Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – April 9, 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EDT (22:00 UTC)
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – April 9, 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EDT (22:00 UTC)
Nobody will want to go past stage 1
-
Chilly-McFreeze✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Chilly-McFreeze 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...
You can't tank or heal at 5% skill cost increase? Or you mean it won't be FOM anymore?
If I wouldn't be a DK Tank who has Talons, I might be damn temped to slot that 5 second vampire AOE stun. That looks a bit OP for 2k magicka to be honest. You get another super low cost spamable, mist, good ultimate.
Yes, stage 4 might not be for the majority of the playerbase. Stage 1 on the other hand, I would argue most average joe's can't even tell the difference if there is a 5% cost increase.
I'm don't mean FotM. I mean it being a burden. Why should I debuff myself with a 5% cost increase?
You mean for tanking? The AoE Stun is only 2k at stage 4, means +20% on everything else. At stage 1 it's about 3k. Yes, cheap but it does nothing else. So I think Turn Evi is still better for that, yet alone for the group buffs. Also you don't need that vamp spam as tank.Chilly-McFreeze 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...
I don't see Healers and Tanks playing in Werewolf transformation either...
Vampire supposed to be for Magicka, what Werewolf is for Stamina.
On PTS? Seems so. Up until now it wasn't. Not in ESO and surely not in previous TES games. Others wrote enough about why that comparison is lacking, especially from a lore point of view as far as vamps go. Never saw spell slinging werewolfs. But "stamina vampires" isn't really a rare sight.
But the comparison is also lacking in general, as the whole point of WW is the transformation and the temporary third bar. While vamps are about augmenting your mortal skills, and not about debuffing you so heavily that you become so restricted that you won't use your normal skills. Beside that, for using only vamp skills the skill line isn't good enough.
Which harm would it cause to turn Blood for Blood into a skill that scales with your highest stat instead of only mag stats?
I know I repeat myself, but changing this and soften the cost increase would shut up most of the complains.
Fair point about the healers and tanks. Although I already saw posts about werewolf tanking with the new tormentor changes. Won't be meta anyway.
All in all it seems like wasted effort. The rework is a main selling point of the next chapter. Doing all the work so people feel the urge to not use it feels a bit off, don't you think? It's too restrictiv and not inclusive enough.Edited by Chilly-McFreeze on April 27, 2020 11:04AM7 -
biminirwb17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭So I tried the new Vampire on my existing MagBlade Vampire and so far I like it, (I do have 50k mag so regen is not really an issue) Funnel and Sap are great for health restoration while doing damage, mobility is insane, stun spamable gives you the 3 secs to evade and enter running invisible mode in pvp. The Ult is really an oh poo button, probably wont use it much.
Soloed a couple of easier dungeons, and I still have not got the skills levelled fully. So far so good I need more time to learn it.
1 -
Deathlord92✭✭✭✭✭
✭
Could you imagine the salt mine though 😈🤣🤣🤣As anyone tried feed on another player. Does it kill the player?
I have tried it on npc, they die 1 shot.
I have doubts that would actually work and it would probably have to be done in a PvP environment. Even if it did work, I can already see the tsunami of complaints on the horizon from the PvP forum about it. A guaranteed, ranged one shot kill that you can't do anything about unless you constantly spam reveal abilities behind you? Yeah, I don't think that one is gonna fly very well over there.
0 -
Vevvev✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭As anyone tried feed on another player. Does it kill the player?
I have tried it on npc, they die 1 shot.
It works exactly like the blade of woe so it does not effect players. This is both a blessing and a cursing. On the RP side of things now you won't get found out for being a vampire but you are killing the poor victim ((if you're a good vampire)). On the PVE side of things now you have one less target you have to deal with, but on the PVP side of things now you can't feed off other players. I used to do this on Live in PVP when my stages progressed farther than I wanted, and I spotted someone who was not moving all that much. I've also seen people using night blade cloaking or invisibility potions to maneuver behind their target and feed in combat. If you did it right it was a nice stun that could give your side an edge.PC NA - Ceyanna Ashton - Breton Vampire MagDK1 -
Vevvev✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »Latest update didn't mention player vampires at all.
I noticed that to...PC NA - Ceyanna Ashton - Breton Vampire MagDK0 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »Latest update didn't mention player vampires at all.
Starting with the second PTS patch is the one to really watch. It looks like they have roughly three days to work on things between the initial PTS drop and the first patch.XBox EU/NA:@ElsonsoJannus
PC NA/EU: @Elsonso
PSN NA/EU: @ElsonsoJannus
Total in-game hours: 11321
X/Twitter: ElsonsoJannus0 -
navystylz_ESO✭✭✭✭Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »
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.
It wasn't mandatory. But no one in their right mind wouldn't not be a vampire with negible penalitys for the extra regen. Mandatory and no reason not to take it are two different things.4 -
navystylz_ESO✭✭✭✭Chilly-McFreeze 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...
I don't see Healers and Tanks playing in Werewolf transformation either...
Vampire supposed to be for Magicka, what Werewolf is for Stamina.
Werewolf can now. Now that they can reliable taunt while in werewolf form.4 -
navystylz_ESO✭✭✭✭starkerealm 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.
Not that it matters, but 43.6% from Stage 4 and The Vampire Lord set. (Unless Vampire Lord was buffed on the PTS.)
It was changd in such a way no one will use it. You get much more reduction, but no increased damage and increased flame and ability cost. It just extends our vampire stage now, which is incredibly worthless and stupid. No one will use Vampire Lord.2 -
navystylz_ESO✭✭✭✭We're not in the same place now - because there is really no reason to pick Vampire at all now unless you plan on actually using their skills.
And that's fine. You should want to be a vampire to be a vampire. Not because you get buffs without having to worry about enough penalities. Like, seriously. If you don't want to play like a vampire, it's not a curse you should take. Period.3 -
navystylz_ESO✭✭✭✭darthgummibear_ESO 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.
Which is precisely why I'm told they took it away.
They didn't want people picking Vampire just for a passive. They want it to be an active skill line players use.
Except now people will take vampire for a whole skill line option with very little penalty. Right now it's easier and more beneficial to be a stage 1 vampire than a stage 4, unless you ABSOLUTELY MUST have those passives. There is a horrible design issue if it's better to fake vampire than commit.4 -
Glurin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »Latest update didn't mention player vampires at all.
I wouldn't worry too much just yet. Balance changes take a back seat to major bug fixes and there's still plenty of time before it goes live. Plus even if it does go live as is, they can and have decided in the past to make adjustments shortly afterword. It's not like a certain ability doing x amount of damage or costing x amount of magicka is set in stone once it goes live.
Now if the skill or set or whatever in question was one that required extensive work just to be something half way decent, then I'd be worried. But I don't think that's where we are here.Edited by Glurin on April 28, 2020 2:11AM"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..."0 -
Glurin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭navystylz_ESO wrote: »We're not in the same place now - because there is really no reason to pick Vampire at all now unless you plan on actually using their skills.
And that's fine. You should want to be a vampire to be a vampire. Not because you get buffs without having to worry about enough penalities. Like, seriously. If you don't want to play like a vampire, it's not a curse you should take. Period.
Eh, a lot of the friction around here is that some peoples' definition of "play like a vampire" extends no further than filling your bar with abilities labeled "vampire". In spirit I agree with you. If you don't want to be a vampire than don't be one. But I'm skeptical as to your meaning."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..."1 -
Darkstride✭✭darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »Latest update didn't mention player vampires at all.
I wouldn't worry too much just yet. Balance changes take a back seat to major bug fixes and there's still plenty of time before it goes live. Plus even if it does go live as is, they can and have decided in the past to make adjustments shortly afterword. It's not like a certain ability doing x amount of damage or costing x amount of magicka is set in stone once it goes live.
Now if the skill or set or whatever in question was one that required extensive work just to be something half way decent, then I'd be worried. But I don't think that's where we are here.
I want to be optimistic but I've been playing around a lot with vampire and it really does feel trapped in an imbalance between conflicting ideas:
1. Play vampire entirely as a vampire, you have increased ability costs on your other skills to reinforce this notion. It almost makes the vampire your "class" and your class abilities take the supporting role where you can afford them.
2. Vampire isn't a class, it's a supporting skill line, so there isn't a fully developed "kit" of abilities to efficiently function as a full vampire.
Playing as vampire seems sloppy to me. There really isn't a good balance and neither choice (full-vamp skills vs just vamp support skills) feels fluid to play. I'm hopeful, but it's a little disappointing given that this expansion is so vampire-centric and the skill line implementation still seems kinda "meh".Edited by Darkstride on April 28, 2020 2:35AM6 -
navystylz_ESO✭✭✭✭
No you can't. I could make a list of all the stuff you can't do solo. But honestly it's common sense.
You can't even make a "competitive" hybrid character in this game. Keep in mind I'm saying "competitive", yeah sure you can create a hybrid character but it wouldn't be competitive according to min/max statics.
You didn't even comprehend what he wrote. He said he knows he can't solo eDarkstride wrote: »darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »Latest update didn't mention player vampires at all.
I wouldn't worry too much just yet. Balance changes take a back seat to major bug fixes and there's still plenty of time before it goes live. Plus even if it does go live as is, they can and have decided in the past to make adjustments shortly afterword. It's not like a certain ability doing x amount of damage or costing x amount of magicka is set in stone once it goes live.
Now if the skill or set or whatever in question was one that required extensive work just to be something half way decent, then I'd be worried. But I don't think that's where we are here.
I want to be optimistic but I've been playing around a lot with vampire and it really does feel trapped in an imbalance between conflicting ideas:
1. Play vampire entirely as a vampire, you have increased ability costs on your other skills to reinforce this notion. It almost makes the vampire your "class" and your class abilities take the supporting role where you can afford them.
2. Vampire isn't a class, it's a supporting skill line, so there isn't a fully developed "kit" of abilities to efficiently function as a full vampire.
Playing as vampire seems sloppy to me. There really isn't a good balance and neither choice (full-vamp skills vs just vamp support skills) feels fluid to play. I'm hopeful, but it's a little disappointing given that this expansion is so vampire-centric and the skill line implementation still seems kinda "meh".
How did you support this playstyle? Sets, enchants, stage?
0 -
Glurin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Darkstride wrote: »darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »Latest update didn't mention player vampires at all.
I wouldn't worry too much just yet. Balance changes take a back seat to major bug fixes and there's still plenty of time before it goes live. Plus even if it does go live as is, they can and have decided in the past to make adjustments shortly afterword. It's not like a certain ability doing x amount of damage or costing x amount of magicka is set in stone once it goes live.
Now if the skill or set or whatever in question was one that required extensive work just to be something half way decent, then I'd be worried. But I don't think that's where we are here.
I want to be optimistic but I've been playing around a lot with vampire and it really does feel trapped in an imbalance between conflicting ideas:
1. Play vampire entirely as a vampire, you have increased ability costs on your other skills to reinforce this notion. It almost makes the vampire your "class" and your class abilities take the supporting role where you can afford them.
2. Vampire isn't a class, it's a supporting skill line, so there isn't a fully developed "kit" of abilities to efficiently function as a full vampire.
Playing as vampire seems sloppy to me. There really isn't a good balance and neither choice (full-vamp skills vs just vamp support skills) feels fluid to play. I'm hopeful, but it's a little disappointing given that this expansion is so vampire-centric and the skill line implementation still seems kinda "meh".
I don't actually think it's quite that much of a conflict really. People should be able to fill every slot on their character with vampire stuff if they want and still be successful. That's perfectly fine. But it is fundamentally more of a supporting role to your existing character, and always has been.
The problem is over correction in trying to solve the whole taking vampire for the regen thing. We don't want to force every single person playing a vampire into the same mold, which is what the cost increase might potentially be doing. In fact it even undermines it's own purpose when people are taking vampire for any of the active skills and then ignoring the rest of it."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..."2 -
Jeremy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »darthgummibear_ESO 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.
So you would be fine if ZOS keeps the new vampire as it is, but just gives 10% resource regen to everyone across the board?
No I'm saying adding the cost increase at all was overkill considering we had already lost the resource regen.darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »
You still have access to all of your active Vampire Skills at stage 1.
Feeding is only done for the sake of advancing stages. So even as a stage 4 vampire there really isn't much of a reason to go around frequently feeding to be honest... except for the sake of coolness I suppose. The new feed animation is quite awesome. But as a persuasive argument to suggest Stage 1 Vampires are somehow missing out big time on being Vampires, it falls flat. At least with me.
One of the things that people have been clamoring for in regards to vampires was for feeding to have a point, since most people would just get to stage 4 and forget that feeding even exists, which is basically what we have with the vampire changes if people won't want to progress past stage 1. Also, the coolest passive in the game requires vamp stage 4.
It seems silly to have put all this time and manpower into a huge rework of vampires in a vampire-centric expansion, only to have most of that work ignored by the bulk of people who play vampires(if they even choose to remain a vampire).
That's a fair point in regards to feeding.
Feeding actually has more of a point in live, since it is necessary for players to regularly feed in order to maintain lower stages if they used Vampire Skills. But I considered that more of an annoyance than anything else. So I'm not sorry to see it go.
I've always played Vampire because I enjoyed using their active skills in combat. That was the main draw for me. Running around biting NPCs can be fun, but it's not something I need (or even want) to be doing all the time.1 -
Jeremy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭navystylz_ESO wrote: »We're not in the same place now - because there is really no reason to pick Vampire at all now unless you plan on actually using their skills.
And that's fine. You should want to be a vampire to be a vampire. Not because you get buffs without having to worry about enough penalities. Like, seriously. If you don't want to play like a vampire, it's not a curse you should take. Period.
Yeah, I agree.
Vampire should be an active skill line for players who actually want to use Vampire skills. It was kind of silly when it was primarily just being used by everyone for a 10% regen buff. A lot of them (maybe even most) didn't even want to be Vampires in the first place and complained often on the forums about ways to hide it.
1 -
Jeremy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭navystylz_ESO wrote: »darthgummibear_ESO 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.
Which is precisely why I'm told they took it away.
They didn't want people picking Vampire just for a passive. They want it to be an active skill line players use.
Except now people will take vampire for a whole skill line option with very little penalty. Right now it's easier and more beneficial to be a stage 1 vampire than a stage 4, unless you ABSOLUTELY MUST have those passives. There is a horrible design issue if it's better to fake vampire than commit.
Maybe.
I would give it some time first and see what players come up with. I'm betting there are some really good stage 4 Vampire builds out there. But you might be right.Edited by Jeremy on April 28, 2020 3:12AM1 -
navystylz_ESO✭✭✭✭navystylz_ESO wrote: »darthgummibear_ESO 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.
Which is precisely why I'm told they took it away.
They didn't want people picking Vampire just for a passive. They want it to be an active skill line players use.
Except now people will take vampire for a whole skill line option with very little penalty. Right now it's easier and more beneficial to be a stage 1 vampire than a stage 4, unless you ABSOLUTELY MUST have those passives. There is a horrible design issue if it's better to fake vampire than commit.
Maybe.
I would give it some time first and see what players come up with. I'm betting there are some really good stage 4 Vampire builds out there. But you might be right.
Any stage 4 build would be better as a stage 1 build, unless you really need the passives. That's the issue right now. You're not really rewarded for being an "all in" vampire. And no, reduction in cost to abilities costs that don't even cost a lot to begin with does not acheive this. Quite the opposite, you're punished with more fire damage taken and more normal ability cost.5 -
Jeremy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭navystylz_ESO wrote: »navystylz_ESO wrote: »darthgummibear_ESO 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.
Which is precisely why I'm told they took it away.
They didn't want people picking Vampire just for a passive. They want it to be an active skill line players use.
Except now people will take vampire for a whole skill line option with very little penalty. Right now it's easier and more beneficial to be a stage 1 vampire than a stage 4, unless you ABSOLUTELY MUST have those passives. There is a horrible design issue if it's better to fake vampire than commit.
Maybe.
I would give it some time first and see what players come up with. I'm betting there are some really good stage 4 Vampire builds out there. But you might be right.
Any stage 4 build would be better as a stage 1 build, unless you really need the passives. That's the issue right now. You're not really rewarded for being an "all in" vampire. And no, reduction in cost to abilities costs that don't even cost a lot to begin with does not acheive this. Quite the opposite, you're punished with more fire damage taken and more normal ability cost.
Well like I said, you may be right in regards to stage 4 builds. All of my builds were better at stage 1. And not just in contrast to higher stages either. They were just better. The changes on the PTS was a very nice buff to combination builds that utilized both Vampiric and regular abilities (again; providing they stay at stage 1). And I believe those kinds of builds were very important for the developers to maintain. So I like how they gave players more control over which stage to play at so the penalties would not outweigh the benefits.
But I'm just not sure you are correct when you say any stage 4 build would be better in stage 1. If someone were to put together a build that focused exclusively (or nearly so) on just using Vampire Skills, it might be worthwhile. But I'm just theorizing at this point and not equipped to debate it. I'm going to wait and see what people can come up. I might even try to make one myself. I have a Nightblade I may can do something with.Edited by Jeremy on April 28, 2020 3:41AM0 -
Nagastani✭✭✭✭Again, another direct hit. Stam Vamps are done and maybe Vampirism is done for my Stam characters too.
This goes totally against "play your way" because again, I have to bend my build to play as a Vamp now, esp Stam build. That's not even considering the bulk of actual changes to Vamp, the cost increase prevents those changes from even being factored in.
So many game breaking, terrible decisions. Arena weapons are dead, Monster sets are dead (for most part), Stam Vamps are under water, healing and mitigation are under water. I'm just... I am reaching the point where I can no longer justify further participating in this game, esp the PvP scene with it's problems and now I'm losing all of my leverage to successfully compete with other players.
I am seriously seriously giving thought to leaving.5 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭This goes totally against "play your way" because...
That's not what that means. That's never been what that meant.
"Play your way," means that you can approach any content you want. If you want to focus on PvP, that's an option. If you want to focus on open world questing, that's an option. If you want to run group content, that's an option. If you want to build to endgame using crafted gear, you can do that.
However, "play your way," has never meant that you could fling random skills onto your bar and have an effective build off of that.
Your Stampire, right now, isn't a vampire, at least not thematically, it's a stam build that included vampirism for the passives. I know this, because only one of the current vampire active abilities is usable on a stam build, and that one is incredibly situational. So, no, this isn't a, "play your way," situation at all.3 -
Canned_Apples✭✭✭✭✭
✭They don’t want people to go vampire (period)
The cost increase and the lack of abilities/tools in its kit will make it impossible for you to sustain.
PvP? Forget about it.increased cost. Increase damage. No reliable heal and broken (not functioning) stun. Trolololol.6 -
Tessitura✭✭✭✭✭
So after playing a stamina vampire for a minute, I can't help but wonder how you figure this hit stamina harder? Stamina does not actually struggle that much here, sure I am not usually playing my stam toons a stage four on the pts, but I am still making it work and very effectively. How many of you have actually gone onto the pts to test things? I keep finding myself asking this because most of the people I talk to on the pts do not have these gripes, at least the ones that have helped me test things. A few of us have already come up with some builds that offset some of the cost and make use of the weapon power we get to balance out the potential dps loss. Believe it or not. stamina actually can make good use of a every ability in the vampires kit except for the spammable, but Dizzy out preforms it anyway, even with he cost increase, so I still would not use it.
And I just want you to know, a cheap sorce of 75% damage reduction on TOGGLE is amazing on stam. Mist form is so busted since stam regens while you are in it. It basically a free stam regen for stamina toons. Seriously, download the pts and go look for yourself.Edited by Tessitura on April 30, 2020 1:25AM2 -
Nova_J✭✭✭✭So after playing a stamina vampire for a minute, I can't help but wonder how you figure this hit stamina harder? Stamina does not actually struggle that much here, sure I am not usually playing my stam toons a stage four on the pts, but I am still making it work and very effectively. How many of you have actually gone onto the pts to test things? I keep finding myself asking this because most of the people I talk to on the pts do not have these gripes, at least the ones that have helped me test things. A few of us have already come up with some builds that offset some of the cost and make use of the weapon power we get to balance out the potential dps loss. Believe it or not. stamina actually can make good use of a every ability in the vampires kit except for the spammable, but Dizzy out preforms it anyway, even with he cost increase, so I still would not use it.
And I just want you to know, a cheap sorce of 75% damage reduction on TOGGLE is amazing on stam. Mist form is so busted since stam regens while you are in it. It basically a free stam regen for stamina toons. Seriously, download the pts and go look for yourself.
Lol what stage do you play at? 1 or 2?0 -
Paradisius✭✭✭✭Lol what stage do you play at? 1 or 2?
Actually from the videos Ive seen and through personal testing, Stage 2 is a perfect sweet spot for most people, Stage 2 unlocks strike from the shadows, has 20% vampire ability cost reduction, and 10% ability cost increase. So seeing Stage 2 Vampires running around isnt that wild of an idea (Stage 3 if you want undeath that badly) and with mist form being really cheap even at stage 2 it makes it a really enticing setup1 -
Vevvev✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Paradisius wrote: »
Actually from the videos Ive seen and through personal testing, Stage 2 is a perfect sweet spot for most people, Stage 2 unlocks strike from the shadows, has 20% vampire ability cost reduction, and 10% ability cost increase. So seeing Stage 2 Vampires running around isnt that wild of an idea (Stage 3 if you want undeath that badly) and with mist form being really cheap even at stage 2 it makes it a really enticing setup
These are becoming my findings to but that ability cost increase is very noticeable on a magDK, especially when you're put on the defensive and spamming things like Coagulating blood to stay alive. It doesn't feel good to play as a vampire with that ability cost increase on top of the other weaknesses vampires have, but its fun to play in Overland PVE. Just wish the primarily damage dealing ability was a ranged blood magic spell. Having to get close on a skill line that lacks gap closers is annoying..PC NA - Ceyanna Ashton - Breton Vampire MagDK0 -
Glurin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭starkerealm wrote: »This goes totally against "play your way" because...
That's not what that means. That's never been what that meant.
"Play your way," means that you can approach any content you want. If you want to focus on PvP, that's an option. If you want to focus on open world questing, that's an option. If you want to run group content, that's an option. If you want to build to endgame using crafted gear, you can do that.
However, "play your way," has never meant that you could fling random skills onto your bar and have an effective build off of that.
Uh, no. Sorry but that's completely wrong. "Play your way" doesn't mean choosing between PvP or group dungeons. That choice is just the game and is something basically every MMO has.
"Play your way" is in fact a whole lot closer to that random skill flinging thing. It's specifically in reference to the fact that you can build your character a thousand different ways and make it your own instead of being limited to picking from a very small handful of predesigned cookie cutters. This way you can approach any content you want however you want to approach it. That's what differentiates ESO from something like WoW."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..."7