Monthly Combat Update – December 2017

Fexelea · January 2018

I like the idea of encouraging build variety and group variety - my biggest complaint with PvP since the introduction of Vicious Death has been healing "group bombs" that just run around healing until they all have their ultimate ready, and will only be killed after way too many camps have been spent. (plus the lag they generate damn)

Such groups have made keep sieges too easy, and created an unfortunate multiplication of "let's all be templars, dks and wardens and eye of the storm on the pins". Nightblade bombs are annoying but at least they die because they are alone and once their attack is done they are done. Sorcs may get away on a streaky shield, but can't sit under oils and tank them forever.

For those that haven't faced this: the other day I got "kill enemy templars". A group came to take Drake, we eventually defended it, but I had completed all 20 kills of templars in that one group, that honestly only died because they forgot to put a camp out. Oil did nothing to them, meatbags had no effect because they can also chain healing ultis, and their combined eye+proxydet was enough to kill a newbie that chain-reactioned any other approaching defender. When they were out of ultis they just ran around the top of the keep healing until they had ultis to storm the flags again, repeat.

And yes, whilst it's a legitimate strategy... It's just not very balanced and promotes cookie cutter. I miss the days when going for a keep's door was a terrible idea.

Maura_Neysa · January 2018

Onefrkncrzypope wrote: »

Block cost won't stop the unkillable tanks. They will find a way. It's what they like to do. Therfore this is only a Nerf for pve. Put it in battle spirit that what it there for.

I'm pretty sure its not even the un killable tanks that people actually are crying nerf over. Its the Parma block DPS builds which probably are actually getting buffed. Personally I ran my trials capable Tank in PvP. Yes it takes 6+ average players to kill me, and I do run a lot of cc so you can't just ignore me either. However, it takes a lot of work and a little luck for me to kill anyone when I'm alone. Can stop you from taking a resource when I'm out number even if they can't kill me.

This is going to be a PvE nerf and a PvP buff. Really pretty sad. Tank meta has already changed to all sturdy with 3 block cost glyphs. Where do they want us to so now? 9 DPS and 3 healers?

Onefrkncrzypope · January 2018

Maura_Neysa wrote: »

Onefrkncrzypope wrote: »

Block cost won't stop the unkillable tanks. They will find a way. It's what they like to do. Therfore this is only a Nerf for pve. Put it in battle spirit that what it there for.

I'm pretty sure its not even the un killable tanks that people actually are crying nerf over. Its the Parma block DPS builds which probably are actually getting buffed. Personally I ran my trials capable Tank in PvP. Yes it takes 6+ average players to kill me, and I do run a lot of cc so you can't just ignore me either. However, it takes a lot of work and a little luck for me to kill anyone when I'm alone. Can stop you from taking a resource when I'm out number even if they can't kill me.

This is going to be a PvE nerf and a PvP buff. Really pretty sad. Tank meta has already changed to all sturdy with 3 block cost glyphs. Where do they want us to so now? 9 DPS and 3 healers?

They want argonian vampire with the one piece monster sets for mag recovery....

Earthewen · January 2018

Rainraven wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Earthewen wrote: »

I have been lurking here for quite sometime and I'm wondering something. Is it logical at all to adjust things so that a solo person can wipe a group of 24? For that matter, how is it even logical to contend that a small group of say four, should ever be able to wipe a group of 24 toe to toe? What is the motivation for this reasoning? I'd like to really hear an honest answer as I am trying to wrap my head around this.

To me, it sort of feels like a quarterback saying that he is going to play solo or in a group of four in a game that was specifically designed for large groups. Are we changing the entire game of PVP to gear it for only small groups and solo?

Yes. It's logical. And it's also realistic.

IIn 1063, roughly 250 Norman knights and infantry decisively defeated thousands of Muslim horseman at the Battle of Cerami in Sicily.

In 1565, maybe 6,000 knights and conscripted Maltese withstood an attack by 40,000 Ottoman Spahis, Janissaires, and mercenary corsairs, utterly defeating them in the Siege of Malta.

In 1571, 13 Korean ships fought against at least ten times their number of Japanese ships. Dozens of Japanese ships were sunk and half the Japanese soldiers were killed and wounded. The Koreans suffered just 5 casualties and lost no ships.

In 1939, about 4,000 lightly armed Finnish troops surrounded and wiped out an entire Soviet division, consisting of some 20,000 men, dozens of tanks, and hundreds of supporting aircraft at the Battle of Tolvajärvi.

In 1966, 108 Australians inflicted a decisive defeat against roughly 2,000 Viet Cong and North Vietnamese at the battle of Long Tan.

History is full of many defeats inflicted against vastly numerically superior forces. One common theme in all these defeats is the arrogance of these huge armies who simply assumed that because their opponents were so few in numbers that victory would be easy and required nothing more than simply by showing up.

Usually in art, entertainment, movies, etc., are criticized for discarding realism for the sake of drama, exaggeration, and a good story. Hence the motif of the adventuring hero who overcomes seemingly insurmountable odds to defeat the Big Bad Evil Guy and save the world. This is what the Elder Scrolls franchise is all about.

I don't find it illogical at all that a group of 4 players can beat 24. It is consistent with history, consistent with the tradition of heroic deeds in the Elder Scrolls, and healthy for the spirit of competition.

applause

I'd add this: there should be zero things in PVP that guarantee a win. What's the point in the fight if you're that safe?

But seriously? There will be no adjustments made "so a solo person can wipe a group of 24". When and if that happens, good for him, but it's never going to be the norm and I don't see anybody asking for it to be. We don't actually have to go to the greatest possible extreme one way or the other.

I would agree that there is always the extreme example of the small standing against the many. I tend to run in a smaller group which I find very challenging. It is pretty tough even in a 12 man to stand up against the many that faction stack. However, combat toe-to-toe is also a lot of fun when the enemy outnumbers you and you kill them anyway.

What I do sense, however, is that the LOS fighters aren't really looking for a fight as much as they are looking for that kill. I hear a lot about "We're only looking for good fights." However, my question posed here would be "What makes a good fight?"

If the current developers are looking to change the way the game of PVP is played away from the original intent of the original developers, then I'd like to know about it. One of the reasons I bought the game in the first place was for the PVP and having the large scale, siege the castle aspect. If that is being scaled back or even eliminated in favor of the small man and solo PVP, then I'd like to know up front.

Meld777 · January 2018

Ranger209 wrote: »

Draxys wrote: »

PLEASE do not listen to the people complaining about groups taking on specialized support roles. That is a good thing. Nerfing group support roles will only reinforce the already nearly unchallengeable swarms of 40 players. The only way to fight them is with a well composed group of 8-16, WITH support roles.
.

I don't think 8 players should challenge 40, ever.

This is bs. I still don't understand why there is no effective counterplay to stacked groups. Even 1 player should be able to wipe out a 40-man group if they are all stacked like 1 person, spamming AoE skills. That is not smart play. If, however, the 40 people play smart, i.e. tanks in the front, Healers in the back, everyone nicely spread out, NB gankers in the corner in stealth, then yeah, 1 person should not be able to challenge them.

But if all 40 are stacked within a 7 meter radius? Sorry, 1 person should be able to 1-shot all 40. Preferably even without a specialized build. Just buff Detonation, so that it deals 2k base damage + 4k for every player within its radius. Vicious Death should not be needed to wipe out 40 stacked players. This is not smart play and should be punished. VD should be needed to wipe out 6. And anything below 5 should not be wipeable with 1 shot.

Earthewen · January 2018

Meld777 wrote: »

Ranger209 wrote: »

Draxys wrote: »

PLEASE do not listen to the people complaining about groups taking on specialized support roles. That is a good thing. Nerfing group support roles will only reinforce the already nearly unchallengeable swarms of 40 players. The only way to fight them is with a well composed group of 8-16, WITH support roles.
.

I don't think 8 players should challenge 40, ever.

This is bs. I still don't understand why there is no effective counterplay to stacked groups. Even 1 player should be able to wipe out a 40-man group if they are all stacked like 1 person, spamming AoE skills. That is not smart play. If, however, the 40 people play smart, i.e. tanks in the front, Healers in the back, everyone nicely spread out, NB gankers in the corner in stealth, then yeah, 1 person should not be able to challenge them.

But if all 40 are stacked within a 7 meter radius? Sorry, 1 person should be able to 1-shot all 40. Preferably even without a specialized build. Just buff Detonation, so that it deals 2k base damage + 4k for every player within its radius. Vicious Death should not be needed to wipe out 40 stacked players. This is not smart play and should be punished. VD should be needed to wipe out 6. And anything below 5 should not be wipeable with 1 shot.

I'm not sure this is total BS to be honest. I see your point about the 7 meter radius, though. I was wondering about the cap they put on it when they did put the cap on how many people you can hit. However, I'm not sure you should have plus 4K for every player within the radius, even though it would help my group tremendously to stand up to the 50-man zergs that we are facing on a regular basis. With that being said, that one player bombing a large group all stacked in a small radius SHOULD get at least a few kills in before he dies at the hands of the rest of the group he attempted to kill.

LordSlif · January 2018

ZOS_Wrobel wrote: »

@cinbri
We can add abilities to the exception list for interrupt. For example the resurrect ability doesn’t get immunity since being able to stop it is a core part of our gameplay.

@casparian
We have a fix for the bug where Puncturing Sweeps doesn’t stack correctly with damage taken bonuses. We have identified a bug with Radiant Oppression where it’s damage bonus is being calculated additively with the execute damage instead of multiplicatively.

@bohnt
Defile is a buff category so players should only be able to have 1 Minor Defile and 1 Major defile at a time. Could you provide more information on the Defile Stacking issue?

@scipionumatia
Block cost will be reduced by 20% so it will be a buff for everyone who’s not using cost reduction jewelry.

@davidj8291
We’re working on making big group battles more tactical so players focus on spreading their positioning instead of moving as 1 large ball.

@ZOS_Wrobel Nothing about toppling charge bug?

Ranger209 · January 2018

Joy_Division wrote: »

IIn 1063, roughly 250 Norman knights and infantry decisively defeated thousands of Muslim horseman at the Battle of Cerami in Sicily.

In 1565, maybe 6,000 knights and conscripted Maltese withstood an attack by 40,000 Ottoman Spahis, Janissaires, and mercenary corsairs, utterly defeating them in the Siege of Malta.

In 1571, 13 Korean ships fought against at least ten times their number of Japanese ships. Dozens of Japanese ships were sunk and half the Japanese soldiers were killed and wounded. The Koreans suffered just 5 casualties and lost no ships.

In 1939, about 4,000 lightly armed Finnish troops surrounded and wiped out an entire Soviet division, consisting of some 20,000 men, dozens of tanks, and hundreds of supporting aircraft at the Battle of Tolvajärvi.

In 1966, 108 Australians inflicted a decisive defeat against roughly 2,000 Viet Cong and North Vietnamese at the battle of Long Tan.

While this may be true I am going to shoot from the hip here without checking the historical facts and wager to guess that none of these instances occurred going toe to toe in open field battle, which is what ball groups are doing now. I am all for strategic, organized, group play where lesser numbers can defeat larger numbers in some cases. I am not, however, in favor of a situation where 12 people can kill 4 or 5 times their number out in the great wide open using retreat and advance tactics over and over and be successful at this almost all of the time. I think we are on the same page with this and do want to distinguish between organized groups and their niche subset of the ball group. I believe we are on the same page with this. The examples above are the exception, not the rule to warfare, and I am betting they had some environmental or tactical advantage that allowed them to do this in a very specific situation that wouldn't otherwise work.

Minno · January 2018

Ranger209 wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

IIn 1063, roughly 250 Norman knights and infantry decisively defeated thousands of Muslim horseman at the Battle of Cerami in Sicily.

In 1565, maybe 6,000 knights and conscripted Maltese withstood an attack by 40,000 Ottoman Spahis, Janissaires, and mercenary corsairs, utterly defeating them in the Siege of Malta.

In 1571, 13 Korean ships fought against at least ten times their number of Japanese ships. Dozens of Japanese ships were sunk and half the Japanese soldiers were killed and wounded. The Koreans suffered just 5 casualties and lost no ships.

In 1939, about 4,000 lightly armed Finnish troops surrounded and wiped out an entire Soviet division, consisting of some 20,000 men, dozens of tanks, and hundreds of supporting aircraft at the Battle of Tolvajärvi.

In 1966, 108 Australians inflicted a decisive defeat against roughly 2,000 Viet Cong and North Vietnamese at the battle of Long Tan.

While this may be true I am going to shoot from the hip here without checking the historical facts and wager to guess that none of these instances occurred going toe to toe in open field battle, which is what ball groups are doing now. I am all for strategic, organized, group play where lesser numbers can defeat larger numbers in some cases. I am not, however, in favor of a situation where 12 people can kill 4 or 5 times their number out in the great wide open using retreat and advance tactics over and over and be successful at this almost all of the time. I think we are on the same page with this and do want to distinguish between organized groups and their niche subset of the ball group. I believe we are on the same page with this. The examples above are the exception, not the rule to warfare, and I am betting they had some environmental or tactical advantage that allowed them to do this in a very specific situation that wouldn't otherwise work.

I'm fairly certain those battles would have ended differently had they just only turned on "noclip" ESO mode.

IxSTALKERxI · January 2018

I don't have a problem with how groups sizes of 12 or less currently perform. Only the very best can make a group of 12 take on 2-3 times the numbers and can be wiped fairly easily by 2-3 knowledgeable people hidden among the potato's.

Once you get to a group size of 16-18 or even higher, with the addition of even more support roles and more healers, more ultimate's, the organised groups become exponentially stronger which is where a lot of the hate comes from.

To take a defended objective though, you need 24 people and there is nothing wrong with that as cyrodiil is for large scale pvp after all. It just would be nice if those 24 people weren't stacked on a single crown. The large siege force should be made up of like 2-3 separate 12 mans.

I am a huge advocate for group pvp and I think group pvp should be encouraged. Cyrodiil needs more groups and guilds, spread out at different objectives etc. The size of their groups just needs to be within reason that's all, or structured differently.

Solo and small scale needs some love also. It's so much more difficult than it used to be, to the point where people zerg surf instead. Objective layout needs a small overhaul also to encourage people to go to split up slightly instead of going from keep to keep in a distinct order.

Maura_Neysa · January 2018

Minno wrote: »

Ranger209 wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

IIn 1063, roughly 250 Norman knights and infantry decisively defeated thousands of Muslim horseman at the Battle of Cerami in Sicily.

In 1565, maybe 6,000 knights and conscripted Maltese withstood an attack by 40,000 Ottoman Spahis, Janissaires, and mercenary corsairs, utterly defeating them in the Siege of Malta.

In 1571, 13 Korean ships fought against at least ten times their number of Japanese ships. Dozens of Japanese ships were sunk and half the Japanese soldiers were killed and wounded. The Koreans suffered just 5 casualties and lost no ships.

In 1939, about 4,000 lightly armed Finnish troops surrounded and wiped out an entire Soviet division, consisting of some 20,000 men, dozens of tanks, and hundreds of supporting aircraft at the Battle of Tolvajärvi.

In 1966, 108 Australians inflicted a decisive defeat against roughly 2,000 Viet Cong and North Vietnamese at the battle of Long Tan.

While this may be true I am going to shoot from the hip here without checking the historical facts and wager to guess that none of these instances occurred going toe to toe in open field battle, which is what ball groups are doing now. I am all for strategic, organized, group play where lesser numbers can defeat larger numbers in some cases. I am not, however, in favor of a situation where 12 people can kill 4 or 5 times their number out in the great wide open using retreat and advance tactics over and over and be successful at this almost all of the time. I think we are on the same page with this and do want to distinguish between organized groups and their niche subset of the ball group. I believe we are on the same page with this. The examples above are the exception, not the rule to warfare, and I am betting they had some environmental or tactical advantage that allowed them to do this in a very specific situation that wouldn't otherwise work.

I'm fairly certain those battles would have ended differently had they just only turned on "noclip" ESO mode.

Hate to break it to you, but swords, axes and staves don't have clips, neither did Norman knights nor the Spartans

Minno · January 2018

Maura_Neysa wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Ranger209 wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

IIn 1063, roughly 250 Norman knights and infantry decisively defeated thousands of Muslim horseman at the Battle of Cerami in Sicily.

In 1565, maybe 6,000 knights and conscripted Maltese withstood an attack by 40,000 Ottoman Spahis, Janissaires, and mercenary corsairs, utterly defeating them in the Siege of Malta.

In 1571, 13 Korean ships fought against at least ten times their number of Japanese ships. Dozens of Japanese ships were sunk and half the Japanese soldiers were killed and wounded. The Koreans suffered just 5 casualties and lost no ships.

In 1939, about 4,000 lightly armed Finnish troops surrounded and wiped out an entire Soviet division, consisting of some 20,000 men, dozens of tanks, and hundreds of supporting aircraft at the Battle of Tolvajärvi.

In 1966, 108 Australians inflicted a decisive defeat against roughly 2,000 Viet Cong and North Vietnamese at the battle of Long Tan.

While this may be true I am going to shoot from the hip here without checking the historical facts and wager to guess that none of these instances occurred going toe to toe in open field battle, which is what ball groups are doing now. I am all for strategic, organized, group play where lesser numbers can defeat larger numbers in some cases. I am not, however, in favor of a situation where 12 people can kill 4 or 5 times their number out in the great wide open using retreat and advance tactics over and over and be successful at this almost all of the time. I think we are on the same page with this and do want to distinguish between organized groups and their niche subset of the ball group. I believe we are on the same page with this. The examples above are the exception, not the rule to warfare, and I am betting they had some environmental or tactical advantage that allowed them to do this in a very specific situation that wouldn't otherwise work.

I'm fairly certain those battles would have ended differently had they just only turned on "noclip" ESO mode.

Hate to break it to you, but swords, axes and staves don't have clips, neither did Norman knights nor the Spartans

I was referencing the fact in ESO everyone can walk through each other basically ignoring most chokepoint tactics.

Somber97866 · January 2018

I'd like to finally say here and now that this game does not need more negative nerfs to characters ppl have spent 1000plus hrs to make. Maybe try creating new sub skill lines ( like dark brotherhood skill line) that are actually beneficial to game play and allow characters to become more well rounded toons rather than keep nerfing till all players are equal just because they showed up. Trophy for everyone! I have a magic sorcerer and you ppl have nerfed it into the ground so bad that it is hard to get trial teams to let me join raids unless in certain dungeons. I still have high aoe And good survivability but stam characters take front runner spot due to insane single target damage. I'm not screaming to see them nerfed like they did me just asking if you (ZOS) could create new skill lines that allow me to make a more well rounded and situational able character without having to create the newest on top toon that the cry babies haven't screamed bloody murder about because they need to L2P

Pinja · January 2018

Draxys wrote: »

Pinja wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Another thing you’ll see when Update 17 goes to the PTS is a reduction in damage for some charge abilities. Decreasing their damage is going to ensure that at-range players who are utilizing movement and terrain to maintain their distance from melee enemies are better rewarded for that tactical advantage.

I advise against this direction.
If your referring to 'charge' abilities in the sense of Gap-Closers then you'd be referring to suicidal counter play options.
Stam toons are not bombs to most extremes.
A gap close into a zerg means:
A. Your survival based not doing much damage or...

B. Dead or dipping out of your mistakes.

If your looking to revolve cryrodill around group play nerfing Gap-Closers in general would be detrimental in multiple forms. Except Bomb-blades in which they use their Gap-Closer damage to encourage an initial death on the first of a chain target.

Why you'd want to make it easier for that one guy to run away I can't say but they already have a multitude of options to do so & don't need any more assistants.
Proper kiting messes up LoS of abilities, Nightblades have an LoS built in, & really who wants to chase that one pestilence longer then they have to.
Also recognize & respect the difference between diffrent forms of Gap-Closers some have greater utility stun, snare, ect. While others are just used in combos... Crit Rush, is used for nothing but this & thus does not need to be reduced or made mundane to it's purpose. Remembering not all combinations are as great. And not all can be returned in other moves as there many varying forms of 2h combos, like using just stampede & rally from 2h.

I read your reasons and none of them are good reasons for keeping high damage gap closers. We need balance, not to keep skills that do way too many things at once (yep, still looking at incap, but that’s another thread.) It’s a gap closer, not an attack you should be able to spam and kill someone with 4 hits. They will still work the same way mechanically. You can still catch that one player you’re so obsessed with. And how in world would this change revolve cyrodiil around group play?

Well it's pretty simple what I said but I'll explain further. Melee players are granted higher damage because they put themselves in harms way. That Gap-closer is the first thing they use to gain their mildly deserved advantage after they put themselves in harms way. On a survival based charter that can sustain in the danger zone, damage done is reduced naturally. Otherwise your fighting or fleeing for your life's worth, as a melee damager. Since you are playing melee you are the frontal target of the enemy zerg. Offensive Gap closers do not negate ranged player targeting or redirect projectiles.

Melee charters need a way to get to a fight efficiently.
Yes.
Do projectiles need reduce damage as they seek after sprinters?
No.
Does using the terrain to LoS reward using the terrain to LoS?
Yes.

IE: You have almost a more redundant change then the Worst Frag Nerf.

Personofsecrets · January 2018

I got buffed!

kessik221 · January 2018

When will you guys actually fix the lag instead of pushing out *** nerfs\buffs?

Yolokin_Swagonborn · January 2018

Xsorus wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

Rainraven wrote: »

Ok. Thanks.

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

We’re also beginning to look at ways to improve group combat in Cyrodiil, particularly when groups of varying sizes fight each other. Some specific concerns we’ve been looking into include:
Not enough effective options to deal damage to clustered groups from afar

Earthgore is too powerful in group vs group battles

Not enough diversity in Ultimate choice

Large groups can have players take on specialized utility roles, reducing counter-play options against them

We’re still talking about what exactly we’ll be doing, but once we have a better idea of the direction we’re taking, we’ll include it in one of the next combat updates.

Good, so somebody is hearing this. Earthgore needs to disappear from Cyrodiil: I'm sure it's nice for some high-intensity PVE situations but it's a terrible idea in PVP, and devastating when stacked. And of course it's stacked.

It'd be nice to see something done about the ability of ball groups to run with constant rapids and endless purges, but please be careful. They aren't the only ones using those tools.

If PVPers had some new things to do in Cyrodiil, that might help a lot.

Anyway, I'm glad the team is thinking about these things. Good luck.

Sighs... When i read such posts...

Player are sacrificing their 1vsX skill to perform better in a group and take a role. There is absolutely no issue with that. It is called group play. You know? Playing together as a group. It's like going to a PVE trial with 2 healers, 2 tanks and 8 dds. They have their roles and they play those roles. There's no difference in PVP when you want to actually play as a group and not as some mindless zerglings who just stick to the place where hundreds of players are and it doesn't even matter if you can play or play as a group. Yet, this change has the potential to mess up organized groups (of any skill) in favor of zergs. So tell me, when there are constantly 50+ zerglings (EP on Sotha Sil / PC EU) on a spot, how to you even have the slightest chance to fight them when ZOS thinks they have to take away your tools? Yes right, numbers, so let's zerg more and more.

Sorry, but this change sounds really stupid and seems to come from people who haven't spent a single minute in PVP (or didn't realized they probably should have joined battlegrounds instead...).

I keep seeing people say “how are we suppose to fight those 50 man zergs?” When the vast majority of zergballs I see organized guilds running in are zerging down less numbers then them who are usually pugging and then when any resistance shows up they haul ass away to repeat after the bigger zerg leaves.

Use to when groups actually ran small numbers we’d use ambush tactics on the zergs... not in this game where any terrible zerg guild can run around in a big ball and spam healing ults along with destro ult while being backed up by multiple earthgores. Every single time they added something to combat it they either took it away because those groups whined or they added something else to compensate the power loss.

This games pvp will not get better till actual group pvp isn’t ina joke in this game... and right now it’s a joke

This may be the second or third time I have every agreed with you on the forums. Mark the occasion. And yes. Most anti-zerging changes buff zergs. (aka the prox det days) And most zergs are organized tryhard guilds.

LordSlif · January 2018

About block, ZOS should reviwei the block casting spam it is out of the control, mainly the heal block casting. It should have the skill cost increased.

casparian · January 2018

LordSlif wrote: »

About block, ZOS should reviwei the block casting spam it is out of the control, mainly the heal block casting. It should have the skill cost increased.

As a magplar, I am 100% ok with that, as long as Templars are given another defense other than block-casting heals. We have

- no class mobility
- no decent class CCs
- no passives that benefit any defense other than blocking and healing

What else do you propose we do?

LordSlif · January 2018

casparian wrote: »

LordSlif wrote: »

About block, ZOS should reviwei the block casting spam it is out of the control, mainly the heal block casting. It should have the skill cost increased.

As a magplar, I am 100% ok with that, as long as Templars are given another defense other than block-casting heals. We have

- no class mobility
- no decent class CCs
- no passives that benefit any defense other than blocking and healing

What else do you propose we do?

Im a templar 5k hours and it is a cancer
U can block and cast, but now u have a downside

LordSlif · January 2018

casparian wrote: »

LordSlif wrote: »

About block, ZOS should reviwei the block casting spam it is out of the control, mainly the heal block casting. It should have the skill cost increased.

As a magplar, I am 100% ok with that, as long as Templars are given another defense other than block-casting heals. We have

- no class mobility
- no decent class CCs
- no passives that benefit any defense other than blocking and healing

What else do you propose we do?

About toppling charge bug and some useless passives , it is being discussed in another thread, but one error does not justify other.

Smithernest54 · January 2018

Is block casting here to stay? At first not too many people knew about it and it wasn't a thing, but now a good 70% of players are doing it and it is making pvp toxic.

BohnT · January 2018

Smithernest54 wrote: »

Is block casting here to stay? At first not too many people knew about it and it wasn't a thing, but now a good 70% of players are doing it and it is making pvp toxic.

Because it is just like casting skills while having a damage shield on them. If you remove block casting you can remove everyone who isn't using shields

casparian · January 2018

BohnT wrote: »

Smithernest54 wrote: »

Is block casting here to stay? At first not too many people knew about it and it wasn't a thing, but now a good 70% of players are doing it and it is making pvp toxic.

Because it is just like casting skills while having a damage shield on them. If you remove block casting you can remove everyone who isn't using shields

It's not just like using a damage shield. People with a damage shield can still be hard-CCed by skills other than Fear, Rune Prison, and Petrify.

BohnT · January 2018

casparian wrote: »

BohnT wrote: »

Smithernest54 wrote: »

Is block casting here to stay? At first not too many people knew about it and it wasn't a thing, but now a good 70% of players are doing it and it is making pvp toxic.

Because it is just like casting skills while having a damage shield on them. If you remove block casting you can remove everyone who isn't using shields

It's not just like using a damage shield. People with a damage shield can still be hard-CCed by skills other than Fear, Rune Prison, and Petrify.

And people with shields don't take any damage to their health.
Just because there are small differences doesn't mean they are not the same.
You use skills while still having access to your main defence. It is exactly the same thing

WrathOfTheRipper · January 2018

When are you guys going to take out animation cancelation? Its annoying and to me i consider it glitching. Please do something about it.

aeowulf · January 2018

Please can you look at combat performance.

I've enabled the built in FPS meter and (for example) I was running through Blackheart Haven last night. I get a 60-90 FPS most of the time, but the moment combat starts this can drop a huge amount. One fight it went to ~13FPS but even that is a huge moment of screen freeze. It makes combat feel very 'not fluid'. I don't want to adjust visual out of combat game options (which is 90% of my playing time) but would like to reduce some of the combat effects going off. I imagine this might also be the cause of Cyrodiil lag (complete guess) except multiplied by lots. I've found that place is <fine-ish> until you get in to combat. There is a 33k+ viewed post in the PC tech support forum, it really is a big issue that I think started in Cyrodiil but now seems to be leaking out into PVE world. Gameplay > visual effects.

Also can you look at dungeon finder stats regarding how many tanks that queue are DK's - it feels like all of them. I don't remember doing a pledge anymore where the tank wasn't a DK. I know one class needs to be situationally the best in each role, but complete dominance is another thing entirely. Same can be said for healers but at least we see Templar & Warden filling that spot now. There is also a huge lack of tanks on the server, or at least ones queuing for pledges, so some love in the direction of this role to make it more friendly, especially for non-DK would be great..

Smithernest54 · January 2018

BohnT wrote: »

casparian wrote: »

BohnT wrote: »

Smithernest54 wrote: »

Is block casting here to stay? At first not too many people knew about it and it wasn't a thing, but now a good 70% of players are doing it and it is making pvp toxic.

Because it is just like casting skills while having a damage shield on them. If you remove block casting you can remove everyone who isn't using shields

It's not just like using a damage shield. People with a damage shield can still be hard-CCed by skills other than Fear, Rune Prison, and Petrify.

And people with shields don't take any damage to their health.
Just because there are small differences doesn't mean they are not the same.
You use skills while still having access to your main defence. It is exactly the same thing

I have 8 fully leveled characters. I like playing on my stam sorc, but right now my stam warden, mag dk, and mag Templar are op, because of block casting. If anything ZOS might really want to prohibit healing casting while block. Too many benefits, like never being excuted.

Bevik · January 2018

Was hoping for an update for January.

@ZOS_GinaBruno

IxSTALKERxI · January 2018

Bevik wrote: »

Was hoping for an update for January.

They are probably too busy with pts. They already mentioned some things that are going in next update. They might provide a combat update after dragon bones update goes live.