daemonor wrote: »

Vevvev wrote: »

MincVinyl wrote: »

^this right here is exactly what i mean, you are not even looking for ways to bypass or lessen the negative passives. Zos even spit the answer in your face to help you overcome it.

And yes I have had the game change on me, I have been playing since beta. Maining a bosmer stamsorc, which has not really seen meta since the IC days. My main form of playstyle has been removed from the game several times over to conform to players who can't think for themselves or care to learn more about the game mathematically or mechanically.

My main hasn't even been a vampire for over a year, and I've never played the meta and always made my own fun builds for both PVE and PVP. Crunching the numbers and getting better and better as time went on. I've been thinking about making my MagDK a vampire again once Greymoor came out but with these changes I might just skip the whole thing entirely.

I've worked with New Moon Acolyte several times and have tried several combinations to make it work for me. That cost increase on a magDK is significant and I've had to set it aside for other sets like draugrkin, elemental succession, and spell strategist. And this issue gets worse when I play no CP Cyrodiil or enter Battlegrounds with that NMA set. Its truly not something players should have to deal with at the values that they are at.

The reason people are not happy with vampire right now is it is not fun to play as on the PTS. You can get it to work, and get some high numbers on a target dummy, but its not viable in practice to suffer through a debuff like that. There is also the issue with Tanks and Healers being unable to even really take advantage of the skill line due to how its set up on the PTS. Like for example if a tank wanted to get the damage reduction passive they need to be at stage 3 vampirisim which gives them 15% increased costs to everything. A lot of good tanks I know run block cost reduction enchantments due to the fact its already a pain in the rear to manage resources as it is ((made even worse by a group that doesn't use orbs and other synergies)). They don't have a whole lot of flexibility to find ways around that cost increase like a damage dealer would be able to.

Have to agree on this one, after finishing dummy humping for 3 days I decided I want to check some pvp changes, and guess what - you can't. 2 hours in bg que, IC is empty so is cyrodil. After 1 hour of spamming chat I found a mate whom we had duels with for a good hour. But that's about it. There's no way currently to extensively test all the stuff thats added on the pts.

I have some good news for you tho, going with the 5 siroria 5 elf bane and 2 ilambris set up with the old asylum rotation i managed to pull 85k dps on a trial dummy by replacing force pulse with blood for blood vampire spammable. There's still hope for mag dks but that means losing the range most likely.

carlos424 wrote: »

daemonor wrote: »

Vevvev wrote: »

MincVinyl wrote: »

^this right here is exactly what i mean, you are not even looking for ways to bypass or lessen the negative passives. Zos even spit the answer in your face to help you overcome it.

And yes I have had the game change on me, I have been playing since beta. Maining a bosmer stamsorc, which has not really seen meta since the IC days. My main form of playstyle has been removed from the game several times over to conform to players who can't think for themselves or care to learn more about the game mathematically or mechanically.

My main hasn't even been a vampire for over a year, and I've never played the meta and always made my own fun builds for both PVE and PVP. Crunching the numbers and getting better and better as time went on. I've been thinking about making my MagDK a vampire again once Greymoor came out but with these changes I might just skip the whole thing entirely.

I've worked with New Moon Acolyte several times and have tried several combinations to make it work for me. That cost increase on a magDK is significant and I've had to set it aside for other sets like draugrkin, elemental succession, and spell strategist. And this issue gets worse when I play no CP Cyrodiil or enter Battlegrounds with that NMA set. Its truly not something players should have to deal with at the values that they are at.

The reason people are not happy with vampire right now is it is not fun to play as on the PTS. You can get it to work, and get some high numbers on a target dummy, but its not viable in practice to suffer through a debuff like that. There is also the issue with Tanks and Healers being unable to even really take advantage of the skill line due to how its set up on the PTS. Like for example if a tank wanted to get the damage reduction passive they need to be at stage 3 vampirisim which gives them 15% increased costs to everything. A lot of good tanks I know run block cost reduction enchantments due to the fact its already a pain in the rear to manage resources as it is ((made even worse by a group that doesn't use orbs and other synergies)). They don't have a whole lot of flexibility to find ways around that cost increase like a damage dealer would be able to.

Have to agree on this one, after finishing dummy humping for 3 days I decided I want to check some pvp changes, and guess what - you can't. 2 hours in bg que, IC is empty so is cyrodil. After 1 hour of spamming chat I found a mate whom we had duels with for a good hour. But that's about it. There's no way currently to extensively test all the stuff thats added on the pts.

I have some good news for you tho, going with the 5 siroria 5 elf bane and 2 ilambris set up with the old asylum rotation i managed to pull 85k dps on a trial dummy by replacing force pulse with blood for blood vampire spammable. There's still hope for mag dks but that means losing the range most likely.

Have you tried that same setup using the whip spammable? Just curious if you can get similar results. If so, there would be no point in using vamp skills and having to manage health.

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

ElliottXO wrote: »

Just watched Alcast's video on vampires.

Vampires will be fine; and I can promise you that within the first month of release there will be the first broken Vampire builds running around (e.g. by fully exploiting the 60% vampire ability cost decrease with the set bonus).

Of course, slapping on vampire just for 2 passives won't work anymore. Get over it.

Condescending much?
People are pissed that the rework didn't turn out as promising as it was expected to be.

Was it kinda mandatory in the past? Surely. Be it for the passives alone or because some classes even needed the few lousy skills it offered.

But now tanks and healers can go cure themselves. Most (!) stamina chars as well. Vampirism turned from being omnipresent to being a straight up nerf and unusable to 50% of the playerbase.
Pick your poison. I'd rather see it more inclusive than it is now. E.g. via slightly softer cost penalties as well as a stam scaling damage ability. With those two changes alone you could get a good chunk back on board again.

If I wanted to use a skill line that with 50%+ useless skills and passives for me, I'd play a sorc on stamina . Oh, wait...

darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »

We'll effectively be in the same place as we are now because people won't want to go past stage 1 with the cost increases and actively avoid feeding. Stage 1 will be like stage 4 is now, with everything being more expensive.

I wanted to be able to feed to get stronger, now I have to avoid feeding because I'll get severely penalized for it. There's no upside.

josh.lackey_ESO wrote: »

The extra ability cost should just be removed entirely. The reduced cost for vampire skills doesn't need to be offset by anything. Or just remove the reduced vamp costs if you need extra cost to come from somewhere.

I don't know why ZOS always double-dips when they think something needs to be adjusted. Yes, a lot of people took Vamp for the "free" 10% regen. So they removed the regen. But then now instead of thinking 'let's see if that solves the problem,' they still operate from the mindset of 'it's too good' so they go in and add another penalty. (Or the opposite, something is too weak, so they double-dip buffing it and then it's overpowered.)

They do the double-dip thing pretty consistently when they do balance changes.

It makes everything balls-to-the-wall so you get whiplash from patch to patch, rather than small tweaks -- 5% here and there until it's balanced just right. I am not bashing them, just making the observation, maybe suggesting they should be more conservative with changes in general.

Glurin wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

josh.lackey_ESO wrote: »

The extra ability cost should just be removed entirely. The reduced cost for vampire skills doesn't need to be offset by anything. Or just remove the reduced vamp costs if you need extra cost to come from somewhere.

I don't know why ZOS always double-dips when they think something needs to be adjusted. Yes, a lot of people took Vamp for the "free" 10% regen. So they removed the regen. But then now instead of thinking 'let's see if that solves the problem,' they still operate from the mindset of 'it's too good' so they go in and add another penalty. (Or the opposite, something is too weak, so they double-dip buffing it and then it's overpowered.)

They do the double-dip thing pretty consistently when they do balance changes.

It makes everything balls-to-the-wall so you get whiplash from patch to patch, rather than small tweaks -- 5% here and there until it's balanced just right. I am not bashing them, just making the observation, maybe suggesting they should be more conservative with changes in general.

Players can already largely remove the penalty by simply reducing their stage. A very manageable 5% increase in ability cost is well worth the access to all of the new and improved Vampire skills, not to mention the Dark Stalker passive. If your build isn't using mostly Vampire abilities it shouldn't be at the higher stages anyway.

Jeremy, as you already know fully well given our discussion over in the general forum, THAT'S NOT THE FRIKIN POINT!!! Vampires are not magicka werewolves and should not be magicka werewolves. People who want to play as a vampire don't mean they want to only use vampire abilities. It's a play-style, not a build. If the cost penalty is too great at stage four, or any other stage for that mater, it turns playstyle into build, so the thing that needs to be addressed is whether or not that penalty is in fact too great. When you tell people to reduce their stage and stay at stage one, you are not addressing that issue.

Jeremy wrote: »

Glurin wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

josh.lackey_ESO wrote: »

The extra ability cost should just be removed entirely. The reduced cost for vampire skills doesn't need to be offset by anything. Or just remove the reduced vamp costs if you need extra cost to come from somewhere.

I don't know why ZOS always double-dips when they think something needs to be adjusted. Yes, a lot of people took Vamp for the "free" 10% regen. So they removed the regen. But then now instead of thinking 'let's see if that solves the problem,' they still operate from the mindset of 'it's too good' so they go in and add another penalty. (Or the opposite, something is too weak, so they double-dip buffing it and then it's overpowered.)

They do the double-dip thing pretty consistently when they do balance changes.

It makes everything balls-to-the-wall so you get whiplash from patch to patch, rather than small tweaks -- 5% here and there until it's balanced just right. I am not bashing them, just making the observation, maybe suggesting they should be more conservative with changes in general.

Players can already largely remove the penalty by simply reducing their stage. A very manageable 5% increase in ability cost is well worth the access to all of the new and improved Vampire skills, not to mention the Dark Stalker passive. If your build isn't using mostly Vampire abilities it shouldn't be at the higher stages anyway.

Jeremy, as you already know fully well given our discussion over in the general forum, THAT'S NOT THE FRIKIN POINT!!! Vampires are not magicka werewolves and should not be magicka werewolves. People who want to play as a vampire don't mean they want to only use vampire abilities. It's a play-style, not a build. If the cost penalty is too great at stage four, or any other stage for that mater, it turns playstyle into build, so the thing that needs to be addressed is whether or not that penalty is in fact too great. When you tell people to reduce their stage and stay at stage one, you are not addressing that issue.

Actually that is the "frikin point".

Vampires should pick the stage that best suits their individual play style. That is likely why the new system makes it easier to pick and choose your stage.

If you choose to become a stage 4 Vampire yet use a build that spams regular abilities instead of Vampire abilities, then that is just poor decision making on the part of the player and not the fault of the game. As I've told you countless times before (since you seem to want to follow me into this thread now for some weird reason) the game provides you with the necessary tools to effectively play a build that combines both Vampiric abilites and regular abilities. If you choose not to take advantage of those tools, then that's on you. So your issue has already been addressed.

josh.lackey_ESO wrote: »

The extra ability cost should just be removed entirely. The reduced cost for vampire skills doesn't need to be offset by anything. Or just remove the reduced vamp costs if you need extra cost to come from somewhere.

I don't know why ZOS always double-dips when they think something needs to be adjusted. Yes, a lot of people took Vamp for the "free" 10% regen. So they removed the regen. But then now instead of thinking 'let's see if that solves the problem,' they still operate from the mindset of 'it's too good' so they go in and add another penalty. (Or the opposite, something is too weak, so they double-dip buffing it and then it's overpowered.)

They do the double-dip thing pretty consistently when they do balance changes.

It makes everything balls-to-the-wall so you get whiplash from patch to patch, rather than small tweaks -- 5% here and there until it's balanced just right. I am not bashing them, just making the observation, maybe suggesting they should be more conservative with changes in general.

ElliottXO wrote: »

josh.lackey_ESO wrote: »

The extra ability cost should just be removed entirely. The reduced cost for vampire skills doesn't need to be offset by anything. Or just remove the reduced vamp costs if you need extra cost to come from somewhere.

I don't know why ZOS always double-dips when they think something needs to be adjusted. Yes, a lot of people took Vamp for the "free" 10% regen. So they removed the regen. But then now instead of thinking 'let's see if that solves the problem,' they still operate from the mindset of 'it's too good' so they go in and add another penalty. (Or the opposite, something is too weak, so they double-dip buffing it and then it's overpowered.)

They do the double-dip thing pretty consistently when they do balance changes.

It makes everything balls-to-the-wall so you get whiplash from patch to patch, rather than small tweaks -- 5% here and there until it's balanced just right. I am not bashing them, just making the observation, maybe suggesting they should be more conservative with changes in general.

Ok, but why would anyone not chose to be vampire then? 5% fire damage, 10% health regen, and 20% fighters guild ability damage?

First two are barely noticeable, but you then get access to another in my opinion very good utility skill tree.

Without the 5% ability cost increase we are back at 100% vampire population. No reason to be human, especially not for PVE.

darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Playing as a stage 1 Vampire is not avoiding playing as a Vampire.

It most certainly is avoiding playing as a vampire when that actively prohibits you from feeding.

darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

ElliottXO wrote: »

josh.lackey_ESO wrote: »

The extra ability cost should just be removed entirely. The reduced cost for vampire skills doesn't need to be offset by anything. Or just remove the reduced vamp costs if you need extra cost to come from somewhere.

I don't know why ZOS always double-dips when they think something needs to be adjusted. Yes, a lot of people took Vamp for the "free" 10% regen. So they removed the regen. But then now instead of thinking 'let's see if that solves the problem,' they still operate from the mindset of 'it's too good' so they go in and add another penalty. (Or the opposite, something is too weak, so they double-dip buffing it and then it's overpowered.)

They do the double-dip thing pretty consistently when they do balance changes.

It makes everything balls-to-the-wall so you get whiplash from patch to patch, rather than small tweaks -- 5% here and there until it's balanced just right. I am not bashing them, just making the observation, maybe suggesting they should be more conservative with changes in general.

Ok, but why would anyone not chose to be vampire then? 5% fire damage, 10% health regen, and 20% fighters guild ability damage?

First two are barely noticeable, but you then get access to another in my opinion very good utility skill tree.

Without the 5% ability cost increase we are back at 100% vampire population. No reason to be human, especially not for PVE.

I think you're right. Some penalty is necessary - especially if the developers are interested in reserving the Vampire population for those who actually want to use Vampire abilities (instead of everyone just grabbing it for a passive or two).

The lower stage penalties are easily dealt with and more than a fair trade given the excellent skills it gives you access to . Most of the fuss seems to stem from players attempting to play builds that center around using regular abilities at higher tiers of Vampirism where that kind of build is severely punished. So I think is more of an adaption issue that will eventually work itself out as people familiarize themselves with the new system.

We already have a penalty by losing the resource regen we had before this, which is the main reason a lot of people went vampire to begin with.

Vanos444 wrote: »

As anyone tried feed on another player. Does it kill the player?
I have tried it on npc, they die 1 shot.