starkerealm wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

DK's have talons. Encase is a AOE root in front of you, Talonsis an AOE root around you. Same bloody difference. Both will be used for trash immobilization.

Not even remotely similar. Talons is not a self-heal.

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

And yes. My point is that nobody used this ***. And there is no reason for them to use it because shields were not a PVE problem in the first place...

This is where you're wrong. It's the entirety of where you're wrong on this change.

The difference between PvP and PvE is the mobs can't come on the forums and cry how something's imbalanced.

This was, absolutely about PvE.

If it was only a PvP consideration, crit damage on shields was the only necessary change.

Cast time, and the %health cap, are entirely balanced around PvE.

1. Choking talons: Enemies deal less damage.

It is an AOE root with a defensive morph that either reduces the damage from those enemies or recovers from damage allready suffered. It is the same.

2. It. Wasn't. YOU CONTINUE TO CITE THE FACT, THAT ONE SHIELD, THAT HAD THE INTEGRITY OF TISSUE PAPER, CASTED BY LIVING TISSUE PAPER, WAS A PROBLEM. And it wasn't. It was rapidly destroyed, rarely lasted the entire duration, and was fine. Half the time you died to one-shots anyone shields or no.

The justification for this was 'healers feel less useful'. And the reason they did was there was rarely any damage for them to heal. Just one-shot mechanics.

It was a PVE change, but there was no problem to solve, you and ZOS seem convinced there -is- however, AND NEITHER OF YOU WILL STATE WHY! you just go 'mobs cant cry' like they would expound upon the abuses they've suffered if they could, with no further explanation.

And considering their -first- solution was just a cast time, it definately wasn't the size of the shield that was the problem. So please. Explain to me why having a tissue-paper one-shot negator is a bad thing.

As someone who could make use of the new shields with resistances, I will gladly give them up, argue against my own best interest, so long as Sorc isn't mangled like this.

starkerealm wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

Half the time you died to one-shots anyone shields or no.

Then you're doing something wrong.

Which, thinking back to your description of the Rillis fight, seems likely.

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

AND NEITHER OF YOU WILL STATE WHY!

ZOS has stated why, several times. In patch notes, and outside of them. Not my fault you didn't like the answer.

1. No. No, you were playing right, it's just this game has an over-reliance on one-shot mechanics with the express understanding they are one-shot mechanics.

Take the new dungeon for example. Many individual mobs in the new dungeons have one-shot mechanics you must watch out for. And if we're looking at boss-fights, the archivist is a great example. Allowing the werewolves to mutate and leting them stand in a circle near the archivist prompts those mobs to do, and this was on a tank with max mitigation, around 44K damage.

I dont care how many points in health you have. If you run that in light armor, let alone heavy, you are going to die if you eat that damage. That's how most of the modern one-shots are designed, and yes, that's an extreme case where the obvious answer is not to let the mobs mutate, that's mechanics. But the AOE trial damage, lets say 10K per second. Assuming your entire team is on the damn ball, and reacts inhumanly fast, you could deal with that if there is no lag whatsoever. But most of the time their not. That's an unreasonable expectation.

2. This was Rob Garret on the change.

"First I'd like to talk about our motivation with the change. We believe choices between damage output and survivability make combat more interesting. There are a number of areas within our system that could better adhere to this philosophy, but these self-cast damage shield abilities stood out as being particularly out of line. It was too easy to throw a bunch of effective health on yourself while making a minimal sacrifice in terms of DPS itemization and rotation. This applied to both PvE and PvP scenarios."

And my continual point to this is that, the content was balanced around the effective health you could throw out, garret. The damage being put out was incredible and you had incredible defenses, in order to combat it, along with two healers per raid. You want to balance one? You need to balance the other. If you are going to reduce our defeneses, to use the earlier senario, reduce the trial damage on the AOE constant from 10K to 5K a second so that healers have something to *** do, instead of nerfing across the board.

Not to mention smaller scale content like VMA for which magplar was allready not exactly the best class for.

So dont tell me 'you just didn't like it'. I'm telling you, that their reasoning was idiotic, stemmed from false informaiton or mis-conception and shouldn't have been acted upon. And now, we as a community have to try to talk them down from this acid trip. Not meekly roll over because you, Stark, have decided we should. Because continuing to let ZOS act on these misconceptions will only damage the game going forward, wasn't what the class reps had in mind, and can only end badly in future.

What if ZOS decides -mitigation- is a issue without altering how health works, how many attribute points you get, or how many damage enemies do? Do you honestly think you can adapt through that? And given some of the balls out insane decisions this combat team has made over the years, I dont wholey believe they wouldn't do something like that.

And if we cant talk them down here, there's no use going forward. Because we wont be able to disuade them from anything and if and when they make another game-mangling change, it'll go through. So might as well pull out now.

starkerealm wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

Half the time you died to one-shots anyone shields or no.

Then you're doing something wrong.

Which, thinking back to your description of the Rillis fight, seems likely.

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

AND NEITHER OF YOU WILL STATE WHY!

ZOS has stated why, several times. In patch notes, and outside of them. Not my fault you didn't like the answer.

1. No. No, you were playing right, it's just this game has an over-reliance on one-shot mechanics with the express understanding they are one-shot mechanics.

I know I was playing fine. You're the one who was talking about one shots being unmanageable.

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

Take the new dungeon for example. Many individual mobs in the new dungeons have one-shot mechanics you must watch out for. And if we're looking at boss-fights, the archivist is a great example. Allowing the werewolves to mutate and leting them stand in a circle near the archivist prompts those mobs to do, and this was on a tank with max mitigation, around 44K damage.

I dont care how many points in health you have. If you run that in light armor, let alone heavy, you are going to die if you eat that damage. That's how most of the modern one-shots are designed, and yes, that's an extreme case where the obvious answer is not to let the mobs mutate, that's mechanics. But the AOE trial damage, lets say 10K per second. Assuming your entire team is on the damn ball, and reacts inhumanly fast, you could deal with that if there is no lag whatsoever. But most of the time their not. That's an unreasonable expectation.

Yes, oh god, having to actually play the mechanics, what a horror.

Also, not the same thing as the Rilis fight. You know, the on were complaining about, where the "one shot," you're talking about, isn't. It is entirely survivable.

As opposed to a puzzle mechanic that you're supposed to understand.

So if this is crying about how you could use shields to bypass intentional mechanics... what, you want sympathy for that?

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

2. This was Rob Garret on the change.

"First I'd like to talk about our motivation with the change. We believe choices between damage output and survivability make combat more interesting. There are a number of areas within our system that could better adhere to this philosophy, but these self-cast damage shield abilities stood out as being particularly out of line. It was too easy to throw a bunch of effective health on yourself while making a minimal sacrifice in terms of DPS itemization and rotation. This applied to both PvE and PvP scenarios."

And my continual point to this is that, the content was balanced around the effective health you could throw out, garret. The damage being put out was incredible and you had incredible defenses, in order to combat it, along with two healers per raid. You want to balance one? You need to balance the other. If you are going to reduce our defeneses, to use the earlier senario, reduce the trial damage on the AOE constant from 10K to 5K a second so that healers have something to *** do, instead of nerfing across the board.

Not to mention smaller scale content like VMA for which magplar was allready not exactly the best class for.

So dont tell me 'you just didn't like it'. I'm telling you, that their reasoning was idiotic, stemmed from false informaiton or mis-conception and shouldn't have been acted upon. And now, we as a community have to try to talk them down from this acid trip. Not meekly roll over because you, Stark, have decided we should. Because continuing to let ZOS act on these misconceptions will only damage the game going forward, wasn't what the class reps had in mind, and can only end badly in future.

At which point, we're back to what I said, it is not my problem that you don't like the answer. That is not the same as there not being an answer. And complaining about how they aren't explaining it, when they have, is disingenuous at best.

So essentially, you parade in here, tell people to adapt, defend the change, then eschew any responsibility when people reasonibly attempt to debate the position you have chosen to defend.

You. Lost any and all respect with the 'it's not my problem' bit. You're unfit to consult. You will not be adressed again. Once again, I beg of you: Never go into game design for the damage you would do to it.

starkerealm wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

So essentially, you parade in here, tell people to adapt, defend the change, then eschew any responsibility when people reasonibly attempt to debate the position you have chosen to defend.

You. Lost any and all respect with the 'it's not my problem' bit. You're unfit to consult. You will not be adressed again. Once again, I beg of you: Never go into game design for the damage you would do to it.

I haven't heard anything from you, except complaints about nerfs you don't understand, to a class you don't play.

It's been explained to you, by the game's developers that players were using shields to bypass mechanics. Which anyone who's played a magicka build in endgame, already knew.

It's not my problem that you don't like that answer.

It's not my problem that your easy button is being taken away.

Yeah, keep ranting at me like I am a sorc who uses shields. Please, it really proves you are not an ideologue.

It's not my problem you cant distinguish between one person and an idea.