Yeh, they haven't thought this through at all.
You sound surprised by that OP.
They are probably aware of what abilities are marked as aoe, you guys are just assuming they have no idea.
Did any of you actually read the whole post?
'After we complete the above tests, we may try other combinations of cooldown, cost, and regen values on AOE abilities. However, we need to run these tests first and then assess the data. We will then let everyone know what we found and how we will move forward. We will be very upfront, but please be aware that if these tests confirm our hypothesis, then chain-casting AOE abilities will no longer form the core of the ESO PvP experience in the way it has for the last few years. We would then go through each class and ensure that there are viable builds for each and make adjustments as necessary.'
The 3 seconds is not something thats set in stone. Yes changes to abilities will happen, they always happen and tbh im still waiting for that fabled class identity patch...
How do you Guys at ZOS expect reliable test results from the AOE changes when the majority of class skills will be affected by the current ruleset?
This is only from magica perspective not counting ultimates:
bolded = burst defense mechanic affected
italic= class spammable affected
striked = 50% or more of offensive toolkit affected
Necromancer: 13 out of 15 class skills affected
Templar: 11 out of 15 class skills affected
Sorcerer: 10 out of 15 class skills affected
Dragonknight: 8 out of 15 class skills affected
Warden: 8 out of 15 class skills affected
Nightblade: 4 out of 15 class skills affected
Restoration staff: 5 out of 5 skills affected.
Destruction staff: 2 ouf of 5 skills affected.
Imo any class that is bolded will be flatout unplayable as their main defense skill(s) gets partly disabled - which can´t be substituted for in any way as EVERY restoration staff skill will also match aoe criteria.
Then you´re left with DK and NB - of which one still is impaired offensively quite a bit depending on skill choices.
In the end you´re left with one class being remotely playable. How to you expect a test with reliable results when 5 out of 6 magica classes flatout won´t work and most likely people will not play as a result?
They are probably aware of what abilities are marked as aoe, you guys are just assuming they have no idea.
Did any of you actually read the whole post?
'After we complete the above tests, we may try other combinations of cooldown, cost, and regen values on AOE abilities. However, we need to run these tests first and then assess the data. We will then let everyone know what we found and how we will move forward. We will be very upfront, but please be aware that if these tests confirm our hypothesis, then chain-casting AOE abilities will no longer form the core of the ESO PvP experience in the way it has for the last few years. We would then go through each class and ensure that there are viable builds for each and make adjustments as necessary.'
The 3 seconds is not something thats set in stone. Yes changes to abilities will happen, they always happen and tbh im still waiting for that fabled class identity patch...
It´s like you didn´t read my post. I´ve bolded the important part.
I´m asking how they expect reliable test results when classes get partly or almost entirely disabled to the point where ppl won´t be able to play.
As in: The implication on gameplay are so enormous that i question the accuracy or relevance of the tests results.
If people can´t use 70% their abilities normally ofc the game will run better. With key abilities being disabled most people won´t even show up - which will also make the game run better.
Not even going into the argument adressing the rest of the unbolded dev statement - that the needed adjustments to skills to compensate classes would be MASSIVE and ZOS doesn´t have a history of making needed changes in a timely fashion.
If sth remotely resembling any of the suggested mechanics would go live and the needed balance changes would come in the usual 3 6 or 9 months ZOS timeframe delay the games open pvp would be dead by the time things get adjusted.
Lughlongarm wrote: »How do you Guys at ZOS expect reliable test results from the AOE changes when the majority of class skills will be affected by the current ruleset?
This is only from magica perspective not counting ultimates:
bolded = burst defense mechanic affected
italic= class spammable affected
striked = 50% or more of offensive toolkit affected
Necromancer: 13 out of 15 class skills affected
Templar: 11 out of 15 class skills affected
Sorcerer: 10 out of 15 class skills affected
Dragonknight: 8 out of 15 class skills affected
Warden: 8 out of 15 class skills affected
Nightblade: 4 out of 15 class skills affected
Restoration staff: 5 out of 5 skills affected.
Destruction staff: 2 ouf of 5 skills affected.
Imo any class that is bolded will be flatout unplayable as their main defense skill(s) gets partly disabled - which can´t be substituted for in any way as EVERY restoration staff skill will also match aoe criteria.
Then you´re left with DK and NB - of which one still is impaired offensively quite a bit depending on skill choices.
In the end you´re left with one class being remotely playable. How to you expect a test with reliable results when 5 out of 6 magica classes flatout won´t work and most likely people will not play as a result?
They probably expect players to adjust for the sake of testing. As a Warden main I can think about ways to be viable even with the restrictions. Not sure I will invest time in getting the gear needed though.
Lughlongarm wrote: »How do you Guys at ZOS expect reliable test results from the AOE changes when the majority of class skills will be affected by the current ruleset?
This is only from magica perspective not counting ultimates:
bolded = burst defense mechanic affected
italic= class spammable affected
striked = 50% or more of offensive toolkit affected
Necromancer: 13 out of 15 class skills affected
Templar: 11 out of 15 class skills affected
Sorcerer: 10 out of 15 class skills affected
Dragonknight: 8 out of 15 class skills affected
Warden: 8 out of 15 class skills affected
Nightblade: 4 out of 15 class skills affected
Restoration staff: 5 out of 5 skills affected.
Destruction staff: 2 ouf of 5 skills affected.
Imo any class that is bolded will be flatout unplayable as their main defense skill(s) gets partly disabled - which can´t be substituted for in any way as EVERY restoration staff skill will also match aoe criteria.
Then you´re left with DK and NB - of which one still is impaired offensively quite a bit depending on skill choices.
In the end you´re left with one class being remotely playable. How to you expect a test with reliable results when 5 out of 6 magica classes flatout won´t work and most likely people will not play as a result?
They probably expect players to adjust for the sake of testing. As a Warden main I can think about ways to be viable even with the restrictions. Not sure I will invest time in getting the gear needed though.
But thats bring question of testing result again. Obviously people will try to slot single target skills but then what results test suppose to show when those who use aoe will gut themselves and stop use it - obviously perfomance increase but only for reason that people will stop even trying to use aoe, not coz treatment improved aoe.
Lughlongarm wrote: »How do you Guys at ZOS expect reliable test results from the AOE changes when the majority of class skills will be affected by the current ruleset?
This is only from magica perspective not counting ultimates:
bolded = burst defense mechanic affected
italic= class spammable affected
striked = 50% or more of offensive toolkit affected
Necromancer: 13 out of 15 class skills affected
Templar: 11 out of 15 class skills affected
Sorcerer: 10 out of 15 class skills affected
Dragonknight: 8 out of 15 class skills affected
Warden: 8 out of 15 class skills affected
Nightblade: 4 out of 15 class skills affected
Restoration staff: 5 out of 5 skills affected.
Destruction staff: 2 ouf of 5 skills affected.
Imo any class that is bolded will be flatout unplayable as their main defense skill(s) gets partly disabled - which can´t be substituted for in any way as EVERY restoration staff skill will also match aoe criteria.
Then you´re left with DK and NB - of which one still is impaired offensively quite a bit depending on skill choices.
In the end you´re left with one class being remotely playable. How to you expect a test with reliable results when 5 out of 6 magica classes flatout won´t work and most likely people will not play as a result?
They probably expect players to adjust for the sake of testing. As a Warden main I can think about ways to be viable even with the restrictions. Not sure I will invest time in getting the gear needed though.
But thats bring question of testing result again. Obviously people will try to slot single target skills but then what results test suppose to show when those who use aoe will gut themselves and stop use it - obviously perfomance increase but only for reason that people will stop even trying to use aoe, not coz treatment improved aoe.
They are probably aware of what abilities are marked as aoe, you guys are just assuming they have no idea.
Did any of you actually read the whole post?
'After we complete the above tests, we may try other combinations of cooldown, cost, and regen values on AOE abilities. However, we need to run these tests first and then assess the data. We will then let everyone know what we found and how we will move forward. We will be very upfront, but please be aware that if these tests confirm our hypothesis, then chain-casting AOE abilities will no longer form the core of the ESO PvP experience in the way it has for the last few years. We would then go through each class and ensure that there are viable builds for each and make adjustments as necessary.'
The 3 seconds is not something thats set in stone. Yes changes to abilities will happen, they always happen and tbh im still waiting for that fabled class identity patch...
It´s like you didn´t read my post. I´ve bolded the important part.
I´m asking how they expect reliable test results when classes get partly or almost entirely disabled to the point where ppl won´t be able to play.
As in: The implication on gameplay are so enormous that i question the accuracy or relevance of the tests results.
If people can´t use 70% their abilities normally ofc the game will run better. With key abilities being disabled most people won´t even show up - which will also make the game run better.
Not even going into the argument adressing the rest of the unbolded dev statement - that the needed adjustments to skills to compensate classes would be MASSIVE and ZOS doesn´t have a history of making needed changes in a timely fashion.
If sth remotely resembling any of the suggested mechanics would go live and the needed balance changes would come in the usual 3 6 or 9 months ZOS timeframe delay the games open pvp would be dead by the time things get adjusted.
You are just assuming they don't know about what abilities are listed as aoe and you think they are going to release it without making any changes prior. They might, who knows, you don't that's for sure.
They are probably aware of what abilities are marked as aoe, you guys are just assuming they have no idea.
Did any of you actually read the whole post?
'After we complete the above tests, we may try other combinations of cooldown, cost, and regen values on AOE abilities. However, we need to run these tests first and then assess the data. We will then let everyone know what we found and how we will move forward. We will be very upfront, but please be aware that if these tests confirm our hypothesis, then chain-casting AOE abilities will no longer form the core of the ESO PvP experience in the way it has for the last few years. We would then go through each class and ensure that there are viable builds for each and make adjustments as necessary.'
The 3 seconds is not something thats set in stone. Yes changes to abilities will happen, they always happen and tbh im still waiting for that fabled class identity patch...
It´s like you didn´t read my post. I´ve bolded the important part.
I´m asking how they expect reliable test results when classes get partly or almost entirely disabled to the point where ppl won´t be able to play.
As in: The implication on gameplay are so enormous that i question the accuracy or relevance of the tests results.
If people can´t use 70% their abilities normally ofc the game will run better. With key abilities being disabled most people won´t even show up - which will also make the game run better.
Not even going into the argument adressing the rest of the unbolded dev statement - that the needed adjustments to skills to compensate classes would be MASSIVE and ZOS doesn´t have a history of making needed changes in a timely fashion.
If sth remotely resembling any of the suggested mechanics would go live and the needed balance changes would come in the usual 3 6 or 9 months ZOS timeframe delay the games open pvp would be dead by the time things get adjusted.
You are just assuming they don't know about what abilities are listed as aoe and you think they are going to release it without making any changes prior. They might, who knows, you don't that's for sure.
Except they said themselves they will not make those adjustments prior to the tests in the very paragraph you quoted yourself.
I´ll highlight it again for you:
"if these tests confirm our hypothesis, then chain-casting AOE abilities will no longer form the core of the ESO PvP experience in the way it has for the last few years. We would then go through each class and ensure that there are viable builds for each and make adjustments as necessary."
Pretty easy to understand - no? If hypothesis is confirmed THEN changes will be made.
Let me know if you need any more help
Meanwhile i´ll continue questioning if doing a test in a flawed environment they know needs adjustment has any value to confirm a hypothesis in the first place.
They are probably aware of what abilities are marked as aoe, you guys are just assuming they have no idea.
Did any of you actually read the whole post?
'After we complete the above tests, we may try other combinations of cooldown, cost, and regen values on AOE abilities. However, we need to run these tests first and then assess the data. We will then let everyone know what we found and how we will move forward. We will be very upfront, but please be aware that if these tests confirm our hypothesis, then chain-casting AOE abilities will no longer form the core of the ESO PvP experience in the way it has for the last few years. We would then go through each class and ensure that there are viable builds for each and make adjustments as necessary.'
The 3 seconds is not something thats set in stone. Yes changes to abilities will happen, they always happen and tbh im still waiting for that fabled class identity patch...
It´s like you didn´t read my post. I´ve bolded the important part.
I´m asking how they expect reliable test results when classes get partly or almost entirely disabled to the point where ppl won´t be able to play.
As in: The implication on gameplay are so enormous that i question the accuracy or relevance of the tests results.
If people can´t use 70% their abilities normally ofc the game will run better. With key abilities being disabled most people won´t even show up - which will also make the game run better.
Not even going into the argument adressing the rest of the unbolded dev statement - that the needed adjustments to skills to compensate classes would be MASSIVE and ZOS doesn´t have a history of making needed changes in a timely fashion.
If sth remotely resembling any of the suggested mechanics would go live and the needed balance changes would come in the usual 3 6 or 9 months ZOS timeframe delay the games open pvp would be dead by the time things get adjusted.
You are just assuming they don't know about what abilities are listed as aoe and you think they are going to release it without making any changes prior. They might, who knows, you don't that's for sure.
Except they said themselves they will not make those adjustments prior to the tests in the very paragraph you quoted yourself.
I´ll highlight it again for you:
"if these tests confirm our hypothesis, then chain-casting AOE abilities will no longer form the core of the ESO PvP experience in the way it has for the last few years. We would then go through each class and ensure that there are viable builds for each and make adjustments as necessary."
Pretty easy to understand - no? If hypothesis is confirmed THEN changes will be made.
Let me know if you need any more help
Meanwhile i´ll continue questioning if doing a test in a flawed environment they know needs adjustment has any value to confirm a hypothesis in the first place.
'The code for these changes will be going into today’s PTS patch, and we will be running some basic tests throughout the day on Tuesday in Cyrodiil to ensure we’re able to make the above changes without requiring any maintenance or downtime.'
This right here, you know this means there may very well be changes before the tests right.
The problem i have is with your 'flawed' environment, you assumed it would be done as is because you didn't fully read or comprehend what was going on.
There will be a lot of people in cyro during the test phases, much more than you would ever get on PTS so its best done on pts.
JayKwellen wrote: »@catnamedwill will they though?
As far as I know even cloak has an aoe component too in that it does an area check when used, does it not? If this test doesn't just factor in active AoE abilities but also includes all abilities which have any area effects at all, that's huge. Even single target abilities like rapid regen and healing ward still have an area component in that the abiliy scans everyone in the area before the server decides where the ability should go. Cloak itself checks the surrounding area for all players sending incoming damage so it knows what projectiles need to be mitigated. These aren't AoEs in the traditional sense everyone thinks of, but they're still abilities that interact with the players in the area around them.
If in fact these changes include every ability which has any area effect, nightblades won't be safe either. Magblades won't be able to reliably use cloak or heal, so you might as well just delete them from the game. Stamblades, while they would fare better, would still be very negatively effected by this too if they use cloak.
How do you Guys at ZOS expect reliable test results from the AOE changes when the majority of class skills will be affected by the current ruleset?
How do you Guys at ZOS expect reliable test results from the AOE changes when the majority of class skills will be affected by the current ruleset?
This is only from magica perspective not counting ultimates:
bolded = burst defense mechanic affected
italic= class spammable affected
striked = 50% or more of offensive toolkit affected
Necromancer: 13 out of 15 class skills affected
Templar: 11 out of 15 class skills affected
Sorcerer: 10 out of 15 class skills affected
Dragonknight: 8 out of 15 class skills affected
Warden: 8 out of 15 class skills affected
Nightblade: 4 out of 15 class skills affected
Restoration staff: 5 out of 5 skills affected.
Destruction staff: 2 ouf of 5 skills affected.
Imo any class that is bolded will be flatout unplayable as their main defense skill(s) gets partly disabled - which can´t be substituted for in any way as EVERY restoration staff skill will also match aoe criteria.
Then you´re left with DK and NB - of which one still is impaired offensively quite a bit depending on skill choices.
In the end you´re left with one class being remotely playable. How to you expect a test with reliable results when 5 out of 6 magica classes flatout won´t work and most likely people will not play as a result?
Necromancer: 13 out of 15 class skills affected
Templar: 11 out of 15 class skills affected
Sorcerer: 10 out of 15 class skills affected
Dragonknight: 8 out of 15 class skills affected
Warden: 8 out of 15 class skills affected
Nightblade: 4 out of 15 class skills affected
Restoration staff: 5 out of 5 skills affected.
Destruction staff: 2 ouf of 5 skills affected.
I think people are jumping to conclusions way to much.
This aoe change seems temporary and extreme to see if it effects performance.
Similar to turning off the ac in a car on a very hot day, to see if the engine still sounds labored. It’s not sustainable, but it helps pinpoint where the problem is.
This appears to be an experiment to see if the server issues are from aoes. If that is the issue, then they will go from there. If not, then there is nothing to worry about.
Let them see if this is the cause of lag, then debate what the solution should be.
I think people are jumping to conclusions way to much.
This aoe change seems temporary and extreme to see if it effects performance.
Similar to turning off the ac in a car on a very hot day, to see if the engine still sounds labored. It’s not sustainable, but it helps pinpoint where the problem is.
This appears to be an experiment to see if the server issues are from aoes. If that is the issue, then they will go from there. If not, then there is nothing to worry about.
Let them see if this is the cause of lag, then debate what the solution should be.
I agree totally. I have been designing and testing software for 20+ years. Initial testing often includes very broad strokes before you can narrow down precise areas of trouble for efficient solutions. Instead of trying to poke holes in their methodology, maybe we should give them the benefit of the doubt and assist them as much as possible. After all, this is a testing phase towards a solution of PVP performance. At least they are trying.