Suggestion: make dodgeroll mitigate damage taken

Dorrino · May 2017

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

1. Blocking is already insanely punishing thing on live for builds which isn't about it, with doubled cost it's useless(for everyone except blockholders who will just utilise frost staff and S&B ultimate)

Obviously i meant builds that use blocks as their main defense. In med you can also block. The point is, exactly as you put it out, that you wouldn't prefer to.

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

3. You can be CC'ed while blocking, but if you block - than you get ~40% of damage, so most definitely you'll be CC'ed not in full health.

No you can't. The only way to get CC-ed while blocking are disorients and fears. And this property of blocking is shared with dodging.

All the stuns, knockbacks and knockdowns does not affect a blocking target at all. Unlike dodging.

And damage mitigation while blocking STARTS at 50% and get scaled much higher with DK passives and gear.

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

block sometimes, game should not give any silver bullets, while dodge is already outperforms other ways to mitigate damage(except shieldstacking sorcs of course).

This is incorrect for the reasons i outlined in the original post and here.

Sugaroverdose · May 2017

Dorrino wrote: »

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

1. Blocking is already insanely punishing thing on live for builds which isn't about it, with doubled cost it's useless(for everyone except blockholders who will just utilise frost staff and S&B ultimate)

Obviously i meant builds that use blocks as their main defense. In med you can also block. The point is, exactly as you put it out, that you wouldn't prefer to.

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

3. You can be CC'ed while blocking, but if you block - than you get ~40% of damage, so most definitely you'll be CC'ed not in full health.

No you can't. The only was to get CC-ed while blocking are disorients and fears. And this property of blocking is shared with dodging.

All the stuns, knockbacks and knockdowns does not affect a blocking target at all.

And damage mitigation while blocking STARTS at 50% and get scaled much higher with DK passives and gear.

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

block sometimes, game should not give any silver bullets, while dodge is already outperforms other ways to mitigate damage(except shieldstacking sorcs of course).

This is incorrect for the reasons i outlined in the original post and here.

1. This builds are all about tanking, so it's not main defence, but the only thing of them - being damage sponge.
2. Disorient + Any stun ability = stun.
3. DK passive reduces damage by additional 15%, does it makes it OP? Nah, with current damage numbers DK in LA can be killed trough block.

You didn't actually said anything unusual which tells for what the hell reason already outperforming dodging should be buffed.

UPD: Uh, almost forgot it: wepswap during block = being CC'ed

Rohamad_Ali · May 2017

Interesting theory that I wouldn't mind testing before saying no way or definetly yes .

Autolycus · May 2017

sodantokb16_ESO wrote: »

Not gonna happen. ZoS wants players to rely on more than one mean of defense. Except if that defense is shield, block, healing, passive mitigation or big HP pool.

Medium armor lul -> no bonus to healing, small passive mitigation, no bonus to HP, blocking is the most expensive of any builds in the game, using main defense punished by stacking cost, all shields in the game scaling of the 2 worst resources

Yeah, but that crit tho....

j/p ofc, I agree with you.

Strider_Roshin · May 2017

This would be a fantastic change. Everything can be shielded, everything can be healed through, most things can be blocked, but only certain things can be dodged. And the more ZOS makes things undodgeable, the more they nerf medium armor; which is already the weakest armor type in the game.

Hurika · May 2017

Dorrino wrote: »

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

I could get behind this if it only applied to those wearing 5 or more medium armor. Or how about add a damage reduction percentage per piece. Like 2% per. So at 7 pieces you'd reduce at 14%. I think 50% would be far too much.

This part is understandable and arguable. Personally i'd make it apply to everybody, to promote consistency. I'm not aware of any non-med pvp spec that becomes so much stronger in the result of this change, that we need to limit the change to medium only.

But yes, main target of the change is obvious medium armor builds.

Dodge roll replaced with a parry mechanic that either reduces damage based on amount of medium armor and/or costs less stamina. (free to cast, costs stamina to absorb damage)

Shields should be similar. They should reduce damage taken based on amount of light armor and/or cost less magica per hit (free to cast, costs magica to absorb damage)

If it's not tied to armor, there's a slight imbalance in that magic classes would get the same benefit from a single cast as stamina but stamina does not the same benefit from casting shields as they are based on resource pool.

ie
magic class, roll 1 time - immune for 1-2 sec, shield 1 time absorb 7000 dmg
stami class, roll 1 time - immune for 1-2 sec, shield 1 time absorb 2000 dmg

Even the block passive for one hand and shield would be better in the heavy armor line.

Dorrino · May 2017

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

1. This builds are all about tanking, so it's not main defence, but the only thing of them - being damage sponge.

Any build using s&b relies on blocking as their main form of damage mitigation. So most magplars, stam dks, mag dks, some stam sorcs and stamplars in pvp.

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

3. Disorient + Any stun ability = stun.

If you didn't break free - yes. Same for dodge, but without disorient. The question is why wouldn't you break free when everybody else would?:)

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

5. DK passive reduces damage by additional 15%, does it makes it OP? Nah, with current damage numbers DK in LA can be killed trough block.

10%.

Dks in la use shields for damage mitigation. And they will still mostly play in heavy in pvp.

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

You didn't actually said anything unusual which tells for what the hell reason already outperforming dodging should be buffed

Since you never even started to justify how come the worst damage mitigation in pvp is suddenly outperforming it's hard for me to imagine what reasons are you looking for:)

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

UPD: Uh, almost forgot it: wepswap during block = being CC'ed

Weapon swap without block also == being CC-ed:) It's not a property of blocks.

Dorrino · May 2017

Hurika wrote: »

If it's not tied to armor, there's a slight imbalance in that magic classes would get the same benefit from a single cast as stamina but stamina does not the same benefit from casting shields as they are based on resource pool.

This part is by zos design. They specifically decided that shields should be purely magicka damage mitigation.

Avran_Sylt · May 2017

So, thinking about it a bit more again.
How long does the current dodge bonus last? testing it it appears to only last for about one second.
Here's my revised opinion:
Assuming the roll dodge effect lasts for 1 second:
Roll dodge should grant 0.5 seconds of Ground Targeted Damage immunity. (cause them to miss)
Roll dodge should grant 0.75 seconds of Channeled Single target ability immunity (cause them to miss)
Roll dodge should grant the normal 1 second of Direct Damage immunity. (cause them to miss)
Roll dodge should grant 1 second of full Damage immunity while the player is not effected by Dodge Fatigue (cause them to miss)

Edit: Does not cause DoTs on the player to miss.

reasoning for the 0.5 sec of ground damage immunity: once you land you're on the ground.
reasoning for the 0.75 seconds of channeled single target immunity, they move with you after your initial movement
reasoning for the 1 second normal damage immunity: if they aren't focused on you (or it's a direct attack) it will miss if you're not there.
reasoning for the 1 second full Damage immunity while not effected by dodge fatigue: The initial roll dodge is a surprise to the enemy, but if you continue to dodge, they will follow your actions.

I just don't like the idea of a full damage resistance always when you dodge. Your thoughts?

Ignore this:
Was thinking about it a little bit more:
Dodge should have a slight duration where all attacks should miss (Ground based, everything). This period would last for about as long as the animation has the player off of the ground. After this, Ground base attacks would deal damage, and after one more tick (Whenever the character comes to a slight rest/momentum slows), channeled single target abilities start to hit again (enemy refocuses on your new location). then afterwards other abilities start to hit again as normal.

So 0.5 seconds of all damage immunity. 1 second of channeled ability immunity.

Dorrino · May 2017

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

So, thinking about it a bit more again.
How long does the current dodge bonus last? testing it it appears to only last for about one second.
Here's my revised opinion:
Assuming the roll dodge effect lasts for 1 second:

1 sec exactly.

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

Roll dodge should grant 0.5 seconds of Ground Targeted Damage immunity. (cause them to miss)
Roll dodge should grant 0.75 seconds of Channeled Single target ability immunity (cause them to miss)
Roll dodge should grant the normal 1 second of Direct Damage immunity. (cause them to miss)
Roll dodge should grant 1 second of full Damage immunity while the player is not effected by Dodge Fatigue (cause them to miss)

reasoning for the 0.5 sec of ground damage immunity: once you land you're on the ground.
reasoning for the 0.75 seconds of channeled single target immunity, they move with you after your initial movement
reasoning for the 1 second normal damage immunity: if they aren't focused on you (or it's a direct attack) it will miss if you're not there.
reasoning for the 1 second full Damage immunity while not effected by dodge fatigue: The initial roll dodge is a surprise to the enemy, but if you continue to dodge, they will follow your actions.

I just don't like the idea of a full damage resistance always when you dodge. Your thoughts?

Love the justifications:) But it feels like you're overcomplicating a rather simple ability and creating a QA nightmare there.

Sounds really rp and fun to read. But then imagine explaining all that to a new player and hoping he won't mix them up. And all those complain threads full with 'i thought i was supposed to be immune, but i got wtfpwnd and i SWEAR it was my first dodge':)

Avran_Sylt · May 2017

@Dorrino

lol, yeah, I'm a stickler for rp kinda abilities, like everything to be kinda grounded in reality so players can have an intuition for some things. And it most certainly is a more complicated system. And I mean, you could argue that that is the case with the current dodgeroll description ingame when it says "Your character can dodge roll out of the path of incoming attacks" wouldn't duration based beams also be considered "incoming" attacks? which you even point out in your main post : )

(dodgeroll description is located under the combat section of the ingame help menu)

Joy_Division · May 2017

Dorrino wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

I'm sure there is a better idea. People talk about how this game is getting dumbed down, how there are no counters, and now we want to make every single type of attack, regardless of what it is do 50% damage against dodging? Doesn''t blocking already do this?

That's the whole point that blocking already does that. And you can't block while dodging. This makes it so you can get punished for dodging, unlike any other defense mechanics in the game.

Joy_Division wrote: »

If I see a sorcerer casting fragments, damn it I want to dodge that and avoid it entirely.

Now you see, say a templar jabbing you with pol:) As literally any other spec, but med armor, you just block the jabs and/or spam shields/heals. As a med armor spec at best you pray, at worst you dodge. That's the key problem - your worst decision would be to use your main avoidance mechanic.

None of the other mechanics share this vulnerability. There're zero cases when blocking, shielding or healing would make your situation worse.

Thus the proposed change.

Alternatively, even though it's worse for multiple reasons, let's make blocking available in the middle of the dodge. It will bring a similar outcome as the proposed change at the expense of much higher stam costs and requirement to the personal skill of the player.

Oh, I think I misunderstood you. You want dodge to avoid attacks AND receive a 50% damage mitigation. That's way too high. ZoS added the dodge roll penalty in the first place because rolly-polly builds were abusing it.

As someone who mains a templar, I can assure you that any halfway decent play can easily avoid the majority of jabs coming their way through a variety of means. All you have to do is dodge roll through the templar and you avoid getting hit entirely.

Dorrino · May 2017

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

@Dorrino

lol, yeah, I'm a stickler for rp kinda abilities, like everything to be kinda grounded in reality so players can have an intuition for some things. And it most certainly is a more complicated system. And I mean, you could argue that that is the case with the current dodgeroll description ingame when it says "Your character can dodge roll out of the path of incoming attacks" wouldn't duration based beams also be considered "incoming" attacks? which you even point out in your main post : )

(dodgeroll description is located under the combat section of the ingame help menu)

Yep, i know. That just adds to the inconsistency.

Check your pm btw.

Joy_Division wrote: »

Oh, I think I misunderstood you. You want dodge to avoid attacks AND receive a 50% damage mitigation.

Yes.

Joy_Division wrote: »

That's way too high.

I put out justifications why 50% might even be too low.

Why can it be too high?:)

Joy_Division wrote: »

ZoS added the dodge roll penalty in the first place because rolly-polly builds were abusing it.

The penalty is fine and needs to stay. The costs are not the problem. The problems i outlined above multiple times.

Joy_Division wrote: »

As someone who mains a templar, I can assure you that any halfway decent play can easily avoid the majority of jabs coming their way through a variety of means. All you have to do is dodge roll through the templar and you avoid getting hit entirely.

As someone that mains a stamblade i can assure you that this is wrong, taking into account that jabs range is higher than dodge distance and that templar can turn around:)

Trust me i'm not making these examples up nor exaggerating anything.

Joy_Division · May 2017

Dorrino wrote: »

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

@Dorrino

lol, yeah, I'm a stickler for rp kinda abilities, like everything to be kinda grounded in reality so players can have an intuition for some things. And it most certainly is a more complicated system. And I mean, you could argue that that is the case with the current dodgeroll description ingame when it says "Your character can dodge roll out of the path of incoming attacks" wouldn't duration based beams also be considered "incoming" attacks? which you even point out in your main post : )

(dodgeroll description is located under the combat section of the ingame help menu)

Yep, i know. That just adds to the inconsistency.

Check your pm btw.

Joy_Division wrote: »

Oh, I think I misunderstood you. You want dodge to avoid attacks AND receive a 50% damage mitigation.

Yes.

Joy_Division wrote: »

That's way too high.

I put out justifications why 50% might even be too low.

Why can it be too high?:)

Joy_Division wrote: »

ZoS added the dodge roll penalty in the first place because rolly-polly builds were abusing it.

The penalty is fine and needs to stay. The costs are not the problem. The problems i outlined above multiple times.

Joy_Division wrote: »

As someone who mains a templar, I can assure you that any halfway decent play can easily avoid the majority of jabs coming their way through a variety of means. All you have to do is dodge roll through the templar and you avoid getting hit entirely.

As someone that mains a stamblade i can assure you that this is wrong, taking into account that jabs range is higher than dodge distance and that templar can turn around:)

Trust me i'm not making these examples up nor exaggerating anything.

Well I think you are exaggerating.

If you can't dodge roll a stationary templar who is locked into a jobs channel, you need to L2P. A dodge roll is faster than a templar who tries to rotate around (i.e., the game prevents them from instantly "turning" around).

You are so quick to point out the "unique disadvantage" of dodge roll as a defense, but fail to acknowledge the unique advantage of dodge roll in that it completely avoids many incoming attacks entirely and the subsequent aftereffects of said attacks, something neither blocking, shielding, or healing can do.

Because dodge has this unique advantage, it has unquiet disadvantages too. Channels go through dodge. As intended by ZoS (see patch notes for TG's change to Radiant Destruction). Because channels have the unique advantage of going through dodge, they can be interrupted, can't be animation canceled, can't be block-cast, and super-snare the caster (except for Dark Deal for some strange reason). Now you want the major protection buff + the minor protection buff + the nord's racial mitigation passive + another 6% just for the hell of it protection against the very attack designed to counter dodge ... while apparently thinking it's balanced that channels still have the accompanying disadvantages. Of course you do because you main a stamblade.

And blocking does not reduce all damage. The destro ultimate for starters. It also does nothing against ground Dots. Or against Dots ticking on you. It does not prevent after-effects such as the snare from Vampire's Bane. A blocker also greatly restricts her mobility. Yes these builds are annoying but they are also kind of pathetic just to watch them stand there holding block and spamming igneous shield knowing death is inevitable against the half dozen people beating on them. At least NBs and sorcerers in medium and light armor have a shot of getting away.

What it boils down to is you want to combine the unique advantage of dodge with something even better than blocking (and think this might be too low!) and have it remove snares and apparently keep the already existing drawbacks of channeled attacks and the unique disadvantages of other form of defense (e.g. healing must contend with defile, which is also going to be far more prevalent in Morrowind).

I get it, the cliffracer skill is dumb and medium armor sucks (and so does light armor). These are specific problems that do not need an overhaul of the combat system to benefit your main.

Dorrino · May 2017

Joy_Division wrote: »

Well I think you are exaggerating.

Unfortunately i don't. I wished i did.

Joy_Division wrote: »

If you can't dodge roll a stationary templar who is locked into a jobs channel, you need to L2P.

My friend, i wished i needed to l2p. This problem is universal and doesn't depend on defending player's skill level.

Joy_Division wrote: »

A dodge roll is faster than a templar who tries to rotate around (i.e., the game prevents them from instantly "turning" around).

If you happen to be exactly on top of the templar then you might dodge some part of jabs once. Then the templar will repeat the jabs while keeping the distance. But most of the time you're too far to dodge through him and if you try to run to him you'll get full jabs in the process.

Joy_Division wrote: »

You are so quick to point out the "unique disadvantage" of dodge roll as a defense, but fail to acknowledge the unique advantage of dodge roll in that it completely avoids many incoming attacks entirely and the subsequent aftereffects of said attacks, something neither blocking, shielding, or healing can do.

Blocking, shielding and healing mitigate attacks damage. Dodgeroll avoids some of them. Avoidance is a form of mitigation. There's no reason for me to hide this property of the dodge roll.

Joy_Division wrote: »

Because dodge has this unique advantage, it has unquiet disadvantages too. Channels go through dodge. As intended by ZoS (see patch notes for TG's change to Radiant Destruction). Because channels have the unique advantage of going through dodge, they can be interrupted, can't be animation canceled, can't be block-cast, and super-snare the caster (except for Dark Deal for some strange reason).

All of that is irrelevant because you can't do anything about channels WHILE in a dodgeroll. If for a spec dodgeroll is a secondary defense mechanics (like it is for magplars) then its 'unique drawbacks' are justified, because those specs can choose NOT to dodgeroll and utilize their primary defense mechanics. For specs relying on dodgeroll as a primary defense mechanics not dodgerolling is not an option, because their secondary defense mechanisms are vastly inferior. Imagine that as a magplar you'd have NOT to spam bol and instead you'd HAVE to dodgeroll.

Joy_Division wrote: »

Now you want the major protection buff + the minor protection buff + the nord's racial mitigation passive + another 6% just for the hell of it protection against the very attack designed to counter dodge ... while apparently thinking it's balanced that channels still have the accompanying disadvantages. Of course you do because you main a stamblade.

I want for the dodgeroll to provide a similar levels of reliable protection ANY other defense mechanism provides. Again, imagine in 10-20% of battle situations as a magplar you'd have NOT to bol or you'd make your situation WORSE for you. Even more each your bol cast (doesn't matter if it make it better for you or worse) would increase your next bol cast costs by 20%. That's how you get a feel how dodgeroll works as a primary defense mechanism.

Joy_Division wrote: »

And blocking does not reduce all damage. The destro ultimate for starters.

None of defense mechanisms reduce damage from destro ults. While both spam healing and spam shields work equally effective against anything including destro ults.

Joy_Division wrote: »

It also does nothing against ground Dots. Or against Dots ticking on you. It does not prevent after-effects such as the snare from Vampire's Bane.

Just like dodgerolling.

Joy_Division wrote: »

A blocker also greatly restricts her mobility.

This is the only real drawback of blocking.

Joy_Division wrote: »

What it boils down to is you want to combine the unique advantage of dodge with something even better than blocking (and think this might be too low!) and have it remove snares and apparently keep the already existing drawbacks of channeled attacks and the unique disadvantages of other form of defense (e.g. healing must contend with defile, which is also going to be far more prevalent in Morrowind).

Yes.

Joy_Division wrote: »

I get it, the cliffracer skill is dumb and medium armor sucks (and so does light armor). These are specific problems that do not need an overhaul of the combat system to benefit your main.

Cliffracer is the least of the problems, even though it's symptomatic. The main problems are conveniently outlined in the OP.

I'd ask you specifically not to diminish the problem with dodgerolls and even more specifically try not to 'explain it out' with my personal pvp problems. I don't ask for advantages. I don't need them. I'm irrelevant. I ask for the fix to make the game better.

It's just like my addon, if i needed it i wouldn't have released it. If I needed these fixes to dodgerolling for myself only i wouldn't have asked ZOS to implement them. This is stupid to ask for a game-wide change to solve my private problem.

Qbiken · May 2017

Dodgerolling is already getting a buff with Morrowind were you become immune to crowd controlling effects (such as DK´s talons)

Dorrino · May 2017

Qbiken wrote: »

Dodgerolling is already getting a buff with Morrowind were you become immune to crowd controlling effects (such as DK´s talons)

Take it back and implement my proposed change instead:)

Joy_Division · May 2017

@Dorrino

Grind Skyreach on a Templar then message me in game, I will show you how to dodge roll Puncturing Sweeps.

ManDraKE · May 2017

Qbiken wrote: »

Dodgerolling is already getting a buff with Morrowind were you become immune to crowd controlling effects (such as DK´s talons)

you don't get CC inmunity, just inmovilizations inmunity, and that is in order to prevent getting lock while exiting the dodgeroll. The problem is dodgeroll not being consistent as the main defense of medium armor, imagine if there was 10-15+ skills that ignore damage shields, how that would affect light armor? well, that's exactly what we have with undoggeable stuff, "ey, this is your main defense, that only works agiasnt some stuff". Think the problem as adding shield breaker to class skills ^^

Minno · May 2017

Joy_Division wrote: »

@Dorrino

Grind Skyreach on a Templar then message me in game, I will show you how to dodge roll Puncturing Sweeps.

Lol.

Sugaroverdose · May 2017

Dorrino wrote: »

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

1. This builds are all about tanking, so it's not main defence, but the only thing of them - being damage sponge.

Any build using s&b relies on blocking as their main form of damage mitigation. So most magplars, stam dks, mag dks, some stam sorcs and stamplars in pvp.

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

3. Disorient + Any stun ability = stun.

If you didn't break free - yes. Same for dodge, but without disorient. The question is why wouldn't you break free when everybody else would?:)

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

5. DK passive reduces damage by additional 15%, does it makes it OP? Nah, with current damage numbers DK in LA can be killed trough block.

10%.

Dks in la use shields for damage mitigation. And they will still mostly play in heavy in pvp.

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

You didn't actually said anything unusual which tells for what the hell reason already outperforming dodging should be buffed

Since you never even started to justify how come the worst damage mitigation in pvp is suddenly outperforming it's hard for me to imagine what reasons are you looking for:)

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

UPD: Uh, almost forgot it: wepswap during block = being CC'ed

Weapon swap without block also == being CC-ed:) It's not a property of blocks.

1. Hell so what does it means? Some run it, but in fact magplars main defence is HoT/BoL with ritual under they're legs, blocking is just to prevent being instantly CC'ed
3. I have bad news for ya - disorient and hardCC comes at the same moment from any viable player(except magdk, who don't have viable hardCC)
5. Why should i run shields on LA? That's f problem of the game, you are somehow decided for me how should i play(MA=Dodgeroll,LA=Shields and both must mitigate everything because you suck at making decisions but want to spam one f button every time things going to be bad), i have bad news for ya

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaDVESEN0x4

5xLA,1xHA,1xMA

Dorrino · May 2017

Joy_Division wrote: »

@Dorrino

Grind Skyreach on a Templar then message me in game, I will show you how to dodge roll Puncturing Sweeps.

Well, i tend to trust people until they repeatedly show me they can't be trusted.

So i went to the PTS and made a magplar:)

Joy_Division wrote: »

A dodge roll is faster than a templar who tries to rotate around (i.e., the game prevents them from instantly "turning" around).

As expected this proved to be totally false.

You can instantly turn your camera around in the middle of puncturing sweeps and all subsequent sweeps will now hit the target that was behind you. No lag, no delay. Additionally you can cancel ongoing sweeps and cast them again on the target.

As to your really generous offer to help me learn to counter jabs - i definitely accept it. Log onto PTS and show to me how do you reliably dodge my sweeps:)

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

1. Hell so what does it means? Some run it, but in fact magplars main defence is HoT/BoL with ritual under they're legs, blocking is just to prevent being instantly CC'ed

In pvp 'magplars main defence is HoT/BoL with ritual under they're legs' WHILE BLOCKING.

'blocking is just to prevent being instantly CC'ed' - blocking is to reduce incoming damage by 70% (base 50% + 20% from s&b passive) and to protect against cc.

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

3. I have bad news for ya - disorient and hardCC comes at the same moment from any viable player(except magdk, who don't have viable hardCC)

Since this game has a global cooldown of 1 sec shared between all skills 'disorient and hardCC' CANNOT come 'at the same moment'. At the very best they are 1 sec apart. Sorry about that:)

Sugaroverdose wrote: »

5. Why should i run shields on LA? That's f problem of the game, you are somehow decided for me how should i play(MA=Dodgeroll,LA=Shields and both must mitigate everything because you suck at making decisions but want to spam one f button every time things going to be bad), i have bad news for ya
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaDVESEN0x4

5xLA,1xHA,1xMA

You demonstrated a video that a magdk can blockcast even in light:) If that's not an example of how block overperforms, i'm not sure what is:)

Joy_Division · May 2017

Dorrino wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

@Dorrino

Grind Skyreach on a Templar then message me in game, I will show you how to dodge roll Puncturing Sweeps.

Well, i tend to trust people until they repeatedly show me they can't be trusted.

I see. And it should trust a person who yells in CAPS to everyone as if their opinions are somehow more than just that are are absolute truths that the rest of us are too ignorant to understand?

Whenever ZoS comes onto these forums they always ask people to consider the implication of a proposed change beyond the benefit of their class or spec. In particular how this might negatively impact the other mechanics in the game. I do not think you have met this standard.

You yell at me:

Imagine that as a magplar you'd have NOT to spam bol and instead you'd HAVE to dodgeroll.

Well guess what? Because I actually played the class for three years as opposed to just hopping on the PTS, I can tell you there are situations where dodge roll is a better choice than BoL. I could be heal debuffed, I might need LoS, I might be in an Eye of the Storm, a nearby ally might have lower health than me, I might want to create separation from multiple attackers beating on me, etc. Breath of Life is good, but it reactive and it has a huge drawback in that you have to eat things like Incapacitating Strike. It is not a panacea. It is not something in my estimation that is trustworthy as a reliable primary defense. I use secondary defenses like block, dodge roll, Mist form, potions of immovability & speed, etc. to cover the weaknesses of Breath of Life. You might deem your own Rally heal or cloak or LOS or whatever other secondary defense you have as "vastly inferior," but just like a healer, sometimes there are situations in which you are better off using them instead of your primary defense.

And you have yet to even address the disadvantages, namely interruption, no block-cast, no animation-cancel, limited mobility, that accompany channels because they are designed to defeat dodge-roll. This is what ZoS means when considering the impact on other game mechanics. Why should a channeler subject themselves to those disadvantages just to have their damage reduced by 50%? When they attack blockers, they don't have to suffer those drawbacks and still are mitigated by a default 50%. Against shields, instant-casts do 100% unmitigated damage. Channeled attack would be too undermined. During the IC patch, we have already seen the effect when even something as powerful as RD was undermined by dodge-rollers.

Yes I think it would be too strong to combine the best aspects of dodge (avoiding hits, mobility) and block (50% mitigation against everything in the game - even 50% mitigation against damage block does not currently mitigate) while adding snare removal and doing nothing to the drawbacks of channels. Because I hold it, that doesn't somehow make me "wrong" in which you need to lecture me in CAPS. I do think the suggestion posted by Bee by tying a smaller percentage tied to how many medium armor pieces is a good suggestion. Such a reform would also by a similar reform for Light Armor because it too is not reliable. Ideally both reforms would be implemented, perhaps with an accompanying passive to light armor that afford the user some passive protection while channeling.

clocksstoppe · May 2017

What a surprise.. The guy with the crutch "dodge now" addon wants dodge to be buffed.

Dorrino · May 2017

Joy_Division wrote: »

I see. And it should trust a person who yells in CAPS to everyone as if their opinions are somehow more than just that are are absolute truths that the rest of us are too ignorant to understand?

Ok, since you for some reason interpret CAPS as yelling instead of neutral means of emphasizing key points in the sentence, i'll use bold instead from now on. No yelling was meant.

Joy_Division wrote: »

Whenever ZoS comes onto these forums they always ask people to consider the implication of a proposed change beyond the benefit of their class or spec. In particular how this might negatively impact the other mechanics in the game. I do not think you have met this standard.

I said multiple times that i think this change should be applied to any dodge instead of med armor only. Frankly i think adding it to med only will lead to inconsistency, confusion and negative disparity between different specs.

Thus the aim of my suggestion is to buff an underperforming defense mechanics for everybody using it. The change is aimed to benefit any class/spec and thus it meets your standard by definition.

Med specs obviously will benefit more from this change because they use dodges more, we can discuss if this might have a negative impact on the game.

Joy_Division wrote: »

You yell at me:

Imagine that as a magplar you'd have NOT to spam bol and instead you'd HAVE to dodgeroll.

Well guess what? Because I actually played the class for three years as opposed to just hopping on the PTS, I can tell you there are situations where dodge roll is a better choice than BoL.

This is undeniably true. Though the point wasn't that 'bol is always the strongest defense choice'. The point was 'there're no circumstances when using bol would put the templar to a worse spot as compared to not using it'.

Joy_Division wrote: »

I could be heal debuffed, I might need LoS, I might be in an Eye of the Storm, a nearby ally might have lower health than me, I might want to create separation from multiple attackers beating on me, etc. Breath of Life is good, but it reactive and it has a huge drawback in that you have to eat things like Incapacitating Strike.

This 'huge' drawback is not even relevant, since templars purge defiles first and cast bol second. And since they are holding block the whole time they can't even get punished during 1sec gcd before bol.

Joy_Division wrote: »

It is not a panacea. It is not something in my estimation that is trustworthy as a reliable primary defense. I use secondary defenses like block, dodge roll, Mist form, potions of immovability & speed, etc. to cover the weaknesses of Breath of Life.

Just like med specs use block, pots, cloaks etc to cover the weaknesses of dodges. The problem is that combined effectiveness of bol+secondary means type of defense generally outweigh combined effectiveness of dodge+secondary means for the reasons outlined in the OP (not yelling caps).

Joy_Division wrote: »

You might deem your own Rally heal or cloak or LOS or whatever other secondary defense you have as "vastly inferior," but just like a healer, sometimes there are situations in which you are better off using them instead of your primary defense.

This is true, but as i said above due to the problems with dodge in some situations using it would be detrimental to the player instead of just 'less effective than secondary defense mechanisms'.

Joy_Division wrote: »

And you have yet to even address the disadvantages, namely interruption, no block-cast, no animation-cancel, limited mobility, that accompany channels because they are designed to defeat dodge-roll.

These 'disadvantages' occur against any target, dodging or not. They are not dodge specific.

But more importantly why would you claim 'they are designed to defeat dodge roll'? Besides that this is not true, please point at skills 'designed to defeat blocks' and 'skills designed to defeat shields' (skills, not sets). Even skills 'designed to defeat heals' don't work against classes with purge.

Joy_Division wrote: »

This is what ZoS means when considering the impact on other game mechanics. Why should a channeler subject themselves to those disadvantages just to have their damage reduced by 50%?

Yes, why? When his target dodge rolls the 'channeler' puts himself in zero danger, because the target has zero means to punish him for channeling. So why this 'channeler' has to be provided with a non-brainer/not punishable way to 'defeat dodge rolls'? Just because he slotted a universally effective med to high damage channeling skill?

Joy_Division wrote: »

When they attack blockers, they don't have to suffer those drawbacks and still are mitigated by a default 50%. Against shields, instant-casts do 100% unmitigated damage. Channeled attack would be too undermined. During the IC patch, we have already seen the effect when even something as powerful as RD was undermined by dodge-rollers.

Channels were made uninterruptable by dodges to prevent making them totally useless against a spammable mechanic. That, in turn, as a collateral, made them too strong against dodges. My change aims at reducing this gap to a more balanced amount.

Joy_Division wrote: »

Yes I think it would be too strong to combine the best aspects of dodge (avoiding hits, mobility) and block (50% mitigation against everything in the game - even 50% mitigation against damage block does not currently mitigate) while adding snare removal and doing nothing to the drawbacks of channels.

Yet none of the few points that you provided as a justification of this position are strong enough to do so. It is still unclear too me, why people need to receive full damage through a damage-avoidance mechanics.

Joy_Division wrote: »

Because I hold it, that doesn't somehow make me "wrong" in which you need to lecture me in CAPS.

I heard you and will lecture you in bold instead.

Joy_Division wrote: »

I do think the suggestion posted by Bee by tying a smaller percentage tied to how many medium armor pieces is a good suggestion. Such a reform would also by a similar reform for Light Armor because it too is not reliable. Ideally both reforms would be implemented, perhaps with an accompanying passive to light armor that afford the user some passive protection while channeling.

As i said above i disagree with Bee on her suggestion. it both provides too small benefit, which will not solve the current problems with the dodgerolls and it provides it exclusively to med armor, thus imbalancing the game.

ps. I hope i understood your silence correctly and we agree now that jabs/sweeps pose a big problem to specs with dodgerolls as their primary defense mechanism?:)

KellieHusker · May 2017

from a pve perspective I'd love to see something like "When 5 or more pieces of Medium Armor are equipped: Reduced damage taken from area of effect attacks by 20%."

Yes I would also want this to stack with Deadly Cloak, it might mean stamina builds could finally survive aoes in vTrials. It would Mean stamina classes take 40%~ less total damage from area of effect skills, absorb shields still give more survivability to magicka builds than that, and to a wider range of damage but it would be a step in the right direction.

Dorrino · May 2017

KellieHusker wrote: »

from a pve perspective I'd love to see something like "When 5 or more pieces of Medium Armor are equipped: Reduced damage taken from area of effect attacks by 20%."

Yes I would also want this to stack with Deadly Cloak, it might mean stamina builds could finally survive aoes in vTrials. It would Mean stamina classes take 40%~ less total damage from area of effect skills, absorb shields still give more survivability to magicka builds than that, and to a wider range of damage but it would be a step in the right direction.

I agree to this suggestion as a half-measure.

I'd still add it to dodgerolls specifically though and increased the amount.

NightbladeMechanics · May 2017

You know a thread like this won't amount to anything.

ZOS is reducing counterplay across all means of defense. You'll need to use multiple to adapt going forward.

Dorrino · May 2017

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

ZOS is reducing counterplay across all means of defense. You'll need to use multiple to adapt going forward.

Yet still other means of defense outperform dodge on pts.

Blocking change arguably hit med armor specs as hard as block-reliant specs. Due to additional stam drain with full block cost.

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

You know a thread like this won't amount to anything.

Am i supposed to cry and threaten to leave then?:P Is it how it works here?

NightbladeMechanics · May 2017

Dorrino wrote: »

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

You know a thread like this won't amount to anything.

Am i supposed to cry and threaten to leave then?:P Is it how it works here?

No, but you could propose more realistic changes. ZOS does not want dodge roll to be a primary means of defense for anyone, even medium armor builds. Keep that in mind when making suggestions.