Mrsinister2 wrote: »VirtualElizabeth wrote: »Okay so.....I have been out of the game for a bit and no idea OL was such a thing! Here I was playing a Sorc in PvP, dropping Stormy all over the place getting all sorts of kills. I hear about OL one night and decide to give it a whirl...let's just say I absolutely sucked LOL. I died all the time and my kill counter went down....down...down.
What is this so called magic you refer to as Overload or was I just that bad???
You have to build right for overload to work like people are complaining about you also need your opponent to be off balance to increase its damage by 70%
When these line up you are insta dead from overload and that's the problem. I have a fully lvled sorc, I like sorcs so I don't wana call for all kinds of nerfs but nothing in pvp should be able to instagib someone just by holding left mouse button for 2 seconds doing 24k plus damage.
Luckily there is only a handful of sorcs actually doing this the right way
Soul_Demon wrote: »Mrsinister2 wrote: »VirtualElizabeth wrote: »Okay so.....I have been out of the game for a bit and no idea OL was such a thing! Here I was playing a Sorc in PvP, dropping Stormy all over the place getting all sorts of kills. I hear about OL one night and decide to give it a whirl...let's just say I absolutely sucked LOL. I died all the time and my kill counter went down....down...down.
What is this so called magic you refer to as Overload or was I just that bad???
You have to build right for overload to work like people are complaining about you also need your opponent to be off balance to increase its damage by 70%
When these line up you are insta dead from overload and that's the problem. I have a fully lvled sorc, I like sorcs so I don't wana call for all kinds of nerfs but nothing in pvp should be able to instagib someone just by holding left mouse button for 2 seconds doing 24k plus damage.
Luckily there is only a handful of sorcs actually doing this the right way
Now why did you have to hold their hands on something that was already spoon fed to them in earlier posts man? I gotta tell you the mileage I was getting out of the 'why are trial players not using it and why is it not on youtube- must be untrue' and you totally ruined that for me.
Soul_Demon wrote: »I gotta tell you the mileage I was getting out of the 'why are trial players not using it and why is it not on youtube- must be untrue' and you totally ruined that for me.
If OL were truly as powerful and cheap and easy as the nerf-herders claim, why would there be anything other than full OL builds in trials? Did those endgame raid leading folks... who spend every waking moment theorycrafting every skill, set and combination of them... just somehow overlook a way to trivialize high end content... provided what OP and others in the thread are claiming is true?
If OL were truly as powerful and cheap and easy as the nerf-herders claim, why would there be anything other than full OL builds in trials? Did those endgame raid leading folks... who spend every waking moment theorycrafting every skill, set and combination of them... just somehow overlook a way to trivialize high end content... provided what OP and others in the thread are claiming is true?
I can't quite make out if this is a troll post or not. Is this dude really equating performance in Cyrodiil PVP to endgame PVE? Because I would like to know when has this been the case. There are plenty of strong builds in PVP that are pathetic in PVE, and plenty of high-performing PVE builds that are crap in PVP.
If OL were truly as powerful and cheap and easy as the nerf-herders claim, why would there be anything other than full OL builds in trials? Did those endgame raid leading folks... who spend every waking moment theorycrafting every skill, set and combination of them... just somehow overlook a way to trivialize high end content... provided what OP and others in the thread are claiming is true?
I can't quite make out if this is a troll post or not. Is this dude really equating performance in Cyrodiil PVP to endgame PVE? Because I would like to know when has this been the case. There are plenty of strong builds in PVP that are pathetic in PVE, and plenty of high-performing PVE builds that are crap in PVP.
Soul_Demon wrote: »Yeah.....sometimes it is hard to tell if pretending to be that dumb or truly not aware of game mechanics to that degree. His other posts appear to be from someone really, really excited to have scored a Mature rated game and is now 'exploring' how far he can go in posting. High ended control mechanisms like "Dodge of inconvenient facts noted." that are really just screaming "I don't know how this is done and need help, spoon feed me more" seem a bit to see through and again hard to tell if this is someone's kid who got ahold of the game somehow and is running amuck.
Soul_Demon wrote: »Definition of Ad Hominem
Ad hominem, which stands for the Latin term argumentum ad hominem, is a response to a person’s argument by attacking the person’s character rather than the logic or content of the argument. Ad hominem remarks are often an example of fallacy, because they are irrelevant to the overall argument. However, there are cases in which ad hominem arguments are appropriate. For example, if a person states an opinion and another person calls their credibility into question, this may be a perfectly relevant response that invalidates the opinion.
VirtualElizabeth wrote: »Mrsinister2 wrote: »VirtualElizabeth wrote: »Okay so.....I have been out of the game for a bit and no idea OL was such a thing! Here I was playing a Sorc in PvP, dropping Stormy all over the place getting all sorts of kills. I hear about OL one night and decide to give it a whirl...let's just say I absolutely sucked LOL. I died all the time and my kill counter went down....down...down.
What is this so called magic you refer to as Overload or was I just that bad???
You have to build right for overload to work like people are complaining about you also need your opponent to be off balance to increase its damage by 70%
When these line up you are insta dead from overload and that's the problem. I have a fully lvled sorc, I like sorcs so I don't wana call for all kinds of nerfs but nothing in pvp should be able to instagib someone just by holding left mouse button for 2 seconds doing 24k plus damage.
Luckily there is only a handful of sorcs actually doing this the right way
So there is a secret sauce - just not that readily available it sounds like! Honestly I don't love using OL enough to create a build around it.
If OL were truly as powerful and cheap and easy as the nerf-herders claim, why would there be anything other than full OL builds in trials? Did those endgame raid leading folks... who spend every waking moment theorycrafting every skill, set and combination of them... just somehow overlook a way to trivialize high end content... provided what OP and others in the thread are claiming is true?
I can't quite make out if this is a troll post or not. Is this dude really equating performance in Cyrodiil PVP to endgame PVE? Because I would like to know when has this been the case. There are plenty of strong builds in PVP that are pathetic in PVE, and plenty of high-performing PVE builds that are crap in PVP.
Dodge of inconvenient facts noted. Red Herring noted. If OL were as strong and cheap as out of context claims in this thread misrepresent it to be, the entire DPS component of end game PVE would be composed of OL sorcs.
Yet they are not, quite the opposite.
You can rationalize or waffle around that all you like, but it directly counters the premise of this thread and several of the claims in it based on out of context recaps.
If OL were truly as powerful and You're talking about two vastly different ways of dealing damage.
Sorc's have their "Curse -> Meteor -> Fury -> Streak -> Frags" burst combo to nuke somebody down in PvP, yet you don't see them spamming that same combo in PvE.
Why? Because boss health is too high for such burst combos. Overload is another combo available to Sorc, offering high burst due to the insane heavy AoE DoT ticks, which is why you don't see it used in PvE, and probably won't ever see it used.
Okay, so let's think about what we were told about the issues by ZOS as an entity. The goal was balance. We've been told this at every single one of the changes in the past. The Object as stated by ZOS is BALANCE.
So following their own logic, since they are allowing this clearly out of balance ulti, let's just simply move the same attributes that OL has to ALL of the ultimates that are available. Turn them all into a toggle. Cost the exact same thing and do as much damage as the OL. Only then will we be able to see that BALANCE is truly the objective of these devs?
3. The biggest drawback to OL is low range unlike -many- alpha combos. A glass cannon sorc using it is not going to be able to just "streak away" before getting mauled by any competent or even incompetent players. They will not have health for decent shields, resists from L Form or pets, certainly not tools like cloak that other classes have. This is why it is rare in relation to destro, meteor and atronach. Sure, there are players who build OL gank builds, just like many niche builds and those are inferior to other types of ganks.
Soul_Demon wrote: »Definition of Ad Hominem
Ad hominem, which stands for the Latin term argumentum ad hominem, is a response to a person’s argument by attacking the person’s character rather than the logic or content of the argument. Ad hominem remarks are often an example of fallacy, because they are irrelevant to the overall argument. However, there are cases in which ad hominem arguments are appropriate. For example, if a person states an opinion and another person calls their credibility into question, this may be a perfectly relevant response that invalidates the opinion.
Definition is inaccurate; arguendo the condition at the end doesn't -ever- apply to responding to arguments by calling the person making them "dumb" "young," "running amuck," in a passive-aggressive, unnecessarily verbose way, and now you are derailing into the land of red herring in addition to continuing to dodge the facts that are inconvenient to your argument... again.
Not surprised, just another day on a gaming forum.
in a 1v1, sure. maybe even 1vX.1. OL HA is one of the most telegraphed, obvious skills in the game. Anyone claiming to get caught off guard by it other than the chance of wandering by a waiting sorc in stealth is blowing smoke or just bad.
I'm going to release the build and post the link everywhere. Cyrodiil should be extremely fun in a few months. When ZOS does not play the game to realize something is broken, make every player in the game use it and maybe then ZOS will get off their one million boat and do something bout it.
Soul_Demon wrote: »Inability to understand what was written is at the core of your problems.
Soul_Demon wrote: »Oh yes, and to continue on the 'assist' for you the condition 'arguendo' is a legal term...
I'm going to release the build and post the link everywhere. Cyrodiil should be extremely fun in a few months. When ZOS does not play the game to realize something is broken, make every player in the game use it and maybe then ZOS will get off their one million boat and do something bout it.
I'm going to release the build and post the link everywhere. Cyrodiil should be extremely fun in a few months. When ZOS does not play the game to realize something is broken, make every player in the game use it and maybe then ZOS will get off their one million boat and do something bout it.
Alpha combos like Shalknado? 6m. Leap & Lash? 7m, single target.
I don't call 15m low range, with a 7m animation. I call 7m low range, and at 7m it would have a matching animation & telegraph. Wouldn't that be nice?
just give my DK a 20-ulti cost heavy attack that can do ~50% damage on off-balance enemy from a range, and im cool.
1. "Arguendo," as a matter of fact and not opinion, is not narrowly considered a "legal term," but garden variety shorthand Latin convenient when a premise is disputed but wouldn't support an argument even if true. This is exactly how I used the term.Soul_Demon wrote: »Inability to understand what was written is at the core of your problems.
If I do have any problem in the thread, it's continuing to engage with a poster such as yourself whose posts are crammed with fallacies, passive aggressive snide and ad hom instead of simply discussing the topic. Of late, you have apparently edited out the "spelling word of the day" ad hom snide from your latest post... a bit too late unfortunately.Soul_Demon wrote: »Oh yes, and to continue on the 'assist' for you the condition 'arguendo' is a legal term...
1. "Arguendo," as a matter of fact and not opinion, is not narrowly considered a "legal term," but garden variety shorthand Latin convenient when a premise is disputed but wouldn't support an argument even if true. This is exactly how I used the term.
2. Nowhere in my crystal clear prior post did I conflate "ad hom" and "arguendo." You made that up or just didn't understand the post. Not surprised either way.
3. Different words have different meanings? What an amazing revelation.
You are out of your depth, and with that my only problem in the thread, as described above, ends.
*and there is where you attempt to change the definition and conversation. You claim the actual definition is not only incorrect but that you may apply a legal term to the end of the statement as though the definition was something that could be 'argued' somehow. Using the above definition of the word 'Arguendo' apparently you were just going to dismiss the definition of the phrase "for sake of argument" because the end conditions are never met?.....its the definition of Ad hominem and not subject your own changes*Soul_Demon wrote: »Definition of Ad Hominem
Ad hominem, which stands for the Latin term argumentum ad hominem, is a response to a person’s argument by attacking the person’s character rather than the logic or content of the argument.
Definition is inaccurate; arguendo the condition at the end doesn't -ever- apply
One final thing. Where is this alleged off balance supposed to come from? NERFED LL? NERFED blockade?
"What is this sparkly stuff all over the ground? What could that be? Maybe I should stand in it awhile and find out. Hmm it tickles!"
How -exactly- are these uber OL sorcs going to readily apply Off balance, carry around a pocket DK? O the irony.
Alpha combos like Shalknado? 6m. Leap & Lash? 7m, single target.
I don't call 15m low range, with a 7m animation. I call 7m low range, and at 7m it would have a matching animation & telegraph. Wouldn't that be nice?
I do call it low range. Warden has a whole tree dedicated to healing allowing it to choose closer combat. And Leap only has a 7m range? That's a new one on me. Was about 20m last I used it with a 7m AOE at the end of that.
Simple True or False, Sorcs who use atronach, meteor, destro, negate, vastly -vastly- outnumber sorcs who use OL as an ult.
If true, and it is, why do you think that is? Or maybe they are all misguided and just don't know about the uberness of OL?
GeneralSezme wrote: »a destro NB spamming sap does more dps than an overload sorc. No comparison.