Would you be Satisified with a 60% Cap instead?

Imperial_Voice · September 2018

Before people accuse me of either whining because Im being nerfed or whininh because I want more Sorc nerfs I want to say I main a Sorc and have since closed beta and I think 40% is fine. This poll is because im still seeing a lot of people upset with ZoS compromise and Im curious as to what it would take to satisfy the Sorc community on the forums. So please vote and if you can, explain your reasoning. Thanks guys.

msetten · September 2018

Not sure as I am not too experienced with the effect of the cap (I can’t go onto PTS as I am a console player). But can’t you just put more points into CP Bastion to make it more effective?

codestripper · September 2018

Yes, 60% is an acceptable compromise.

I mean, yeah I'd love 60%, but I can make due with 40%. Anything is better than a cast time lets be real here.

Urvoth · September 2018

Shield nerfs shouldnt happen at all, regardless of shield stacking.

Shield are fine on live, the problem is the way the devs implemented PvE mechanics, not shields.

codestripper · September 2018

Yes, 60% is an acceptable compromise.

msetten wrote: »

Not sure as I am not too experienced with the effect of the cap (I can’t go onto PTS as I am a console player). But can’t you just put more points into CP Bastion to make it more effective?

It's literally not even on the PTS yet. So we don't know. I'm assuming if this change actually goes live they will edit bastion to just take less damage on shields instead. Assuming Bastion can't push past the 40% cap.

Aebaradath · September 2018

Watch them make the morphs so one's instant-cast with 40% and a full strength shield with a 1-second cast time.

AcadianPaladin · September 2018

How about instacast, 100% strength but no stacking multiple shields. That seems to address the problem pretty painlessly.

NyassaV · September 2018

I mean I though 40% was a weird number. Why not just 50%

Surak73 · September 2018

No, 40% with instant cast time is enough.

Yeah, I see 40% as an excellent compromise: it removes de facto shields stacking, which was the real issue, and allows sorcerers and other mags to have an instant defence when needed.

Maybe I'm a little biased, since I main a magsorc who has never stacked shields...

Maryanne · September 2018

Yes, 60% is an acceptable compromise.

I am trying to clear vMA for the first time, so... but everything is better than that stupid cast time idea.

DeathStalker · September 2018

Yes, 60% is an acceptable compromise.

I'm happy there is no casting time and can live with a 40% cap. With that said, I think there should be no change to shields at all expect to make them not able to stack. So moving it to 60% would be better than 40%. But I can live with the instant cast 40% shields

raj72616a · September 2018

No, 40% with instant cast time is enough.

for pve, we aint affected by the crittable nerf, and we benefit from the resistance buff, so the effective nerf might not be as much as it seems.

acw37162 · September 2018

Have not even got a version to test and already bickering after getting a change in the first place.

No.

carlos424 · September 2018

Yes, 60% is an acceptable compromise.

Depends on resistance buffs. Most shields will now be around 7k. Thats almost not worth using. I mean, I light attack for that much. 60% would put them around 10k for most builds. Thats ok I guess. Seeing how most hardened wards are 25k ish, still a huge nerf. Not to mention most other mag classes that use annulment. Huge shield nerf. I guess be careful what you wish for. 1sec cast time doesnt seem too bad now.

carlos424 · September 2018

Yes, 60% is an acceptable compromise.

You guys do realize that shields cap at 40% of health right? Unless I read something wrong. So if you have 18k health, your shield will be 7200

Armatesz · September 2018

For pvp shields shouldn't exceed 30k, what zos is trying to do isn't that much better than the second delay.

Imperial_Voice · September 2018

No, 40% with instant cast time is enough.

carlos424 wrote: »

You guys do realize that shields cap at 40% of health right? Unless I read something wrong. So if you have 18k health, your shield will be 7200

Yes, we can also do basic math.

Hixtory · September 2018

Yes, 60% is an acceptable compromise.

I said yes, but I think around 70% and crit happening is enough. A 25K health build in pvp would get shields of 8,75K. That is nothing, a single snipe/surprise attack, etc, hit for8k or more, so it would be balanced.

And because in pve there is no reduction and no crits the shield could be 12k with an average of 18k health.

POps75p · September 2018

OK, I have no clue wtf your talking about here!

nemvar · September 2018

Shield nerfs shouldnt happen at all, regardless of shield stacking.

From a no-CP PVP perspective the crit change might already be overkill. The 40% cap isn't actually that big of a deal in no-CP.

logarifmik · September 2018

They should provide another solution. Think again, please.

ruikkarikun · September 2018

Yes, 60% is an acceptable compromise.

Yes, I'm sure someone will test it on PTS, so a little increase will be good.

What_In_Tarnation · September 2018

As a PvE aspect, the more the better that's for sure. I mean what kind of masochistic would you like a smaller version shield?

As a PvP aspect, probably only 2 kinds of player here, the one who use shield (shields) and the other doesn't use shield. I'm not sure if shield will be halved in PvP (probably yes), then it's gonna be meh for shield user.

StamWhipCultist · September 2018

No. I would be happy with 20%.

Ardan147 · September 2018

Yes, 60% is an acceptable compromise.

But I'm not going to complain about it only being 40%, just as long as it doesn't have a cast time.

Just taking away the ability to stack shields probably would have been enough.

kypranb14_ESO · September 2018

Just to clarify before I vote, shields will now be capped at 40% of your max health? Does anyone have a source for info on this please?

MasterSpatula · September 2018

Edit: Bloody hell, I forgot how shields actually work when I made my post. Actually, I suspect this 40% thing might do exactly what they want it to do, which is "if you rely on shields, your DPS goes down because you're shielding all the time." Cause basically, a 40% shield is going to last about a second in many situations.

I honestly don't know how I feel about this yet.

adeptusminor · September 2018

I'd have to try it in some vet trial content before I make a judgement. Offhand 40% seems like it might be a little low for things like hardmode vMoL, but the good news is it seems like it would be an easy adjustment for the devs to do if they decide it's needed.

MooseKnuckles88 · September 2018

Shields need buffed beyond their current live performance.

I need more shields

Hixtory · September 2018

Yes, 60% is an acceptable compromise.

kypranb14_ESO wrote: »

Just to clarify before I vote, shields will now be capped at 40% of your max health? Does anyone have a source for info on this please?

Just look for class representative meeting results

nemvar · September 2018

Shield nerfs shouldnt happen at all, regardless of shield stacking.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/437982/class-reps-meeting-notes-september-25/p1 here's the thread for reference

The Elder Scrolls Online

Would you be Satisified with a 60% Cap instead?

Would you be Satisified with a 60% Cap instead? 168 votes