Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
PTS: AoE Ability Cap 6 Targets Max
-
GossiTheDog✭✭✭✭✭I'm in support of this change. People are spamming AoE to win (including zergs).0 -
prana33b14_ESO✭✭✭GossiTheDog wrote: »I'm in support of this change. People are spamming AoE to win (including zergs).
This same qq was in Warhammer from the bads.
" OMG Bright Wizard runs up to me and sets off a pbaoe stun which I had at least 3 or 4 seconds to react to avoid but then my zerg got melted because we're bad and didn't cc him or move away from him. Nerf AOE!!!!!!!!"
It's called moving away from aoe and not sucking. Now, zergs will group up in clusters and your aoe spells may hit 1 person one time and another the next time. Completely pointless. You will be steamrolled. The only thing this game has over GW2 now at the moment is the bigger map for small groups but they will be forced to avoid zergs instead of creating bottlenecks and wiping them.
Edited by prana33b14_ESO on April 26, 2014 3:18PM0 -
Holycannoli✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Anyone else think it's ass backwards that the counter to AOE is to stack together rather than spread out? Because that's what this PTS change does.
If this change is in reaction to the vampire ultimate then change the ultimate. A cap of 6 is entirely too low and makes a lot of skills near useless now, like lightning flood (morph of lightning splash). Why bother with increased radius if you can only hit a measly 6 targets? That's only one example.
It's only on PTS so there's time for them to change it.3 -
tw1jaysin✭✭✭At least we can be thankful they did not change aoe skills to do damage based on the amount of players being hit cause then the tactic would be to clump because the more players hit by the skill, the less damage is done to each player. So....careful what you wish for, cause the aoe issue does need to be addressed and there are far more painful ways they can go about changing it. Just remember that.
Really? The cap makes it even more effective. Clump together because their AoE can only hit 6 of us.Edited by tw1jaysin on April 26, 2014 3:25PM1 -
RaZaddha✭✭✭Ok, guys, lesson number one of balancing. If you think AoEs are OP you NERF THE AOE IN QUESTION, what you don't do is COMPLETELY CHANGE HOW THEY WORK. Look at GW2, ask any vet why stacking is so important, ask any vet why a zerg death ball is more effective than spreading out. It simply is due to the fact that since it can only hit 5 people, no 2 AoE will hit the same target, so, the more people the more the chance that all aoe damage will be spread out evenly across everyone, making it easier to heal instead of bursting people one-by-one.Edited by RaZaddha on April 26, 2014 3:43PM1 -
South_of_Heaven✭✭✭A representing poll showed that only 1/11 agreed with this change. It is also common knowledge that games which did that ruined their own pvp. I don't think they are stupid enough to make this change... are they?1 -
High_King_HaraldSoul ShrivenWhy on God's green earth would anyone think that implementing a 6 target cap in pvp on aoe is a good idea, I could understand maybe, and a huge maybe, changing radius' of individual moves or mana/ult/stam costs, or even dmg layers based on distance from caster, but a target cap seems like an easy way out for zenimax so that they don't have to assign programming groups to class balancing changes on classes abilities and will make the game suffer.
I'm not sure why i should subscribe for 15/m for solo pve and zerg v zerg pvp I can just go play skyrim or c.o.d. if i wanted to do that.
Key Points and issues with the game direction since launch;
*Yes there are group dungeons, but how lucrative are those and re-playable?
*I'm not in the PTS so I can't say how much strategy goes into the raids so my group pve argument is lacking, but still has valid points.
*You can nullify aoe currently even if you are zerg just be smart and don't hug your pug friend, position yourselves, don't get bottlenecked, or maybe get some focus target classes going.
*I can't level with my friend effectively if they zone out every 5min when we complete quests at different times or if i've beat a mini boss fight previously and they need assistance.
*Public dungeons, don't even get me started on that mess, the problem here for me is why the things even exist, with the removal of boss kills as a requirement for completion it's just an area to stealth through and grab the skyshard, no exp, maybe higher drop tables on higher rarity items, but other than that useless. So basically it's even more bottable as well since now you'll have roaming bot chains going for items without having to level out of the instance. Great solution nearly every change here since launch has been counter to the general leveling players time and benefit.
So what's to keep me paying for ESO if I can't form a small band and highly organized group in pvp to interrupt another alliances zerg? I don't see a reason to pay to play solo or be another figure in a fight where it just happened the other team had 10 more guys than us.
*edit
Also where is the polling on these game changing proposals don't they want to know where their community stands?
Edited by High_King_Harald on April 26, 2014 4:00PM1 -
Nothing to do with PvP but this will have a serious impact on my DK tanks ability to gather up large pulls in instanced dungeons.0
-
ThreeEyedCrow✭✭✭A lot of good posts in this thread.
I have to agree 100% with just about everyone's reasons for why there should NOT be a cap on AoE damage.
Please develop this game into the best tactical and strategy PvP MMO. Don't let it become a brainless bigger numbers zerg wins.V12 Corporal
Victoria Concordia Crescit2 -
Except that its not the answer you'd get from a GW2 veteran.Look at GW2, ask any vet why stacking is so important, ask any vet why a zerg death ball is more effective than spreading out. It simply is due to the fact that since it can only hit 5 people, no 2 AoE will hit the same target, so, the more people the more the chance that all aoe damage will be spread out evenly across everyone, making it easier to heal instead of bursting people one-by-one.
Do you know how ~40 man Piken Square pug zergs where able to beat a ~20 man Red Guard guild group (well, after they left the server and before they returned)? It certainly wasnt unorganized melee train stacking. That would cause an instant wipe as 40 people was reduced to 20 people in about 3 seconds followed by a hilarious display of retreating easy pickings. Nope, the solution was stupidly simple - scatter. Break apart apart the zerg. Only give their melee train a limited amount of viable targets. The scattered forces then focused on bringing down the tail, one by one until enough momentum was gained to actually kill them. Moaing Sacrx always helped of course.
Your so called "zerg death ball" (ie a melee train) assumes an equal or bigger "zerg death ball" target or its not really effective. Huh, imagine that? In other words, they generally cancel each other out and AoE is on equal terms. When we go to extreme differences, the reason 5 people die to 50 people isnt so much because the AoE cap is working against the 5 peeps - its because of the uncapped damage that 5 people can recieve from 50 people.
The AoE cap is only a small part of why GW2 metagame is how it is. Most of the reason zergs rule it is because of the downed state. Another major part of it is because of the way skills work together with blasting in combo fields.
But anyway, if ZoS has implemented the change, you can probably be sure they wont backtrack on it, lol. GW2 may not have a better metagame with it, but it did improve the fluidity of the gameplay considerably. I remember the good old days when 20vs20 was nearly unplayable due to 2-10s skill lag. GW2 WvW today is decently smooth with 50vs50vs50 (well, except inside Stonemist).
In other words, the gain in network performance far outweigh the petty squabbles of a few people on whether the AoE cap should exist or not. 90% of the playerbase probably wont even notice such a change.
But hey, maybe miracles can happen and they decide not to do with. Who knows.Edited by murklor007neb18_ESO on April 26, 2014 5:08PM0 -
ThreeEyedCrow✭✭✭
To be honest, two people killing a zerg due to uncapped aoe abilties does not skilled play make.
Except two people can't kill a zerg due solely to "uncapped aoe abilities".
I see dozens of small groups every day take out V10 AOE soloists. Only time its tough is when one is the Emperor with the insane Emp buffs.
If the "zerg" had tactics they wouldn't be taken down by two people. a group of 30 disorganized level 10-30s shouldn't have a chance against two coordinated and skilled v10s IMO.
Also you referred to collecting data previously. Well, if the data collected is corrupted then its useless.
Right now a lot of things are bugged so the data collected is not even an accurate reflection of what the meta would be if all the bugs were fixed first.
Fix the bugs first then collect data before implementing too many gameplay changes.
That's the only way to know if its working as intended.
Edited by ThreeEyedCrow on April 26, 2014 5:09PMV12 Corporal
Victoria Concordia Crescit0 -
Dominulf✭✭✭Taking some time to think about this.Edited by Dominulf on April 26, 2014 5:14PMThe Elder Scrolls Online - Where the best spells are AoEs and the strongest weapon is a Shield!
"I used to be the most beloved roleplaying series of a generation... but then I took $14.99/mo to the knee."0 -
ThreeEyedCrow✭✭✭I'll just give one big example of how bugs have affected the meta and why fixing bugs first should take place before any nerfs or gameplay changes:
Werewolves.
Due to the cumulative effect of small bugs (Cyrodiil random ulti points loss bug, WW transform bugged, Pack Leader morph bugged, WW passives bugged), Werewolves are virtually unplayable in PVP.
This was clearly not what was intended. WW were not meant to be completely useless and absent from PVP. But due to the bugs , and I am a Legionary who spent all my V1-V2 questing in Cyrodiil over a week while PvP'ing in small and large scale, I have yet to even see a single WW in Cyrodiil from any faction. When I was a WW I tried for a week to use it in PVP but due to the WW transform bug and the random ulti loss bug, etc I wasn't even able to use it once in a pvp situation.
Based on how strong WW were in PVP in Beta, I don't think the intention was for WW to be completely absent from any scale pvp in Cyrodiil.
WW have special mechanics that strengthen them from "packs" and they had very strong single target damage in beta. It certainly seems possible that WW were one intended counter to a single player spamming AoE. Werewolves , from what it looks like they were designed to do, are a hard counter to an AoE caster. They are fast and do a lot of single target damage. Even in a small pack (which is currently not even possible) they seem designed to take out some of the builds that low level zergs seem to have issues with.
Let's get the bugs fixed and get the skills and skill lines that are currently not working correctly, working correctly and then look at the data. Looking at data from bugged skills to then decide which things to nerf or change is not a good strategy.
Fix the bugs first.
Let knowledge and tactics seep down from the most organized guilds and players.
See how the meta develops then when skills work correctly, then consider game play changes.
Seems the most rational approach to me.Edited by ThreeEyedCrow on April 26, 2014 5:35PMV12 Corporal
Victoria Concordia Crescit2 -
Oblongship✭✭✭✭Currently the poll is 1440 Against this change and 134 For this change.
I hope ZOS is taking notice of this...
Clearly the players don't want this as its fix.0 -
clocksstoppe✭✭✭✭✭
✭can i please get a skill points refund for my inhale ability(and any other aoes for that matter)?
I shouldnt have to pay for a full respec if you destroy staple abilities ive been using.2 -
Soliduparrow✭✭✭Why would you make it so that the server decides who gets hit? Why is anyone even playing if your server is just going to make all the decisions for us? If the server wants to play the game so bad he should buy his own copy and stop hijacking my game.1
-
Asava✭✭✭I'm no mental giant but even I know that if it's pulsing gtfo out of it. That's how I avoid AoE. Now you lemmings that just stand in it feed me AP so I thank you.1
-
Natjur✭✭✭✭✭
✭This was done to fix the 'immortal clump zergs in PVP (turtle with enought AOE healers that nothing could stop them)
It also has to be done before the 12+ 'raids' can be added, or again, the 'immoral clump' in raids would un-killable.
Yes its means AOE farming will be a bit more limited and good AOE PVP group can not longer get a killing 1 to 10 ratio. But they need to 'balance' things and we are playing there game.
So yes, its a shame, but most of us knew this was going to happen.
0 -
Vicodine✭✭✭Needed change, bad implementation.
I think it's unreal for an AoE ability to hit only a portion of people standing directly in the AoE. Really. That's the whole point of AoE. Hit everything in that AREA.
I remember, from many many years playing the now long-dead-to-me MMO, reading plenty of patch notes that stated a clear and, in my point of view, reasonable way to cap AoE.
The final solution: Do not cap the number of targets the AoE can hit. Cap the damage the AoE can do.
Lets take the implementation right now : aoe hits 6 targets. No more.
Now, if the AoE would hit ALL of the target, but scale down the damage to individual targets so that is is equal to the damage it would do to 6 targets, the word AoE would not lose it's meaning. And would be as destructive when used by a coordinated group.
I think WoW used soft damage cap of 12 targets, then scaled down.
tl;dr; calculation time
AoE, 200 damage per target:
1..6 targets : 200 damage per target. Max damage is 6x200 = 1200
7 targets : 1200 damage total. Damage per target: 171
8 targets: 1200 damage total. Damage per target: 150
....
12 targets: 1200 damage total, 100 damage per target.
....
24 targets: 1200 damage total. 50 damage per target.
Those are in no way real numbers, just to give you a hint that it could work.Edited by Vicodine on April 28, 2014 3:15AMThaometh V16 Altmer Templar AD/EU
Thaometh Ashbringer V10Altmer Dragonknight AD/EU0 -
blackwolf7✭✭✭cvghosteb17_ESO wrote: »Needed change, bad implementation.
I think it's unreal for an AoE ability to hit only a portion of people standing directly in the AoE. Really. That's the whole point of AoE. Hit everything in that AREA.
I remember, from many many years playing the now long-dead-to-me MMO, reading plenty of patch notes that stated a clear and, in my point of view, reasonable way to cap AoE.
The final solution: Do not cap the number of targets the AoE can hit. Cap the damage the AoE can do.
Lets take the implementation right now : aoe hits 6 targets. No more.
Now, if the AoE would hit ALL of the target, but scale down the damage to individual targets so that is is equal to the damage it would do to 6 targets, the word AoE would not lose it's meaning. And would be as destructive when used by a coordinated group.
I think WoW used soft damage cap of 12 targets, then scaled down.
tl;dr; calculation time
AoE, 200 damage per target:
1..6 targets : 200 damage per target. Max damage is 6x200 = 1200
7 targets : 1200 damage total. Damage per target: 171
8 targets: 1200 damage total. Damage per target: 150
....
12 targets: 1200 damage total, 100 damage per target.
....
24 targets: 1200 damage total. 50 damage per target.
Those are in no way real numbers, just to give you a hint that it could work.
While your idea is good, for it to work, reauires intensive coding. ZoS currently is looking for the easiest way out of the problem. Too many bugs needs to get fixed.0 -
Dev✭✭✭✭I think they should limit only certain types of aoes, where it would make sense and leave others uncapped.
AOE attacks based on some form of mental control, ammo type or logical limits: vamp drain, bow volley and weapon cone attacks, would make sense since there would be only so many targets to 'mark'
true AOE attacks such as fire/ice or breath weapons would not make sense.
think about it, your not going to take a great sword and hack through 20 bodies, it would get stuck after a few. A 30 yard swath of land on fire on the other hand would burn everyone.
0 -
Vicodine✭✭✭
The fix is already coded. They most certainly have an enum of the targets that should be affected by the current aoe (tick). What they do now is play RNGeesus and single out 6 of those to get hit, when actually it's as simple as:blackwolf7 wrote: »cvghosteb17_ESO wrote: »Needed change, bad implementation.
I think it's unreal for an AoE ability to hit only a portion of people standing directly in the AoE. Really. That's the whole point of AoE. Hit everything in that AREA.
I remember, from many many years playing the now long-dead-to-me MMO, reading plenty of patch notes that stated a clear and, in my point of view, reasonable way to cap AoE.
The final solution: Do not cap the number of targets the AoE can hit. Cap the damage the AoE can do.
Lets take the implementation right now : aoe hits 6 targets. No more.
Now, if the AoE would hit ALL of the target, but scale down the damage to individual targets so that is is equal to the damage it would do to 6 targets, the word AoE would not lose it's meaning. And would be as destructive when used by a coordinated group.
I think WoW used soft damage cap of 12 targets, then scaled down.
tl;dr; calculation time
AoE, 200 damage per target:
1..6 targets : 200 damage per target. Max damage is 6x200 = 1200
7 targets : 1200 damage total. Damage per target: 171
8 targets: 1200 damage total. Damage per target: 150
....
12 targets: 1200 damage total, 100 damage per target.
....
24 targets: 1200 damage total. 50 damage per target.
Those are in no way real numbers, just to give you a hint that it could work.
While your idea is good, for it to work, reauires intensive coding. ZoS currently is looking for the easiest way out of the problem. Too many bugs needs to get fixed.
if(target_count>target_cap)
damage = base_damage * target_cap / target_count;
else
damage = base_damage;
then do a crit roll and apply the god damn damage to everyone
Thaometh V16 Altmer Templar AD/EU
Thaometh Ashbringer V10Altmer Dragonknight AD/EU0 -
Simple in terms of a calculation - expontentially increased load on the server. Its got nothing to do with introducing RNG just to spite us.
0