Sahidom wrote: »

Another thread here prompted me to think about the problematic crowd control issue in BGs and Cyrodiil. The player character must successfully break-free or dodge roll to counter the crowd control effect; hence receiving their CC immunization. What I would like to propose is changing when the player character receives the CC immunization to the following:

Upon being effected by a crowd control effect (knock-back/down, stun, immobilization, or snare) the player character immediately receives a 10 second CC immunization status THAN successfully breaking out or dodge rolling to avoid the detrimental effects of the crowd control.

The proposed change would restrict how many crowd control effects affects the player character simultaneously. Therefore, reinforcing the direction to have reactive and dynamic game play in PVP by selective usage on crowd control skills: when, where and how their applied in lieu of the risk that other players may be counter-productive to their crowd control --> burst damage combination.

That said, I present the proposal for discussion with others.

10s cooldown on every single effect CC yikes. We'll go back to megafast stambuilds running through the wilds and everyone else being kind of ***

ak_pvp wrote: »

10s cooldown on every single effect CC yikes. We'll go back to megafast stambuilds running through the wilds and everyone else being kind of ***

The proposal focuses on staggering CC effectiveness within group vs. group play. However, in dueling the execution to land a CC skill would be more choice on the decision-making strategy to exploit a mistake, counter a specific combo, etc. The 10 seconds was an arbitrary variance; but the conceptual implementation would be the following:

Considering group verse group content,

Target A gets damaged/CC effect by incoming initial CC by Adversary A (of 3) --> Triggers CC immunity.

Target A gets damaged/CC effect by incoming CC by Adversary B in consecutive attacks by both A and B --> Adversary B damaging skill lands damage EXCEPT the CC component of the skill i.e. Target A gained CC immunity from Adversary A damaging/CC effect.

Note: The CC immunity duration does not refresh despite Adversary B landing a valid damaging/CC effect skill on Target B.

The intent of the proposal is to effectively stagger the effects of CC inducing skills. This does not minimize the value of the CC skills but re-approaches issues where Target A could be stunned, immobilized, and snared simultaneously - whether or not the CC duration expire equally.

What does not seem to be a discussion on how CC ramps up incoming damage. For instance the following sources:

Duel Wield passive, Ruffian, that grants +8/15% damage to stunned, immobilized, disoriented, or silenced enemies.
Champion Point passive, Exploiter, that grants +10% damage to off-balance enemies (i.e. stuns, disoriented...)

Duel Wield combined with Blood Thirsty empowered with the above (i.e. Steel Tornado) quickly become potent; As with other skills e.g. Concussion granting +8% additional damage on the enemy paired with one, or both, of the mentioned damage bonuses. These passive boosts to damage proc under the CC condition, and duly earned when the conditions are gained; but under the current issue with rampant CC to be CC again (excluding those capable of avoiding the rinse-repeat factor) is very potent.

The proposal addresses the need to stagger how often a player character becomes effected by CC, as the frequency of CC in Battlegrounds and Cyrodiil changes the frequency on when CC passive damage bonuses are earned/applied to damage skills. Increased damage benefits set aside, CC based skills are "control" skills to pace or disrupt engagements i.e. their defensive characteristics of the skill. This is where ZOS needs to evaluate how CC should be played out in PVP content.

ForgottenEntity wrote: »

Don’t know about a successful roll dodge granting immunity (might be a bit to much for classes like DK)
But I wholeheartedly agree that the CC immunity should be applied once your CC’d and not when you break free (elsewise you end up with your average mage builds getting chain CC’d endlessly due to the ridiculous 5k+ Stam cost to break free)

The proposal on CC would proc when effected by the initial CC skill. The CC immunity would not proc when a player character uses a dodge roll to avoid incoming damage or against a dodge-able CC skill under the proposal, which means the player character would need to be effected by the CC effect in order to trigger the CC immunity. No preemptive CC immunity unless its provided by a class or weapon skill i.e. Forward Momentum, Immovable Brute ult., or potion...

For instance,

Fossilize snares Player A --> triggers the CC immunity on other incoming effects i.e. cannot be stunned while snared.

Player A dodge rolls to break the snare --> The dodge roll itself does not proc the CC immunity but returns mobility back to the player.

I hope this clarifies your concern. The stamina cost of break free could be reevaluated by ZOS, however, the character would not have to pay the stamina cost multiple times to avoid snares and stun effects i.e. breakout THAN dodge roll to escape the multiple CC effects. Mage builds would gain a passive resource extension on their stamina on what initial CC effect the player character needs to break versus plausibly having to pay breakout and dodge roll stamina costs.

On that thought, CC effects may not be enough or as effective, to wear down an opponent's resources in the exchange.

DBZVelena wrote: »

imo its a good idea but the cool down should be shorter.

Why i think its a good idea? Because its often the group vs 1 that causes most complaints. but at the same time, in a 1 vs 1 situation 10 sec would be to long.
5 sec however, with no cool down on its re-applying. will force more play instead of just forcing a target still to pound it in the ground.
there are sets that mitigate cc effectiveness so it would kind of balance out.

The 10 seconds was arbitrary. The suggested 5 seconds would work well too, and would achieve the intent. As one immunity ends, it would refresh by the proposed mechanic when the subject becomes effected again by a CC effect.

One a side note: In group vs. 1 (in context to Battlegrounds and Cyrodiil) after your dodged to break the snare, you should have critical time to decide fight or flight. The CC immunity proposal may address the pain points on immobilization being too rampant due to group spamming CC skills and conjecturing the snares may be passively minimized due to the CC immunity. Indirectly, it could also address the movement speed need since +% movement is one option to counter the -% snare movement speed to lessen the impact of those abilities.