Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
The vampire cost increase is good because....
-
Langeston✭✭✭✭✭
✭
"Tell me your build so I can let you know whether your opinions re: the impending changes to it are valid or not."xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »Nemesis7884 wrote: »Sure but a werewolf can still go into Human form and have not drawbacks. 20% increase 100% of the time is not good gameplay or build diversity.
And also have that juicy stam recovery just for having it slotted.
They need to drastically fix things and not box in Vampires to RPing and niche PvP builds but give it more diversity simple.
WW is so much the better option for builds with the changes they made to the puppers. The difference between the two is is quite unbalanced.
Anyone pushing otherwise just is biased towards vampires out of some other agenda. This is certainly not a concern with balance in the least.
c'est la vie
The 5% penalty at stage 1 is very manageable and does not lock Vampires into RPing and niche PvP builds. Everyone one of my Vampire builds prior to Greymoor survived just fine (in fact they were strengthened).
If anything, the Greymooor expansion will increase diversity among Vampires because it allows for more Vampire-centric builds that were not possible before, and without compromising the previous builds that were in place.
Nah, it is over roasted and needs lots of work.
A mere 5% ability increase is not going to lock Vampires into RPing and niche PvP builds Xmeow. I can tell you this from personal experience, because all of my previous builds have survived just fine. They just require you to lower your stage.
5% is not going to make or break any decent build.
And I can tell you from my experience that it is not how you’re making it out to be.
The penalties are too much and misguided. They need to be toned down simple.
Now note what I said, my experience okie.
Then note what you’re saying, your experiences and your builds you play. That doesn’t mean it is okie.
Who knows what your builds are or how you play....It is just your opinion.
ZOS needs to take everyones feedback that has been given the proper way and make their decisions from there.
What is the core issue for me....is that the penalties which most agree for vampires are too harsh. Especially compared with WW’
ZOS just needs to look it over and readjust it. Which is what the PTS is there to do, help tweak issues before going live. Nothing to go in circles about.
Most of the negative feedback is coming as a result of people trying to play builds that are not focused around using vampiric skills at stage 4. In that case, the feedback is not productive because it's a self-inflicted problem.
If you like, you can give me a rough outline of your character and the rotations you use and I'll go test it out for myself on the PTS and see if the 5% penalty truly does hinder it as much as you say. If i find that to be the case, I'll gladly retract my earlier statement. Because though you say it's my opinion (and you're right, I guess it is) it's very difficult for me to view my comment that a 5% ability cost penalty is not going to reduce every Vampire to either RPging or some niche PvP build as anything but fact.
You have zero self-awareness.
I never said anything about letting him know if his opinions were valid or not.
If you are going to quote me, then I would prefer you actually use my words...not put words in my mouth and pretend I said things I never did. So I think you are the one who could do with a bit of "self awareness".
I asked (politely I may add) about his build and rotations because I was interested to go test them out for myself to see. Because I have a hard time believing a 5% penalty could reduce any build to just RPing. But if it turns out I'm wrong and a 5% penalty truly does have such an impact I said I would happily retract the statement. Notice how what I actually said bears absolutely no resemblance to that smug quote you attributed to me.
Are you kidding? That's precisely what you did. I simply paraphrased your words in the hope that it would illustrate to you how absurd it sounded.
@xXMeowMeowXx said:...from my experience that it is not how you’re making it out to be. The penalties are too much and misguided...
...Now note what I said, my experience...
...What is the core issue for me....is that the penalties which most agree for vampires are too harsh...
Then you said:
She gave her opinion and made it a point to state it as an opinion, then you asked for her build so you could hop on the PTS and "fact check" said opinion. Whether or not you "asked politely" or if you wind up retracting your statement is irrelevant — the fact that you presume to be the arbiter of what does and does not hinder her build was in and of itself presumptuous and arrogant....give me a rough outline of your character and the rotations you use and I'll go test it out for myself on the PTS and see if the 5% penalty truly does hinder it as much as you say...
I also find your comments in this thread to be pretty ironic considering posts of your own such as this one:
"Cost reduction for me, but not for thee..."
Now I may be mistaken here, but I get the impression that you play mostly PVE, while a lot of the people you are disagreeing with clearly play PVP. If that is correct, then you are never going to see eye to eye with them when it comes to the question of sustain. So maybe you should stop telling them that they're "wrong" if you are unable to see things from their perspective.
The 5% cost increase and loss of 10% regen broke my magblade PVP build. I've spent the last week on the PTS trying to remedy it and no matter what I do, my build will be weaker because of these vampire changes. The 5% cost increase from NMA was bad enough, and I'm able to just front bar that. An additional 5% on my front bar, paired with a new 5% cost increase on my back bar (where my most expensive abilities are) along with the fact I'm losing the 10% regen bonus is a significant resource loss to me — and that's if I only stay at stage 1. Your opinion re: the viability of my build (or anyone else's for that matter) is, quite frankly, completely irrelevant. I don't understand why you feel the need to argue about it so vehemently.10 -
Jeremy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
"Tell me your build so I can let you know whether your opinions re: the impending changes to it are valid or not."xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »Nemesis7884 wrote: »Sure but a werewolf can still go into Human form and have not drawbacks. 20% increase 100% of the time is not good gameplay or build diversity.
And also have that juicy stam recovery just for having it slotted.
They need to drastically fix things and not box in Vampires to RPing and niche PvP builds but give it more diversity simple.
WW is so much the better option for builds with the changes they made to the puppers. The difference between the two is is quite unbalanced.
Anyone pushing otherwise just is biased towards vampires out of some other agenda. This is certainly not a concern with balance in the least.
c'est la vie
The 5% penalty at stage 1 is very manageable and does not lock Vampires into RPing and niche PvP builds. Everyone one of my Vampire builds prior to Greymoor survived just fine (in fact they were strengthened).
If anything, the Greymooor expansion will increase diversity among Vampires because it allows for more Vampire-centric builds that were not possible before, and without compromising the previous builds that were in place.
Nah, it is over roasted and needs lots of work.
A mere 5% ability increase is not going to lock Vampires into RPing and niche PvP builds Xmeow. I can tell you this from personal experience, because all of my previous builds have survived just fine. They just require you to lower your stage.
5% is not going to make or break any decent build.
And I can tell you from my experience that it is not how you’re making it out to be.
The penalties are too much and misguided. They need to be toned down simple.
Now note what I said, my experience okie.
Then note what you’re saying, your experiences and your builds you play. That doesn’t mean it is okie.
Who knows what your builds are or how you play....It is just your opinion.
ZOS needs to take everyones feedback that has been given the proper way and make their decisions from there.
What is the core issue for me....is that the penalties which most agree for vampires are too harsh. Especially compared with WW’
ZOS just needs to look it over and readjust it. Which is what the PTS is there to do, help tweak issues before going live. Nothing to go in circles about.
Most of the negative feedback is coming as a result of people trying to play builds that are not focused around using vampiric skills at stage 4. In that case, the feedback is not productive because it's a self-inflicted problem.
If you like, you can give me a rough outline of your character and the rotations you use and I'll go test it out for myself on the PTS and see if the 5% penalty truly does hinder it as much as you say. If i find that to be the case, I'll gladly retract my earlier statement. Because though you say it's my opinion (and you're right, I guess it is) it's very difficult for me to view my comment that a 5% ability cost penalty is not going to reduce every Vampire to either RPging or some niche PvP build as anything but fact.
You have zero self-awareness.
I never said anything about letting him know if his opinions were valid or not.
If you are going to quote me, then I would prefer you actually use my words...not put words in my mouth and pretend I said things I never did. So I think you are the one who could do with a bit of "self awareness".
I asked (politely I may add) about his build and rotations because I was interested to go test them out for myself to see. Because I have a hard time believing a 5% penalty could reduce any build to just RPing. But if it turns out I'm wrong and a 5% penalty truly does have such an impact I said I would happily retract the statement. Notice how what I actually said bears absolutely no resemblance to that smug quote you attributed to me.
Are you kidding? That's precisely what you did. I simply paraphrased your words in the hope that it would illustrate to you how absurd it sounded.
@xXMeowMeowXx said:...from my experience that it is not how you’re making it out to be. The penalties are too much and misguided...
...Now note what I said, my experience...
...What is the core issue for me....is that the penalties which most agree for vampires are too harsh...
Then you said:
She gave her opinion and made it a point to state it as an opinion, then you asked for her build so you could hop on the PTS and "fact check" said opinion. Whether or not you "asked politely" or if you wind up retracting your statement is irrelevant — the fact that you presume to be the arbiter of what does and does not hinder her build was in and of itself presumptuous and arrogant....give me a rough outline of your character and the rotations you use and I'll go test it out for myself on the PTS and see if the 5% penalty truly does hinder it as much as you say...
I also find your comments in this thread to be pretty ironic considering posts of your own such as this one:
"Cost reduction for me, but not for thee..."
Now I may be mistaken here, but I get the impression that you play mostly PVE, while a lot of the people you are disagreeing with clearly play PVP. If that is correct, then you are never going to see eye to eye with them when it comes to the question of sustain. So maybe you should stop telling them that they're "wrong" if you are unable to see things from their perspective.
The 5% cost increase and loss of 10% regen broke my magblade PVP build. I've spent the last week on the PTS trying to remedy it and no matter what I do, my build will be weaker because of these vampire changes. The 5% cost increase from NMA was bad enough, and I'm able to just front bar that. An additional 5% on my front bar, paired with a new 5% cost increase on my back bar (where my most expensive abilities are) along with the fact I'm losing the 10% regen bonus is a significant resource loss to me — and that's if I only stay at stage 1. Your opinion re: the viability of my build (or anyone else's for that matter) is, quite frankly, completely irrelevant. I don't understand why you feel the need to argue about it so vehemently.
Your quote did not resemble what I said. It. I was never trying to validate or invalidate anyone's opinion. I was simply wanting to test the problem out for myself to see if a 5% penalty actually would reduce a build to RPing status, because I don't believe it will. I was also very polite in the way I asked it - unlike the smug characterization you chose to give it.
Your impression is also false as I PvP frequently. And these changes will not make my Vampire weaker. Just the fact I will be able to use my Vampire abilities freely without having to worry about some massive fire damage increase making me easy prey for Dragon Knights alone is a life saver. And this isn't to mention all the new and improved abilities I have to work with.
And if you think this is me arguing "vehemently" then you have never seen me argue anything 'vehemently" before. This is actually me on my very best behavior (since this forum has very strict rules governing behavior). So I hope you never see me when I actually am arguing vehemently. lol...
I can promise you my response to you would have been a lot different if I was.
And I can disagree with people without necessarily telling them they are "wrong". Which is what I have been doing. And if you have a problem with people disagreeing with one another, then perhaps a debate forum is not the best place for you. Because you're going to have quite the job ahead of you if you plan on going around lecturing people for disagreeing with one another. ^^Edited by Jeremy on April 27, 2020 12:43AM1 -
Glurin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Vampirism has always been a bit like putting an accent on your character, except that accent is things like bad sunburn, aversion to fire, a liquid diet, etc. It has never, ever been about strictly adhering to a single, extremely narrow set of abilities. Even werewolves get more freedom than that, despite being all about the transformation into a beast. Vampires have always been a very versatile playstyle, able to be mages or warriors or thieves or whatever else. And no, not because they could just feed and be an almost-not-a-vampire. It's because the vampirism integrated into whatever you were already doing. It didn't ever overwrite it with some predefined, alien loadout and force you to do things that way.
As I've told you countless times before, the option to play as a "versatile" vampire that still utilizes elements of mages, warriors, thieves or what ever else are still available to you by playing at the lower stages. If you let these bizarre notions of not being a complete vampire (or what ever it is) keep you from doing that because you for some reason feel you must play as a stage 4 vampire then I can't help you.
Sometimes you have to bend with the wind or break.
Yup, called it. "You can be versatile as a vampire by just not being a vampire."Edited by Glurin on April 27, 2020 12:29AM"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster...when you gaze long into the abyss the abyss also gazes into you..."5 -
Jeremy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Vampirism has always been a bit like putting an accent on your character, except that accent is things like bad sunburn, aversion to fire, a liquid diet, etc. It has never, ever been about strictly adhering to a single, extremely narrow set of abilities. Even werewolves get more freedom than that, despite being all about the transformation into a beast. Vampires have always been a very versatile playstyle, able to be mages or warriors or thieves or whatever else. And no, not because they could just feed and be an almost-not-a-vampire. It's because the vampirism integrated into whatever you were already doing. It didn't ever overwrite it with some predefined, alien loadout and force you to do things that way.
As I've told you countless times before, the option to play as a "versatile" vampire that still utilizes elements of mages, warriors, thieves or what ever else are still available to you by playing at the lower stages. If you let these bizarre notions of not being a complete vampire (or what ever it is) keep you from doing that because you for some reason feel you must play as a stage 4 vampire then I can't help you.
Sometimes you have to bend with the wind or break.
Yup, called it. "You can be versatile as a vampire by just not being a vampire."
Again: and for what must be the 100th time now: you are still a Vampire at stage 1. It doesn't make no sense to me why you think a Vampire playing in stage 1 isn't a Vampire. It is!
Edited by Jeremy on April 27, 2020 12:39AM1 -
xXMeowMeowXx✭✭✭✭✭
✭
"Tell me your build so I can let you know whether your opinions re: the impending changes to it are valid or not."xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »Nemesis7884 wrote: »Sure but a werewolf can still go into Human form and have not drawbacks. 20% increase 100% of the time is not good gameplay or build diversity.
And also have that juicy stam recovery just for having it slotted.
They need to drastically fix things and not box in Vampires to RPing and niche PvP builds but give it more diversity simple.
WW is so much the better option for builds with the changes they made to the puppers. The difference between the two is is quite unbalanced.
Anyone pushing otherwise just is biased towards vampires out of some other agenda. This is certainly not a concern with balance in the least.
c'est la vie
The 5% penalty at stage 1 is very manageable and does not lock Vampires into RPing and niche PvP builds. Everyone one of my Vampire builds prior to Greymoor survived just fine (in fact they were strengthened).
If anything, the Greymooor expansion will increase diversity among Vampires because it allows for more Vampire-centric builds that were not possible before, and without compromising the previous builds that were in place.
Nah, it is over roasted and needs lots of work.
A mere 5% ability increase is not going to lock Vampires into RPing and niche PvP builds Xmeow. I can tell you this from personal experience, because all of my previous builds have survived just fine. They just require you to lower your stage.
5% is not going to make or break any decent build.
And I can tell you from my experience that it is not how you’re making it out to be.
The penalties are too much and misguided. They need to be toned down simple.
Now note what I said, my experience okie.
Then note what you’re saying, your experiences and your builds you play. That doesn’t mean it is okie.
Who knows what your builds are or how you play....It is just your opinion.
ZOS needs to take everyones feedback that has been given the proper way and make their decisions from there.
What is the core issue for me....is that the penalties which most agree for vampires are too harsh. Especially compared with WW’
ZOS just needs to look it over and readjust it. Which is what the PTS is there to do, help tweak issues before going live. Nothing to go in circles about.
Most of the negative feedback is coming as a result of people trying to play builds that are not focused around using vampiric skills at stage 4. In that case, the feedback is not productive because it's a self-inflicted problem.
If you like, you can give me a rough outline of your character and the rotations you use and I'll go test it out for myself on the PTS and see if the 5% penalty truly does hinder it as much as you say. If i find that to be the case, I'll gladly retract my earlier statement. Because though you say it's my opinion (and you're right, I guess it is) it's very difficult for me to view my comment that a 5% ability cost penalty is not going to reduce every Vampire to either RPging or some niche PvP build as anything but fact.
You have zero self-awareness.
I never said anything about letting him know if his opinions were valid or not.
If you are going to quote me, then I would prefer you actually use my words...not put words in my mouth and pretend I said things I never did. So I think you are the one who could do with a bit of "self awareness".
I asked (politely I may add) about his build and rotations because I was interested to go test them out for myself to see. Because I have a hard time believing a 5% penalty could reduce any build to just RPing. But if it turns out I'm wrong and a 5% penalty truly does have such an impact I said I would happily retract the statement. Notice how what I actually said bears absolutely no resemblance to that smug quote you attributed to me.
No, all you did was avoid the what I was saying and it seems what a lot of people are saying to you.
You’re just going in circles when people are saying we feel we would like some adjustments made. That is all.
Again that is what the PTS is for and why myself and many others submit feedback after testing things out.
And it is She....Also, my opinions, just as every players opinions in this game are valid.
Whether or not they will affect any more changes is up to the devs, not you.
3 -
xXMeowMeowXx✭✭✭✭✭
✭
"Tell me your build so I can let you know whether your opinions re: the impending changes to it are valid or not."xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »Nemesis7884 wrote: »Sure but a werewolf can still go into Human form and have not drawbacks. 20% increase 100% of the time is not good gameplay or build diversity.
And also have that juicy stam recovery just for having it slotted.
They need to drastically fix things and not box in Vampires to RPing and niche PvP builds but give it more diversity simple.
WW is so much the better option for builds with the changes they made to the puppers. The difference between the two is is quite unbalanced.
Anyone pushing otherwise just is biased towards vampires out of some other agenda. This is certainly not a concern with balance in the least.
c'est la vie
The 5% penalty at stage 1 is very manageable and does not lock Vampires into RPing and niche PvP builds. Everyone one of my Vampire builds prior to Greymoor survived just fine (in fact they were strengthened).
If anything, the Greymooor expansion will increase diversity among Vampires because it allows for more Vampire-centric builds that were not possible before, and without compromising the previous builds that were in place.
Nah, it is over roasted and needs lots of work.
A mere 5% ability increase is not going to lock Vampires into RPing and niche PvP builds Xmeow. I can tell you this from personal experience, because all of my previous builds have survived just fine. They just require you to lower your stage.
5% is not going to make or break any decent build.
And I can tell you from my experience that it is not how you’re making it out to be.
The penalties are too much and misguided. They need to be toned down simple.
Now note what I said, my experience okie.
Then note what you’re saying, your experiences and your builds you play. That doesn’t mean it is okie.
Who knows what your builds are or how you play....It is just your opinion.
ZOS needs to take everyones feedback that has been given the proper way and make their decisions from there.
What is the core issue for me....is that the penalties which most agree for vampires are too harsh. Especially compared with WW’
ZOS just needs to look it over and readjust it. Which is what the PTS is there to do, help tweak issues before going live. Nothing to go in circles about.
Most of the negative feedback is coming as a result of people trying to play builds that are not focused around using vampiric skills at stage 4. In that case, the feedback is not productive because it's a self-inflicted problem.
If you like, you can give me a rough outline of your character and the rotations you use and I'll go test it out for myself on the PTS and see if the 5% penalty truly does hinder it as much as you say. If i find that to be the case, I'll gladly retract my earlier statement. Because though you say it's my opinion (and you're right, I guess it is) it's very difficult for me to view my comment that a 5% ability cost penalty is not going to reduce every Vampire to either RPging or some niche PvP build as anything but fact.
You have zero self-awareness.
I never said anything about letting him know if his opinions were valid or not.
If you are going to quote me, then I would prefer you actually use my words...not put words in my mouth and pretend I said things I never did. So I think you are the one who could do with a bit of "self awareness".
I asked (politely I may add) about his build and rotations because I was interested to go test them out for myself to see. Because I have a hard time believing a 5% penalty could reduce any build to just RPing. But if it turns out I'm wrong and a 5% penalty truly does have such an impact I said I would happily retract the statement. Notice how what I actually said bears absolutely no resemblance to that smug quote you attributed to me.
Are you kidding? That's precisely what you did. I simply paraphrased your words in the hope that it would illustrate to you how absurd it sounded.
@xXMeowMeowXx said:...from my experience that it is not how you’re making it out to be. The penalties are too much and misguided...
...Now note what I said, my experience...
...What is the core issue for me....is that the penalties which most agree for vampires are too harsh...
Then you said:
She gave her opinion and made it a point to state it as an opinion, then you asked for her build so you could hop on the PTS and "fact check" said opinion. Whether or not you "asked politely" or if you wind up retracting your statement is irrelevant — the fact that you presume to be the arbiter of what does and does not hinder her build was in and of itself presumptuous and arrogant....give me a rough outline of your character and the rotations you use and I'll go test it out for myself on the PTS and see if the 5% penalty truly does hinder it as much as you say...
I also find your comments in this thread to be pretty ironic considering posts of your own such as this one:
"Cost reduction for me, but not for thee..."
Now I may be mistaken here, but I get the impression that you play mostly PVE, while a lot of the people you are disagreeing with clearly play PVP. If that is correct, then you are never going to see eye to eye with them when it comes to the question of sustain. So maybe you should stop telling them that they're "wrong" if you are unable to see things from their perspective.
The 5% cost increase and loss of 10% regen broke my magblade PVP build. I've spent the last week on the PTS trying to remedy it and no matter what I do, my build will be weaker because of these vampire changes. The 5% cost increase from NMA was bad enough, and I'm able to just front bar that. An additional 5% on my front bar, paired with a new 5% cost increase on my back bar (where my most expensive abilities are) along with the fact I'm losing the 10% regen bonus is a significant resource loss to me — and that's if I only stay at stage 1. Your opinion re: the viability of my build (or anyone else's for that matter) is, quite frankly, completely irrelevant. I don't understand why you feel the need to argue about it so vehemently.
Very well said @Langeston2 -
Jeremy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »
"Tell me your build so I can let you know whether your opinions re: the impending changes to it are valid or not."xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »Nemesis7884 wrote: »Sure but a werewolf can still go into Human form and have not drawbacks. 20% increase 100% of the time is not good gameplay or build diversity.
And also have that juicy stam recovery just for having it slotted.
They need to drastically fix things and not box in Vampires to RPing and niche PvP builds but give it more diversity simple.
WW is so much the better option for builds with the changes they made to the puppers. The difference between the two is is quite unbalanced.
Anyone pushing otherwise just is biased towards vampires out of some other agenda. This is certainly not a concern with balance in the least.
c'est la vie
The 5% penalty at stage 1 is very manageable and does not lock Vampires into RPing and niche PvP builds. Everyone one of my Vampire builds prior to Greymoor survived just fine (in fact they were strengthened).
If anything, the Greymooor expansion will increase diversity among Vampires because it allows for more Vampire-centric builds that were not possible before, and without compromising the previous builds that were in place.
Nah, it is over roasted and needs lots of work.
A mere 5% ability increase is not going to lock Vampires into RPing and niche PvP builds Xmeow. I can tell you this from personal experience, because all of my previous builds have survived just fine. They just require you to lower your stage.
5% is not going to make or break any decent build.
And I can tell you from my experience that it is not how you’re making it out to be.
The penalties are too much and misguided. They need to be toned down simple.
Now note what I said, my experience okie.
Then note what you’re saying, your experiences and your builds you play. That doesn’t mean it is okie.
Who knows what your builds are or how you play....It is just your opinion.
ZOS needs to take everyones feedback that has been given the proper way and make their decisions from there.
What is the core issue for me....is that the penalties which most agree for vampires are too harsh. Especially compared with WW’
ZOS just needs to look it over and readjust it. Which is what the PTS is there to do, help tweak issues before going live. Nothing to go in circles about.
Most of the negative feedback is coming as a result of people trying to play builds that are not focused around using vampiric skills at stage 4. In that case, the feedback is not productive because it's a self-inflicted problem.
If you like, you can give me a rough outline of your character and the rotations you use and I'll go test it out for myself on the PTS and see if the 5% penalty truly does hinder it as much as you say. If i find that to be the case, I'll gladly retract my earlier statement. Because though you say it's my opinion (and you're right, I guess it is) it's very difficult for me to view my comment that a 5% ability cost penalty is not going to reduce every Vampire to either RPging or some niche PvP build as anything but fact.
You have zero self-awareness.
I never said anything about letting him know if his opinions were valid or not.
If you are going to quote me, then I would prefer you actually use my words...not put words in my mouth and pretend I said things I never did. So I think you are the one who could do with a bit of "self awareness".
I asked (politely I may add) about his build and rotations because I was interested to go test them out for myself to see. Because I have a hard time believing a 5% penalty could reduce any build to just RPing. But if it turns out I'm wrong and a 5% penalty truly does have such an impact I said I would happily retract the statement. Notice how what I actually said bears absolutely no resemblance to that smug quote you attributed to me.
No, all you did was avoid the what I was saying and it seems what a lot of people are saying to you.
You’re just going in circles when people are saying we feel we would like some adjustments made. That is all.
Again that is what the PTS is for and why myself and many others submit feedback after testing things out.
And it is She....Also, my opinions, just as every players opinions in this game are valid.
Whether or not they will affect any more changes is up to the devs, not you.
You keep acting as if I said your opinions were invalid... yet I've never said your opinions were invalid. You seem to be confused as if I had actually said that make believe quote that other poster came up with.
So let me take a moment to set the record straight.
What I actually did was disagree with you about a 5% penalty reducing a build to RPing status, and then politely asked you for some idea as to your build and rotation so i could go test it for myself. And I even said if it turned out you was right, I would correct my earlier statement.
Then the other poster chimed in and started accusing me of arrogantly dismissing your opinion as invalid. lol
So I'm content to let others read the exchange for themselves. To say my words are being twisted is an understatement.
I have no problems with you or anyone else presenting feed back. But this is a forum, so you need to prepare yourself for the possibility that others may disagree with your said feedback. And I do.
The 5% penalty at stage 1 Vampirism is not so severe that it will reduce builds to ineffective RP builds. I believe it is easy enough to manage. We disagreed. That's alright, it happens. I only asked for insight into your build so I could test your particular problem out for myself so I could see if maybe I was wrong. I wasn't trying to "invalidate" you.Edited by Jeremy on April 27, 2020 1:11AM0 -
Jeremy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Just being honest. This is about as nice as I get.
I sprinkle my words with sugar when I come onto here and self moderate like you wouldn't believe. So if this still isn't good enough for you, and you still think I'm being "vehement" then you're out of luck, sorry. ^^Edited by Jeremy on April 27, 2020 1:08AM0 -
Langeston✭✭✭✭✭
✭
Maybe we're using different definitions for the word "vehement."
Just being honest. This is about as nice as I get.
I sprinkle my words with sugar when I come onto here and self moderate like you wouldn't believe. So if this still isn't good enough for you, and you still think I'm being "vehement" then you're out of luck, sorry. ^^
Personally, I think that making 50+ posts in the same topic within two days arguing your opinion qualifies as "showing strong feeling; forceful, passionate, or intense."Edited by Langeston on April 27, 2020 1:21AM4 -
Jeremy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Maybe we're using different definitions for the word "vehement."
Just being honest. This is about as nice as I get.
I sprinkle my words with sugar when I come onto here and self moderate like you wouldn't believe. So if this still isn't good enough for you, and you still think I'm being "vehement" then you're out of luck, sorry. ^^
No, I'm using the same definition that you are.
I sanitize my comments like they are infected with Covid-19. This is the least forceful, passionate, and intense you will ever see me.
So if you think the comments I am making here on this board are forceful and intense, Lord I hope you never see what my posts look like on other forums where I am not hamstrung by strict moderation. lolEdited by Jeremy on April 27, 2020 2:07AM0 -
Jeremy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Personally, I think that making 50+ posts in the same topic within two days arguing your opinion qualifies as "showing strong feeling; forceful, passionate, or intense."
Just being honest. This is about as nice as I get.
I sprinkle my words with sugar when I come onto here and self moderate like you wouldn't believe. So if this still isn't good enough for you, and you still think I'm being "vehement" then you're out of luck, sorry. ^^
That stems mostly from a habit I have to where I go out of my way to respond to everything on topics that interest me. But I do like these changes and am making a committed effort to defend them. I'm not going to lie about that.
I'm in no way trying to come across as forceful or intense in my commentary though. On the contrary, I've been making a exhausting effort to keep my comments as subdued as possible. ^^
But if the frequency of my comments bother you Langeston, just put me on ignore. That will solve your problem. I won't take offense.
Edited by Jeremy on April 27, 2020 2:07AM0 -
Opalblade✭✭✭Vampirism has always been a bit like putting an accent on your character, except that accent is things like bad sunburn, aversion to fire, a liquid diet, etc. It has never, ever been about strictly adhering to a single, extremely narrow set of abilities. Even werewolves get more freedom than that, despite being all about the transformation into a beast. Vampires have always been a very versatile playstyle, able to be mages or warriors or thieves or whatever else. And no, not because they could just feed and be an almost-not-a-vampire. It's because the vampirism integrated into whatever you were already doing. It didn't ever overwrite it with some predefined, alien loadout and force you to do things that way.
As I've told you countless times before, the option to play as a "versatile" vampire that still utilizes elements of mages, warriors, thieves or what ever else are still available to you by playing at the lower stages. If you let these bizarre notions of not being a complete vampire (or what ever it is) keep you from doing that because you for some reason feel you must play as a stage 4 vampire then I can't help you.
Sometimes you have to bend with the wind or break.
Yup, called it. "You can be versatile as a vampire by just not being a vampire."
Again: and for what must be the 100th time now: you are still a Vampire at stage 1. It doesn't make no sense to me why you think a Vampire playing in stage 1 isn't a Vampire. It is!
Considering that blood drinking has always been one of the main things that vampires are known for, and that you can't do so without going past stage 1, I don't think that's the case. I want my vampires to act like vampires, but I can't because most of my characters are tanks. Mind you, I WANT to use the new abilities, but the fact that the cost increase includes stuff like blocking and ultimate means I won't be able to feed without screwing myself over. Forcing tank and healer vamps to starve themselves in order to be effective is just silly.7 -
Jeremy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Vampirism has always been a bit like putting an accent on your character, except that accent is things like bad sunburn, aversion to fire, a liquid diet, etc. It has never, ever been about strictly adhering to a single, extremely narrow set of abilities. Even werewolves get more freedom than that, despite being all about the transformation into a beast. Vampires have always been a very versatile playstyle, able to be mages or warriors or thieves or whatever else. And no, not because they could just feed and be an almost-not-a-vampire. It's because the vampirism integrated into whatever you were already doing. It didn't ever overwrite it with some predefined, alien loadout and force you to do things that way.
As I've told you countless times before, the option to play as a "versatile" vampire that still utilizes elements of mages, warriors, thieves or what ever else are still available to you by playing at the lower stages. If you let these bizarre notions of not being a complete vampire (or what ever it is) keep you from doing that because you for some reason feel you must play as a stage 4 vampire then I can't help you.
Sometimes you have to bend with the wind or break.
Yup, called it. "You can be versatile as a vampire by just not being a vampire."
Again: and for what must be the 100th time now: you are still a Vampire at stage 1. It doesn't make no sense to me why you think a Vampire playing in stage 1 isn't a Vampire. It is!
Considering that blood drinking has always been one of the main things that vampires are known for, and that you can't do so without going past stage 1, I don't think that's the case. I want my vampires to act like vampires, but I can't because most of my characters are tanks. Mind you, I WANT to use the new abilities, but the fact that the cost increase includes stuff like blocking and ultimate means I won't be able to feed without screwing myself over. Forcing tank and healer vamps to starve themselves in order to be effective is just silly.
Of course you can.
Stage 1 Vampires can drain the life out of their opponents all day long.
Under the new system, using drain no longer advances your rank. It's a great change for tanks who like to use drain (of which I am one of). You won't have to worry about those nasty fire damage increases that used to come along with frequent use of drain as well. Taking 5% more fire damage is a lot better than taking 25% more fire damage, which is what drain tanks were forced to deal with before Greymoor.Edited by Jeremy on April 27, 2020 1:51AM1 -
Vevvev✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Jeremy, another issue is we want to drink blood but drinking blood hurts us. The new system was advertised as having us act more vampiric but a system that makes people wanna stay stage 1 puts us in a similar situation as on live. We're not drinking blood.... are we even really vampires?PC NA - Ceyanna Ashton - Breton Vampire MagDK8 -
LeHarrt91✭✭✭✭✭
✭The main issue for me is that with the additions of passive Brutality, Savagery and the addition of Major Berserk and Minor Courage, WW doesn't need cast anything additional to get these. Where as to get similar Buffs on Vampire you need to cast non vamp skills which just got 20% more expensive. And i understand they want you to build with mainly vamp skills but they dont provide the passives buffs/ debuffs that WW does.
PS NA
Have played all classes.
Warden Main2 -
robertthebard✭✭✭✭✭Ah, you two. Yes, I get it, you didn't want people to pick vampirism for the passives and you want to play a vampire class you have seen in other RPGs or whatnot. It doesn't matter. ZOS are pulling a 180 on vamps and people will not like that. It's the reality with such drastic changes.
As for the stage argument, aren't you contradicting yourself? On one hand, you preach for people to play as an "actual" vampire, but when it comes down to it, you advise not to actually progress to full vampire state? That just doesn't add up.
Well, wasn't really my point, anyway. I honestly can't tell how vamp will perform in the future. Neither can you, btw, the PTS is not the full game. And not nearly a week is not enough testing time. Nah, I'm simply explaining why people are mad and why they are rightfully so. That is all.
There's a lot of assumption there. Remember, don't assume, you make an ass out of u and me, except that, in this case, me isn't involved, because I don't care how you play your vampire, I don't play them at all, werewolves either. I just love reading all the drama behind "but they're going to make me play a vampire, instead of a (insert whatever class here) with free passives"..., all while claiming, "but it's not fair, I've been exploiting this hole in the build for x amount of time, and they shouldn't be allowed to patch those holes".1 -
Vanos444✭✭✭✭✭I think, they should reduce the cost of non vampire abilities at stage 1 by zero. That way, ppl wouldn't recommend to play as a Breton or redguard race due to cost reduction. Or be the DC faction race.
3 -
Glurin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭The main issue for me is that with the additions of passive Brutality, Savagery and the addition of Major Berserk and Minor Courage, WW doesn't need cast anything additional to get these. Where as to get similar Buffs on Vampire you need to cast non vamp skills which just got 20% more expensive. And i understand they want you to build with mainly vamp skills but they dont provide the passives buffs/ debuffs that WW does.
Frankly, the very fact that you can slot other abilities at stage four disproves the assertion that you're supposed to be all vampire abilities at that stage. The devs' goal was not to make a magicka werewolf. They just wanted vampirism to be more of an active choice than it's current implementation, which can basically be summed up as get it and forget it. A goal they may very well have undermined with that ability cost penalty."He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster...when you gaze long into the abyss the abyss also gazes into you..."3 -
Lord-Otto✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Vampirism has always been a bit like putting an accent on your character, except that accent is things like bad sunburn, aversion to fire, a liquid diet, etc. It has never, ever been about strictly adhering to a single, extremely narrow set of abilities. Even werewolves get more freedom than that, despite being all about the transformation into a beast. Vampires have always been a very versatile playstyle, able to be mages or warriors or thieves or whatever else. And no, not because they could just feed and be an almost-not-a-vampire. It's because the vampirism integrated into whatever you were already doing. It didn't ever overwrite it with some predefined, alien loadout and force you to do things that way.
As I've told you countless times before, the option to play as a "versatile" vampire that still utilizes elements of mages, warriors, thieves or what ever else are still available to you by playing at the lower stages. If you let these bizarre notions of not being a complete vampire (or what ever it is) keep you from doing that because you for some reason feel you must play as a stage 4 vampire then I can't help you.
Sometimes you have to bend with the wind or break.
Yup, called it. "You can be versatile as a vampire by just not being a vampire."
Again: and for what must be the 100th time now: you are still a Vampire at stage 1. It doesn't make no sense to me why you think a Vampire playing in stage 1 isn't a Vampire. It is!
Considering that blood drinking has always been one of the main things that vampires are known for, and that you can't do so without going past stage 1, I don't think that's the case. I want my vampires to act like vampires, but I can't because most of my characters are tanks. Mind you, I WANT to use the new abilities, but the fact that the cost increase includes stuff like blocking and ultimate means I won't be able to feed without screwing myself over. Forcing tank and healer vamps to starve themselves in order to be effective is just silly.
Of course you can.
Stage 1 Vampires can drain the life out of their opponents all day long.
Under the new system, using drain no longer advances your rank. It's a great change for tanks who like to use drain (of which I am one of). You won't have to worry about those nasty fire damage increases that used to come along with frequent use of drain as well. Taking 5% more fire damage is a lot better than taking 25% more fire damage, which is what drain tanks were forced to deal with before Greymoor.
You're so transparent, Jer. Everyone sees through your façade but you insist on keeping it up. For someone who claims to be ready for friendly discussions and be calm and mannered, you sure try to hammer your argument in.
Once again. People chose vampirism for the passives. They have done so since Morrowind. THERE IS NO VAMPIRE CLASS IN THE TES GAMES. Whatever your head canon is about how vampires should behave - it doesn't matter. There is a very clear precedence for how vamps work in Elder Scrolls.
And yes, the higher your stage used to be, the more vampiric you used to be. Advancing stage underlined the unique traits of a vampire. That is the big paradox in your thesis. You are telling us to behave more like vampires, but YOU are the one who is actually trying to weasel away from the vampires' unique traits.
And the quoted post proves it. The fire weakness has always been a thorn in your side, you said that yourself. So you don't want to BE a vampire, you are just looking for a couple re-skinned skills. But you don't actually wanna build around them, nonono. You just want the skills with no influence on your character's stats and traits. If the vampire skills were in the Psijic skill line, you would immediately take them and not care a single bit about being a vampire. It is exactly what you're accusing us of with the "vamp only for recovery" stuff. Just the other way round.
Anyways, this was my last attempt at explaining it to you. Take it or leave it, whatever. It's time to shift attention towards the PTS again.7 -
Lintashi✭✭✭✭✭Jeremy, please, explain me why, vampire tanks and healers should be weaker at tanking and healing than non- vampires? Let us say, that amount of nerf is irrelevant, why should it be there at all? I just do not understand, why being a vampire, makes me worse healer, than human. Can you provide reason, preferrably backed by lore for that? All I can find, is that vampires are supposed to be more dangerous the longer they live ( the more corrupted they become) and they become more dangerous, because of countless years of experience in spells and blade mastery. Every vampire in Tes lore was like that, so why exactly I should be worse tank or healer than human.4 -
Vanos444✭✭✭✭✭Jeremy, is there a point in being a vampire?!
For now, I can see that I must race change my Altmer Tankplar into a Stage 1 vampire breton.Edited by Vanos444 on April 27, 2020 4:44AM0 -
Paradisius✭✭✭✭Jeremy, please, explain me why, vampire tanks and healers should be weaker at tanking and healing than non- vampires? Let us say, that amount of nerf is irrelevant, why should it be there at all? I just do not understand, why being a vampire, makes me worse healer, than human. Can you provide reason, preferrably backed by lore for that? All I can find, is that vampires are supposed to be more dangerous the longer they live ( the more corrupted they become) and they become more dangerous, because of countless years of experience in spells and blade mastery. Every vampire in Tes lore was like that, so why exactly I should be worse tank or healer than human.
This is just what I was trying to get around earlier. Unfortunately I do not see them reworking the skill line to add more synergy with other roles directly, so all that could be hoped for is a change to the vampire detriments to let those at stage 1 not receive an ability cost detriment. That way a vampire stage 1 tank can be as good as a normal tank, with the added benefit of having access to vampire skills should they find the skills useful in certain content1 -
ElliottXO✭✭✭✭✭
"Tell me your build so I can let you know whether your opinions re: the impending changes to it are valid or not."xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »Nemesis7884 wrote: »Sure but a werewolf can still go into Human form and have not drawbacks. 20% increase 100% of the time is not good gameplay or build diversity.
And also have that juicy stam recovery just for having it slotted.
They need to drastically fix things and not box in Vampires to RPing and niche PvP builds but give it more diversity simple.
WW is so much the better option for builds with the changes they made to the puppers. The difference between the two is is quite unbalanced.
Anyone pushing otherwise just is biased towards vampires out of some other agenda. This is certainly not a concern with balance in the least.
c'est la vie
The 5% penalty at stage 1 is very manageable and does not lock Vampires into RPing and niche PvP builds. Everyone one of my Vampire builds prior to Greymoor survived just fine (in fact they were strengthened).
If anything, the Greymooor expansion will increase diversity among Vampires because it allows for more Vampire-centric builds that were not possible before, and without compromising the previous builds that were in place.
Nah, it is over roasted and needs lots of work.
A mere 5% ability increase is not going to lock Vampires into RPing and niche PvP builds Xmeow. I can tell you this from personal experience, because all of my previous builds have survived just fine. They just require you to lower your stage.
5% is not going to make or break any decent build.
And I can tell you from my experience that it is not how you’re making it out to be.
The penalties are too much and misguided. They need to be toned down simple.
Now note what I said, my experience okie.
Then note what you’re saying, your experiences and your builds you play. That doesn’t mean it is okie.
Who knows what your builds are or how you play....It is just your opinion.
ZOS needs to take everyones feedback that has been given the proper way and make their decisions from there.
What is the core issue for me....is that the penalties which most agree for vampires are too harsh. Especially compared with WW’
ZOS just needs to look it over and readjust it. Which is what the PTS is there to do, help tweak issues before going live. Nothing to go in circles about.
Most of the negative feedback is coming as a result of people trying to play builds that are not focused around using vampiric skills at stage 4. In that case, the feedback is not productive because it's a self-inflicted problem.
If you like, you can give me a rough outline of your character and the rotations you use and I'll go test it out for myself on the PTS and see if the 5% penalty truly does hinder it as much as you say. If i find that to be the case, I'll gladly retract my earlier statement. Because though you say it's my opinion (and you're right, I guess it is) it's very difficult for me to view my comment that a 5% ability cost penalty is not going to reduce every Vampire to either RPging or some niche PvP build as anything but fact.
You have zero self-awareness.
I never said anything about letting him know if his opinions were valid or not.
If you are going to quote me, then I would prefer you actually use my words...not put words in my mouth and pretend I said things I never did. So I think you are the one who could do with a bit of "self awareness".
I asked (politely I may add) about his build and rotations because I was interested to go test them out for myself to see. Because I have a hard time believing a 5% penalty could reduce any build to just RPing. But if it turns out I'm wrong and a 5% penalty truly does have such an impact I said I would happily retract the statement. Notice how what I actually said bears absolutely no resemblance to that smug quote you attributed to me.
Are you kidding? That's precisely what you did. I simply paraphrased your words in the hope that it would illustrate to you how absurd it sounded.
@xXMeowMeowXx said:...from my experience that it is not how you’re making it out to be. The penalties are too much and misguided...
...Now note what I said, my experience...
...What is the core issue for me....is that the penalties which most agree for vampires are too harsh...
Then you said:
She gave her opinion and made it a point to state it as an opinion, then you asked for her build so you could hop on the PTS and "fact check" said opinion. Whether or not you "asked politely" or if you wind up retracting your statement is irrelevant — the fact that you presume to be the arbiter of what does and does not hinder her build was in and of itself presumptuous and arrogant....give me a rough outline of your character and the rotations you use and I'll go test it out for myself on the PTS and see if the 5% penalty truly does hinder it as much as you say...
I also find your comments in this thread to be pretty ironic considering posts of your own such as this one:
"Cost reduction for me, but not for thee..."
Now I may be mistaken here, but I get the impression that you play mostly PVE, while a lot of the people you are disagreeing with clearly play PVP. If that is correct, then you are never going to see eye to eye with them when it comes to the question of sustain. So maybe you should stop telling them that they're "wrong" if you are unable to see things from their perspective.
The 5% cost increase and loss of 10% regen broke my magblade PVP build. I've spent the last week on the PTS trying to remedy it and no matter what I do, my build will be weaker because of these vampire changes. The 5% cost increase from NMA was bad enough, and I'm able to just front bar that. An additional 5% on my front bar, paired with a new 5% cost increase on my back bar (where my most expensive abilities are) along with the fact I'm losing the 10% regen bonus is a significant resource loss to me — and that's if I only stay at stage 1. Your opinion re: the viability of my build (or anyone else's for that matter) is, quite frankly, completely irrelevant. I don't understand why you feel the need to argue about it so vehemently.
I have great news. Your build is not broke, because you are not considering that all other passive perk vampires will get the same 'nerf'.
You are comparing your current build to your future build. But what you need to compare is your future build to other future builds.
The DPS numbers on the dummy won't give you a conclusion. And whatever small PVP sessions you did on PTS (if any) will also not give you the conclusion.
You need to relax and see what happens when the changes go live, and when the vast majority will participate in experimenting with the new changes.Edited by ElliottXO on April 27, 2020 5:06AM1 -
Nemesis7884✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭what i dont understand is why people constantly complain before they actually have tested anything - yes you might have to adapt and create a build around it to play a stage 4 vampire BUT THATS THE POINT - commit or dont and there are already PLENTY of videos and guides from content creators that show
- very interesting and viable builds
- that the cost increase is absolutely manageable
so how about testing things first before complaining?3 -
Canned_Apples✭✭✭✭✭
✭Canned_Apples wrote: »They should never base anything off of RP. The RP community is far smaller than the min-max/pvp/casual community.
Maybe 0.01% of people actually playf with “RP” skills.
The vampire skill line/rework- like all the other reworks/changes- are a bust.
Feedback is often ignored so.... yeah.
Because feedback =/= always good ideas. Players are players, they will all vote for broken things just because they want to abuse them, role of developer is to make things balanced. ZOS is not perfect in this matter, but few really is, and their ReVamp is made actually very good. It is very flexible and can be utilized in many ways. Vampires are no longer passive buffs for class, that's all. If you want to play vampire you will be stronger, if you picked vamp just to buff your class, sorry that's not going to happen anymore.Canned_Apples wrote: »They should never base anything off of RP. The RP community is far smaller than the min-max/pvp/casual community.
Maybe 0.01% of people actually play with “RP” skills.
The vampire skill line/rework- like all the other reworks/changes- are a bust.
Feedback is often ignored so.... yeah.
Because feedback =/= always good ideas. Players are players, they will all vote for broken things just because they want to abuse them, role of developer is to make things balanced. ZOS is not perfect in this matter, but few really is, and their ReVamp is made actually very good. It is very flexible and can be utilized in many ways. Vampires are no longer passive buffs for class, that's all. If you want to play vampire you will be stronger, if you picked vamp just to buff your class, sorry that's not going to happen anymore.
Um- dots?? And many many other things.
They don’t care.0 -
Opalblade✭✭✭Vampirism has always been a bit like putting an accent on your character, except that accent is things like bad sunburn, aversion to fire, a liquid diet, etc. It has never, ever been about strictly adhering to a single, extremely narrow set of abilities. Even werewolves get more freedom than that, despite being all about the transformation into a beast. Vampires have always been a very versatile playstyle, able to be mages or warriors or thieves or whatever else. And no, not because they could just feed and be an almost-not-a-vampire. It's because the vampirism integrated into whatever you were already doing. It didn't ever overwrite it with some predefined, alien loadout and force you to do things that way.
As I've told you countless times before, the option to play as a "versatile" vampire that still utilizes elements of mages, warriors, thieves or what ever else are still available to you by playing at the lower stages. If you let these bizarre notions of not being a complete vampire (or what ever it is) keep you from doing that because you for some reason feel you must play as a stage 4 vampire then I can't help you.
Sometimes you have to bend with the wind or break.
Yup, called it. "You can be versatile as a vampire by just not being a vampire."
Again: and for what must be the 100th time now: you are still a Vampire at stage 1. It doesn't make no sense to me why you think a Vampire playing in stage 1 isn't a Vampire. It is!
Considering that blood drinking has always been one of the main things that vampires are known for, and that you can't do so without going past stage 1, I don't think that's the case. I want my vampires to act like vampires, but I can't because most of my characters are tanks. Mind you, I WANT to use the new abilities, but the fact that the cost increase includes stuff like blocking and ultimate means I won't be able to feed without screwing myself over. Forcing tank and healer vamps to starve themselves in order to be effective is just silly.
Of course you can.
Stage 1 Vampires can drain the life out of their opponents all day long.
Under the new system, using drain no longer advances your rank. It's a great change for tanks who like to use drain (of which I am one of). You won't have to worry about those nasty fire damage increases that used to come along with frequent use of drain as well. Taking 5% more fire damage is a lot better than taking 25% more fire damage, which is what drain tanks were forced to deal with before Greymoor.
I wasn't talking about drain. I know that it exists and I even use it pretty frequently on one of my tanks. The entire reason I was looking forward to this update was because I thought I'd finally get to play my vampires like actual vampires. Maybe you're happy with sitting at one stage without ever feeding like on live, but I find it boring.1 -
RedFireDisco✭✭✭✭TX12001rwb17_ESO wrote: »Nemesis7884 wrote: »(to normal skills on stage 4) it forces people to either dedicate themselves to being a vampire or not - same as with werewolves... no just slapping on some passive benefits without truly being living as a vampire and also dedicating a character / rping to it and that is GOOD
less non lore friendly shallow min maxing and more dedication to a theme that comes with benefits and drawbacks
Forcing players to dedicate themselves to only being a vampire is objectively bad. Its a support set with only 1 direct damage attack.
Forcing players to play a specific role in a Role-Playing Game is bad you say...
Role-playing according to who?
I would hazard a guess that 99% of players are not role-playing.1 -
ZaroktheImmortal✭✭✭✭✭
✭robertthebard wrote: »
If players refuse to adapt and keep advancing to rank 4 on builds that it is obviously not intended for, that is just... well, I"ll be polite and say silly. Especially since there is no logical reason to do this. So it's not about me eating my cake and being happy It's about recognizing the need to adapt to changes instead of stubbornly and pointlessly ruining my build for no reason.
There you have it folks. This is all about his build. The rest of us can just go pound sand. The vampire skill line should be exclusively built for his vision and if you don't like it, well you don't have to use it so what's the problem?
So I've been following this debate for the last couple of pages, and I have a serious question:
Why is it ok to ridicule one poster for protecting their build whilst attempting to protect your own?
I mean, I get it, I do; "but I took Vampire so I could be OP w/out a lot of consequences, and now that's going away, so I'm mad", but the argument, at it's base, is exactly the same for both sides of this little debate: You're both looking at your own build, and naysaying the other behind what each one of you wants for it. I mean, from my standpoint, the consequences of vampirism should have applied from the very beginning, not late, and should have gotten worse as a character progressed. We're not talking Staff vs Daggers here, after all, we're talking fundamental changes to the character itself. Of course, that may have meant that vampire wouldn't be all that popular, and thus ZoS threw all the would be vamps a bone...
Vamps op? That boost to fire damage says otherwise. That was already enough of a pain. The boost to magika and stamina was nice but pretty much every dungeon has fire. I kind of like being a vamp just cause I like vampires plus I love the pale look. I'm probably one of the few who actually likes the vamp look but then I'm a horror fan. Plus it's kind of interesting on quests where that comes up like one in summerset where someone was saying how evil all vampires are and you tell them you're a vampire.2
