fair the most unavoidable one unless you preempt it, but cones are terrible, it has no CC unless you're a vampire and your opponent chose the morph that CC's undead, really only "strong" in niche circumstances that require the other player to be a vampire. Reliable burst I guess?

Meteor: Good AoE initial damage which is unavoidable, AoE CC on hit, follows target so it will always hit, AoE DoT, use from the complete safety of range for all components including the damage and the CC, no need for someone to synergize anything, lamentations of the fallen, probably global warming, idk.

It's pretty easy to see that it's overpowered in its current form.

Ghost-Shot wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Ghost-Shot wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Ghost-Shot wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Crown wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

These changes aren't random. Its targeted destruction of group play...........It is ZoS orienting thier game. I don't doubt certain people are going to be very happy about it. I hate it though.

@Satiar I agree - the social aspect of group play (such as doing a shot every time Sarenvog swears) is the most fun that a lot of us have. Since the last major patch, @Lightingale only comes on to play for a few hours during "Drunk Victorem Raid Night" as the rest of the time it's not as much fun. For me, while it is entertaining running 2-6 person groups for a couple hours, it gets old very quickly without the bantering among the groups of 15 odd old timers who have all been friends for years. You can't do that when multiple groups are making different calls and both need battle comms in the same TS channel.

That's what's frustrating to me. There are so many games that cater to small teams, little elite groups of 4-8. There are so few quality games like this where you can have a big team.

This patch, I get the picture. ZoS doesn't want big groups. Message received, not welcome. Ok. It's sickening, though. There are so few games that had the promise this one did, and to me this really feels like the end as far as large group gameplay. I don't doubt I'll stick around for a while, but the moment CU beta drops or hell BDO, I'm done. Time to find a game that actually wants me in it.

As far as I'm concerned, they are so tangled up in amateur coding and lag problems they can't fix they've decided to turn on the player base they advertised to in the first place in a last ditch effort to make thier game halfway playable. And to all the players like me that hung on and convinced their guild and friends to hope for an eventual light at the end of the tunnel...well, there's the door. Goddammit

Rofl....

You think CU is going to cater to your large group?

.......

First of all..The game is going to end up with around 6-8 people as its group cap

Second of all

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI250gU4Ct8

yea...don't get your hopes up on that.

Oh good, I was anxiously holding my breath waiting for you to turn this into a DaoC thread. Also until you have factual evidence that the group cap in CU will be 6-8, you may want to avoid getting you're hopes up there and remember how many times Mark Jacobs has stated that CU is not a reboot of DaoC. Now do you have anything relevant to add to this discussion?

While he stated multiple times it´s not a reboot of daoc - i highly doubt they will provide and environment where numbers trump brains or coordination in the same way GW2 or ESO did.

It was announced to be developed with the ideas present in daoc in mind - that´s why it made it through kickstarter in the first place.

I don't think anyone wants a game where numbers matter more than anything, if we did we wouldn't be anxiously awaiting CU and we would continue playing this. I'm an officer in a guild that runs 24 man groups every night and balls up as tight as possible and I can honestly say that the meta of balling up is stupid but its effective, that's why we do it.

I have no doubt that the group size will be smaller than ESO but I HIGHLY doubt it will be 6-8, that doesn't make any sense for a game where a major selling point is hundreds pf players on screen at once. I'm guessing the cap will be around 16 but lets be honest, anytime we throw those numbers out we are just talking out of our asses.

I´m gonna be honest: I´ve played daoc with my guild since EU launch and we´ve all backed CU because of that on the first kickstarter day.
Most of those people will never ever touch that game if they implement grp sizes bigger than 8 into the games pvp. It was one of daocs defining rvr features to be balanced around the max grpsize and creating vaible synergies in that grp. This feeling is only generated if the grps are small enough to NOT have redundant positions to fill. If you made the decision to run a third healer it was sth. that significantly impacted grp performance.
I can´t see that happening in grps with more slots than there are classes and from the bottom of my heart hope there will be less slots in a grp than there are classes to choose from (because that´s what creates interesting theorycrafting - having to choose because you can´t fit in all available options).

I understand what you're saying and personally I love doing small man stuff, fighting outnumbered is a fun challenge, but i think the "zerg problem" that you all talk about here, is evidence to me that there are more people who prefer large group play than small group. It seems completely illogical to take a game that you build a custom engine for to handle 500+ people on screen at a time, then say you can only group with 8. I find it very hard to believe they will cap groups that low however I think they will provide tools to allow SKILLED small groups to counter big groups. I think Mark Jacobs is a smart enough guy to realize that group caps are the dumbest way combat the zerg.

Recremen wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

Lots of great changes, but unreflectable meteor? Barrier only hitting 6? Both terrible ideas. Other ultimates have a way to avoid them, but Meteor is just gonna happen, no matter what? With its buggy CC, high initial damage, DoT component, etc., I'm incredibly skeptical that this is going to be a positive change. And barrier only hitting 6 is a nerf too far, I think. I'm all for it hitting fewer people, but 12 would have been a better balance point, I think.

Meteor did have a counter and viable rotation for it to hit. Unexpected buff tbh.

@Minno

Not sure what you mean by a "viable rotation for it to hit." Meteor is not currently guaranteed to hit specifically because it is reflectable. It might hit the target, it might hit the caster, it really depends on who has a reflect and who has ranged attacks to eat through an enemy's reflect pool so that they still get hit by the meteor. It's way too strong if it's unreflectable.

Tell that sorcs templars and NBs who had no reliable way of countering a DKs meteor. You´ll eventually learn to block it too.

@Derra I already do block it when I'm out of magical, I'm not an idiot. And people used to be able to re-reflect it back, which was cool and kept me on my toes. NB and Sorc can slot shield for the reflect. Not to mentioned if you see them flap you can just get off some other reflectable ranged attacks to seat through the reflect pool.

With the change to pts so projectiles can no longer be re-reflected it´s only logical to make meteor not reflectable. It´s a mandatory change because slotting a shield and reflecting that meteor back where it was intended to go is no longer an option (kind of sad bc with the changes on pts sorcs would finally have been able to run vaible 1h + shield builds).

But lets not make it a build discussion. I´m sure people will adapt eventually. A change they could do is increase dot dmg and reduce initial hit dmg.

@Derra I agree regarding the lamentable changes to number of reflects, but it still stands that neither reflect is guaranteed, provided you have other ranged abilities on your bar to soak up the opponent's reflect pool. In any case, though, the fact that it isn't reflectable now indicates to me that it needs some other counter, such as the initial hit being dodgeable. Having only block as an option is pretty terrible.

I´ve only ever blocked meteor on my chars - too much of a risk to reflect it back and get doublereflected for more dmg.

I don´t think an ultimate should be easily counterable when it comes with a cost of 200 ultimate. Maybe they should reduce the initial hit dmg a little bit and increase the dot but dodging a one time use ultimate with that much of a cost investment is pretty much unacceptable.

I don't mean dodge it such that it doesn't hit the area it's supposed to land on, I mean dodge it so that you, the target, don't get the CC, don't stand in the DoT, and don't get the initial burst damage, same as for any other ultimate. It just occupies such a unique space in combat due to its instant CC, high damage, DoT, and ability to fire from the safety of range. Every other ultimate does only a couple of those things.

Nova hits from a range but you have to activate its synergy to do burst damage and CC component, for which you need to be standing in it. That gives opponents plenty of time to escape unless you're already right inside them and dropping it on yourself. Costs 50 more ultimate than Meteor and can be pretty much completely avoided beyond a couple ticks from the DoT. PVE/group specific ulti

Negate is ranged but does no damage, it only stops spells from going off, and it can be broken free from, granting actual CC immunity. Costs 25 more ultimate than Meteor. PVE/group specific ulti

DK Standard: DoT damage, caster-centered so you're at risk if you're using it, synergy allows immobilize, way different from a stun. 50 more ultimate than Meteor. PVE/group specific ulti

DK Leap: single-target AoE like Meteor is now, great damage, AoE knockup like Meteor, but is completely avoidable by dodging, doesn't hit if you try to use it against moving enemies from far away, no DoT component, literally takes you from the safety of range and lands you in the center of everything bad. Cheap as hell to compensate for some of those drawbacks, maybe too cheap but that could be adjusted. PVP/DMG specific ulti

Dawnbreaker: cone AoE damage, to be fair the most unavoidable one unless you preempt it, but cones are terrible, it has no CC unless you're a vampire and your opponent chose the morph that CC's undead, really only "strong" in niche circumstances that require the other player to be a vampire. Reliable burst I guess? PVP/DMG specific ulti

Meteor: Good AoE initial damage which is unavoidable, AoE CC on hit, follows target so it will always hit, AoE DoT, use from the complete safety of range for all components including the damage and the CC, no need for someone to synergize anything, lamentations of the fallen, probably global warming, idk.PVP/DMG specific ulti

It's pretty easy to see that it's overpowered in its current form.

Derra wrote: »

Ghost-Shot wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Ghost-Shot wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Ghost-Shot wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

Crown wrote: »

Satiar wrote: »

These changes aren't random. Its targeted destruction of group play...........It is ZoS orienting thier game. I don't doubt certain people are going to be very happy about it. I hate it though.

@Satiar I agree - the social aspect of group play (such as doing a shot every time Sarenvog swears) is the most fun that a lot of us have. Since the last major patch, @Lightingale only comes on to play for a few hours during "Drunk Victorem Raid Night" as the rest of the time it's not as much fun. For me, while it is entertaining running 2-6 person groups for a couple hours, it gets old very quickly without the bantering among the groups of 15 odd old timers who have all been friends for years. You can't do that when multiple groups are making different calls and both need battle comms in the same TS channel.

That's what's frustrating to me. There are so many games that cater to small teams, little elite groups of 4-8. There are so few quality games like this where you can have a big team.

This patch, I get the picture. ZoS doesn't want big groups. Message received, not welcome. Ok. It's sickening, though. There are so few games that had the promise this one did, and to me this really feels like the end as far as large group gameplay. I don't doubt I'll stick around for a while, but the moment CU beta drops or hell BDO, I'm done. Time to find a game that actually wants me in it.

As far as I'm concerned, they are so tangled up in amateur coding and lag problems they can't fix they've decided to turn on the player base they advertised to in the first place in a last ditch effort to make thier game halfway playable. And to all the players like me that hung on and convinced their guild and friends to hope for an eventual light at the end of the tunnel...well, there's the door. Goddammit

Rofl....

You think CU is going to cater to your large group?

.......

First of all..The game is going to end up with around 6-8 people as its group cap

Second of all

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI250gU4Ct8

yea...don't get your hopes up on that.

Oh good, I was anxiously holding my breath waiting for you to turn this into a DaoC thread. Also until you have factual evidence that the group cap in CU will be 6-8, you may want to avoid getting you're hopes up there and remember how many times Mark Jacobs has stated that CU is not a reboot of DaoC. Now do you have anything relevant to add to this discussion?

While he stated multiple times it´s not a reboot of daoc - i highly doubt they will provide and environment where numbers trump brains or coordination in the same way GW2 or ESO did.

It was announced to be developed with the ideas present in daoc in mind - that´s why it made it through kickstarter in the first place.

I don't think anyone wants a game where numbers matter more than anything, if we did we wouldn't be anxiously awaiting CU and we would continue playing this. I'm an officer in a guild that runs 24 man groups every night and balls up as tight as possible and I can honestly say that the meta of balling up is stupid but its effective, that's why we do it.

I have no doubt that the group size will be smaller than ESO but I HIGHLY doubt it will be 6-8, that doesn't make any sense for a game where a major selling point is hundreds pf players on screen at once. I'm guessing the cap will be around 16 but lets be honest, anytime we throw those numbers out we are just talking out of our asses.

I´m gonna be honest: I´ve played daoc with my guild since EU launch and we´ve all backed CU because of that on the first kickstarter day.
Most of those people will never ever touch that game if they implement grp sizes bigger than 8 into the games pvp. It was one of daocs defining rvr features to be balanced around the max grpsize and creating vaible synergies in that grp. This feeling is only generated if the grps are small enough to NOT have redundant positions to fill. If you made the decision to run a third healer it was sth. that significantly impacted grp performance.
I can´t see that happening in grps with more slots than there are classes and from the bottom of my heart hope there will be less slots in a grp than there are classes to choose from (because that´s what creates interesting theorycrafting - having to choose because you can´t fit in all available options).

I understand what you're saying and personally I love doing small man stuff, fighting outnumbered is a fun challenge, but i think the "zerg problem" that you all talk about here, is evidence to me that there are more people who prefer large group play than small group. It seems completely illogical to take a game that you build a custom engine for to handle 500+ people on screen at a time, then say you can only group with 8. I find it very hard to believe they will cap groups that low however I think they will provide tools to allow SKILLED small groups to counter big groups. I think Mark Jacobs is a smart enough guy to realize that group caps are the dumbest way combat the zerg.

I really hope they won´t simply because it eliminates the process of creating a working grp setup with great synergies if you don´t have to choose from the options presented.

If they go with big grpsizes this won´t happen as you´ll have multiple of each class not using their complete arsenal because it´s more efficient if one player uses spell a another uses spell b and the third of that class spell c.
Same with rotations for cooldown skills.

Having grps with a high amount of players in them (and as a result making it easier to organise them) lowers the quality of the gameplay. Largescale pvp is interesting when it´s not too well organised. You won´t achieve that with many players in a grp.
DAOC had gigantic pve raids btw (64 i think? - maybe 128). Thankfully they never implemented the raidframe into their frontier zone.