Svidrir wrote: »

Put the speed not limited to the group would be for me a big mistake:

1 People who play "solo" around 20 other solo should only enjoy their own skills / buffs (zone heals will also disappear to push people to play as a group.)

2 We're going to get the zone speed bug "I speed at tp = I'm buffing Cyrodil ..."


With the nerve of speed, one thing should be urgently reviewed in addition to CC spam, power and make it easier to pose Siege Weapons because currently you spend 30% of your time trying to survive this one. % still surviving the CC, 30% looking for the enemy and finally 10% fighting


The nerve of speed coupled with the power of the Siege Weapons will be horrible

Why would you want to push players to play as a group any more than is already the case?

jcm2606 wrote: »

Personally, a number of things need to happen.

Firstly, the movement speed equation needs to be rewritten such that all bonuses, whether positive or negative, are additive. From the thread linked in the OP, it seems the speed equation is sort of like:

speed = base * max(2.0, 1.0 + Buffs + Sprint * SprintSpeed) * (1.0 - Snare)

If this is the case, it needs to be rewritten ASAP. It should be written like:

speed = base * max(2.0, 1.0 + Buffs + Sprint * SprintSpeed - Snare)

In the first case, the snares are applied through a multiplication against the final speed. This means that snares hit faster moving builds disproportionately harder than slower moving builds. If we apply a 40% snare to a build with no speed buffs, the snare slows the target by 40% (1.0 * 0.4 = 0.4), obviously. However, throw in Major and Minor Expedition (stamsorc with Major Expedition from a bow?), that becomes 56% (1.4 * 0.4 = 0.56). This is not okay, and needs to be fixed by making it additive, as I outlined above. Making it additive would mean a 40% snare is a 40% snare, regardless of the target's build.

Secondly, all current snares need to be reevaluated and removed or toned down. The amount of snares is absurd, as outlined in the OP of this thread. My opinion?

Area Denial > Deliberate Single Target > Deliberate AOE > Passive.

Skills that are designed to force opponents out of or around certain areas should have the strongest snares as deterrent, but they should be balanced by having a small radius, being easy to move out of, and not be spammable. If they are balanced properly, I feel 50-60% is a fair amount, since the point is to move you around, and the small radius should make getting out of the AOE easier.

Next up should be deliberate snares. The big problem with snares at the moment, I feel, is a lot of the stronger snares are pretty much automatic, as they are on spammable abilities you would be using regardless. In my ideal world, if you want a strong snare, you have to deliberately use it, similar to how you have to deliberately use stuns. These should not be any stronger than 30-35%, I feel. As an extension to this, single target snares should be stronger than AOE snares, as you're only hitting one target versus multiple.

Finally, passive snares. These are the snares that DK produce by casting Ardent Flame abilities, the snares that Templar produces when an enemy stands in your AOE, the snares that are on Rending Slashes, etc. These should offer the lowest movement speed debuff, at most around 10-15%, at the most.

Good points. My only thing is that jabs needs a decent snare. It’s iffy enough as is and misses a lot. It also comes down to the fact that not all abilities aren’t created equal and there are some instances where just because skills are the same in description doesn’t mean they function the same and should not be treated the same. For example caltrops being undodgeable makes sense, it has a purposeful application, and is a ground AOE. But making steel tornado undodgeable made it one of the best skills in PvP. ZOS needs to stop trying to force all AOE or whatever to act exactly the same. It’s not good for balance. The same should go for snare balancing. But I agree with most of what you’re saying.

Minno wrote: »

usmcjdking wrote: »

I feel like this is a one-sided conversation that is focused more on removal and escaping than the application and the use of snares and if that is being fulfilled, underperforming or abused. The discussion here doesn't seem to fit the narrative.

I don't think the conversation is easy:
- too many people are inconsistent in their report of snare impactfulness. Everyone wants major/minor snare but the largest already overrides the lowest. Plus everyone hates on templar purge AOE, but doesnt realize the 30% is lost after you leave the area; most of the time they are feeling another snare while trying to leave the AOE making noise threads in the process.
- snares on some abilities more powerful than on others. Some weapon lines have gap closers but some need the snares after a gap close. Some don't need ANY snares because of their ability to control the field.
- speed is directly countered by snares. a 30% snare counters the major expedition buff but has to do extra because everyone has 100% movement speed base.
- no easy counterplay currently on live. One snare can counter 2 GCD worth of speed or 1GCD but over 300+ effective spell/weapon in order to get a minimal 10% speed boost in some applications.

Heres what I think could happen (any one selected would be decent):
- mag melee that gives another escape tool (similar to mist form/streak except unique to melee mag. Maybe a teleport?)
- resto staff to get snare removal/immunity on quick siphon.
- sprint to increase cost to 1k per second. But while sprinting get snare removal. the cost+ bar lockout and stam recovery turning off are counterplay to having a strong counter to snares but gives all classes a way to remove snares. Similar to dodge roll getting root removal.
- anything that is 70% gets reduced to 50-60% but compensated by receiving offensive buffs equal to the snare lost. If 5% speed from swift equals to 840 mag/stam, then 10% drop is 1680 max stat worth of buff.
- anything 60% drops to 40%
-40% drops to 30%.
- nothing lower than 30%, since major expedition instantly counters this and we have steed mundas for minimal offensive loss.
- buff to light armor snare reduction.

All very good ideas.

jcm2606 wrote: »

Personally, a number of things need to happen.

Firstly, the movement speed equation needs to be rewritten such that all bonuses, whether positive or negative, are additive. From the thread linked in the OP, it seems the speed equation is sort of like:

speed = base * min(2.0, 1.0 + Buffs + Sprint * SprintSpeed) * (1.0 - Snare)

If this is the case, it needs to be rewritten ASAP. It should be written like:

speed = base * min(2.0, 1.0 + Buffs + Sprint * SprintSpeed - Snare)

In the first case, the snares are applied through a multiplication against the final speed. This means that snares hit faster moving builds disproportionately harder than slower moving builds. If we apply a 40% snare to a build with no speed buffs, the snare slows the target by 40% (1.0 * 0.4 = 0.4), obviously. However, throw in Major and Minor Expedition (stamsorc with Major Expedition from a bow?), that becomes 56% (1.4 * 0.4 = 0.56). This is not okay, and needs to be fixed by making it additive, as I outlined above. Making it additive would mean a 40% snare is a 40% snare, regardless of the target's build.

Secondly, all current snares need to be reevaluated and removed or toned down. The amount of snares is absurd, as outlined in the OP of this thread. My opinion?

Area Denial > Deliberate Single Target > Deliberate AOE > Passive.

Skills that are designed to force opponents out of or around certain areas should have the strongest snares as deterrent, but they should be balanced by having a small radius, being easy to move out of, and not be spammable. If they are balanced properly, I feel 50-60% is a fair amount, since the point is to move you around, and the small radius should make getting out of the AOE easier.

Next up should be deliberate snares. The big problem with snares at the moment, I feel, is a lot of the stronger snares are pretty much automatic, as they are on spammable abilities you would be using regardless. In my ideal world, if you want a strong snare, you have to deliberately use it, similar to how you have to deliberately use stuns. These should not be any stronger than 30-35%, I feel. As an extension to this, single target snares should be stronger than AOE snares, as you're only hitting one target versus multiple.

Finally, passive snares. These are the snares that DK produce by casting Ardent Flame abilities, the snares that Templar produces when an enemy stands in your AOE, the snares that are on Rending Slashes, etc. These should offer the lowest movement speed debuff, at most around 10-15%, at the most.

@Joy_Division This reply is actually the best sum up and explanation and is the most reasonable balancing approach that I've seen so far. Can you please integrate the key arguments in your OP and pass them along?

I remember playing Everquest when an enchanter could charm another player and turn them into their pet, the ultimate CC I have ever seen in any game. The person charmed would helplessly watch themselves attack their friends unable to do anything about it. Alas that was deemed too potent and made impossible to do in PvP. Eventually Everquest gutted most if not all of their hard CC and made it so very little actually could be done in PvP. PvP became a shell of what it was in that game.

The point is that CC, both hard and soft should be an integral part of PvP. It creates different dynamics that aren't present if CC is not a part of the experience. However, it can be too strong which can be just as bad as if it is non-existent. I think CC needs to be strategic, and it needs to have counterplay. CC should make you adjust to the fight, adapt to different situations, it should temporarily suspend attacking and healing, to clear what ever control you are under, and then it should allow a window of opportunity for you to resume attacking and healing before becoming susceptible to further CC, and further adaptation. It should not lock you down to the point that all you are doing is spamming something endlessly trying to free yourself up from whatever has you under control.

CC needs to be available to, and have counterplay for every available class combo. I am uncertain what the window of time should be where you are immune to soft CC, but there should be one. 2 second, 4 seconds, 6 seconds, something. I am thinking 6 seconds if it is on a different timer than hard CC, since you can alternate both types really only leaving 2 or 3 or 4 seconds in between CC types to do something to retaliate. A person has to be able to cleanse themselves and resume some sort of attack, heal, reposition. I think snares and roots have to be looked at in conjunction with hard CC's. All of it slows you down and interrupts your ability to counter the person(s) you are fighting with. I know the OP is emphasizing snares, but being stunned or knocked back or down impairs movement. To me what we have going on in Cyrodiil goes beyond just snares in slowing down game play. I think we need to look at CC as a whole, and figure out how to balance it all so that it has an effect on PvP, but doesn't rule PvP. So I apologize if I have gotten a little off topic. It should alter PvP fights, but shouldn't solely determine the outcome.

Nerfing moveability more and more? Now with the rapids change?

Is there ANYBODY out there listening?

ZOS_AntonioP wrote: »

Hello there,

Recently we've had to remove a few posts for some unneeded flaming, which is against the Forum Rules. For further posts be sure to stay constructive and on-topic to avoid action on one's own account.

Thank you for understanding.

I think this is good. So keep on doing it. But it might help lessening these posts if you gave some feedback and make sure the right persons on your company are reading this and consider doing something about the issues that are clearly and constructively being discussed here. Being pro-active instead of reactive is the best thing to do most of the time.

Looking forward to get a statement on this discussion that is not limited to this above.
Thank you very much and kind regards.