Thoughts on PvP-only class skills?

tinythinker · December 2024

Not much information yet other than plans for "experimenting with a Cyrodiil campaign where all classes will have PvP-specific (and more performant) skills that replace the standard player skills", but if it worked to greatly increase performance would it be worth it to learn a new set up of PvP-only class skills?

One might guess that these skills would require far fewer server checks, at least. Assuming the pace of and feel of combat still flows as it would on a low lag campaign, does the fact that the skills would differ from the PvE skills line matter?

xylena_lazarow · December 2024

Impossible to say until we know what they're doing with sets. If they nerf our skills but leave sets as is, the ruleset will be DOA, nobody is gonna want to play with nerfed skills but full strength garbage like Rushing Agony.

tinythinker · December 2024

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Impossible to say until we know what they're doing with sets. If they nerf our skills but leave sets as is, the ruleset will be DOA, nobody is gonna want to play with nerfed skills but full strength garbage like Rushing Agony.

This is true. The closest analogy that comes to mind is Final Fantasy XIV. They originally let people use PVE skills and gear. However, I recall being told "don't use your rez skill" as a healer because the player you helped would be weaker for a time than if they just respawned in the starting area. When that game moved to having a combination of job-based (a.k.a class-based) PVE skills modified for PVP plus new PVP-only job skills, gear no longer mattered in PvP. Each player has the same base resources based on their job. So any White Mage fighting another White Mage in PvP has the same health, mana points, and skills/abilities. Each Dragoon using Starcross in PvP does 12,000 damage to nearby opponents, period. No modifiers from gear. The main difference between PVP players in that game now are primarily skill, experience, and whether you are coordinating with others on your team.

I am not suggesting that will or should happen in this experimental campaign for ESO, but you are correct that gear must be taken into account and that is one avenue open to ZOS.

So I guess another question is: How should gear sets be handled?

Nestor · December 2024

It is about time. Finally PvP Balance and Performance can be addressed without affecting PvE. Or the other way around.

AS for Gear there are already sets focused on and best used in PvP. With PvE sets that are used in PvP, not sure any thing needs to be done directly.

gamma71 · December 2024

We need pvp only sets not skills how can you balance a million sets you can't skills are not a problem for the most part it's the skills combined with certain sets that are the problem. But of course they wanna balance pvp backwards.

Vaqual · December 2024

If my PvP build is bad in PvE, but I can bring it, that is fine. Same goes for PvE builds in PvP.
If I can not bring abilities/sets because they do nothing or they dont exist in the other mode, I will not even consider them.
If the modes are entirely mutually exclusive, I won't play.
I develop my character specific builds as trade-offs between power-fantasy, aesthetics and performance. An arcade-mode for generic and mediocre zerg battles does not interest me. I will give them the benefit of the doubt, but if this change trivializes build crafting I will not use this mode. If it cuts back needless particle effects that might actually be something good.

Destai · December 2024

Without knowing specifically what it'll be like, I still support it on paper. I've had my builds impacted quite a bit over the years. Just recently, my warden heal got nerfed because of how it was tuned for PVP. My solo farm builds for IA and other arenas got ruined. Other games separate PVP and PVE balance, I think it's time to do so here.

RaidingTraiding · December 2024

I have a feeling this is going to turn out really bad. I don't trust the current dev team to balance anything, and they want to introduce a new system where basically all skills are different than they currently are? So much for no wide sweeping changes. And who knows how many new bugs this will introduce. We all know their QA leaves a lot to be desired.

Also I thought that the aoe tests they did a few years ago resulted in them finding that limiting skills had no significant impact on performance? and now they're telling us the opposite? I'm a little confused on that. Plus there's a ton of sets that you would think would be pretty calculation heavy, and they keep dumping more into the game. That's not going to stop anytime soon. Pretty big oversight to not mention that at all, or maybe they thought we wouldn't notice?

One other thing is that their goal is to have pvp like they had at launch with tons of people. Good luck with that when they've driven a big portion of the pop away with brain dead balance decisions. It's not just bad performance that pushes people to leave and stop playing. Leaving grossly overpowered sets like rush of agony in the game for years is a really bad decision. Nobody wants metas that last this long. It's been over 3 years of pulls, and I don't think it's ever going away. "We're keeping a close eye on it."

Honestly anything short of fixing the spaghetti coding and getting new high capacity servers that aren't the cheapest option available is just a half ass attempt that we'll pay for when they *** up. They know what it takes to fix it but guess what? It's not in the budget. Even if they did fix performance you still have a pretty unbalanced mess which they aren't capable of fixing either. You have to actually play the game and know how it works to be able to properly balance it and recognize what's way out of balance and needs adjusting. That stream they did pretty much confirms what we already knew. And we're supposed to trust them to come up with a whole new system of skills just for pvp? This feels like a setup for a total disaster. I hope I'm wrong, but if I'm not then I'll be enjoying the shitshow.

xylena_lazarow · December 2024

RaidingTraiding wrote: »

I have a feeling this is going to turn out really bad.

Same. I know some forum posters have loudly been asking to "separate PvP and PvE" for a long time, but much like no-cp Cyrodiil, this is going to end up having a much smaller audience than forum cries may indicate, and remind us all again how player driven solutions to complex game development problems usually fall flat.

The_Meathead · December 2024

It's important to note this will be a single Campaign in Cyrodiil, not something being immediately adopted into all PvP or even all of Cyrodiil.

It's being done primarily to increase performance in Cyrodiil, not to improve gameplay/balance or for the benefit of separating PvP/PvE though either could come along as collateral benefit if you're extremely, extremely optimistic.

For myself? If I wanted to play an FPS, I already could. I don't.

I choose MMORPG PvP for a lot of reasons, but key among them is the feeling of character shaping and development that synergizes with gameplay to make your character matter. In ESO, theorycrafting, builds, and stat choices/growth are integral. So, while this *single Campaign* is just a test run like they've done to lacking success before on other singular Campaigns, if it is indeed what it sounds like and does ever become embraced by all of Cyrodiil or all of PvP, I'm done with ESO.

Not hugely worried that will be the case, though. I feel like this is destined for the same eventual fizzle we've seen in similar efforts to reduce lag/increase performance.

The_Meathead · December 2024

I'd much rather they target Cross-Healing and -Shielding instead, both for gameplay and performance reasons.

I almost never see lag or performance issues in Cyrodiil unless a Ball Group is present, and based off Zone chat I know I'm not alone in that.

RaidingTraiding · December 2024

The_Meathead wrote: »

I'd much rather they target Cross-Healing and -Shielding instead, both for gameplay and performance reasons.

I almost never see lag or performance issues in Cyrodiil unless a Ball Group is present, and based off Zone chat I know I'm not alone in that.

Idk, I get a lot of lag and issues with faction stacks too, also sometimes when not a lot is happening either. Lag isn't exclusive to ball groups but it is often laggy around them especially when they stack more than 12.

I don't like the idea of blaming players for lag, which is easier to do when you don't like their playstyle. The root of the problem is on zos's end. You could also say that nightblade gankers and overload/mages wrath sorcs cause a lot of desyncs, but the desyncs aren't the players fault.

The_Meathead · December 2024

RaidingTraiding wrote: »

show previous quotes

The_Meathead wrote: »

I'd much rather they target Cross-Healing and -Shielding instead, both for gameplay and performance reasons.

I almost never see lag or performance issues in Cyrodiil unless a Ball Group is present, and based off Zone chat I know I'm not alone in that.

Idk, I get a lot of lag and issues with faction stacks too, also sometimes when not a lot is happening either. Lag isn't exclusive to ball groups but it is often laggy around them especially when they stack more than 12.

I don't like the idea of blaming players for lag, which is easier to do when you don't like their playstyle. The root of the problem is on zos's end. You could also say that nightblade gankers and overload/mages wrath sorcs cause a lot of desyncs, but the desyncs aren't the players fault.

Don't forget naughty Templars like me, with our Javelin desync! /burns himself at the stake as punishment

I get what you're saying, but I do think Ball Group's massive stacking of all those ticking calculations on such a concentrated area is a different beastie. While it's not the players' fault it causes server trouble, the absurdity of 10+ of multiple HoTs and shields at all times is an excessive mechanic that should probably be drastically reduced not just for performance reasons but also for gameplay.

It's an pretty rare thing for even the biggest Zerg (and I'm talking full Faction stack on a pop lock, so... 70+ players?) to make even a small bit of noticeable lag for me, but a 12-man Ball Group at times can do it all on its lonesome and to greater impact. That stacking of abilities and their specific interaction with the servers is worth looking into on ZOS's part, even if the players aren't to blame for doing the optimal method of empowering their group.

Zama666 · December 2024

I am excited!
Sort of like the Assault and Support Skill line?

Maybe the 'can't mount in combat' break free skill!
Return to fight after getting booted skill line

Seriously - I would like to see things like engineers to help fix keeps over knock them down, ladders to climb walls, skill like to push them off
Design siege engines - ie. tower - loads with troops and drops a draw bridge on to walls. anti seige to knock them down based on skill
Keep that change layout or you can build on to them.
Different kinds of mounts skill depending on terrain (faster over water, or mountains), charges in battle, pikes to block them
Scouting ability - see what the enemy is doing, and counter spy.
Stability during huge battles.

I love ESO has so many sets and skills that really allows choice. Yup there are crazy metas, but this changes with every patch....

Change is good!

RaidingTraiding · December 2024

The_Meathead wrote: »

show previous quotes

RaidingTraiding wrote: »

The_Meathead wrote: »

I'd much rather they target Cross-Healing and -Shielding instead, both for gameplay and performance reasons.

I almost never see lag or performance issues in Cyrodiil unless a Ball Group is present, and based off Zone chat I know I'm not alone in that.

Idk, I get a lot of lag and issues with faction stacks too, also sometimes when not a lot is happening either. Lag isn't exclusive to ball groups but it is often laggy around them especially when they stack more than 12.

I don't like the idea of blaming players for lag, which is easier to do when you don't like their playstyle. The root of the problem is on zos's end. You could also say that nightblade gankers and overload/mages wrath sorcs cause a lot of desyncs, but the desyncs aren't the players fault.

Don't forget naughty Templars like me, with our Javelin desync! /burns himself at the stake as punishment

I get what you're saying, but I do think Ball Group's massive stacking of all those ticking calculations on such a concentrated area is a different beastie. While it's not the players' fault it causes server trouble, the absurdity of 10+ of multiple HoTs and shields at all times is an excessive mechanic that should probably be drastically reduced not just for performance reasons but also for gameplay.

It's an pretty rare thing for even the biggest Zerg (and I'm talking full Faction stack on a pop lock, so... 70+ players?) to make even a small bit of noticeable lag for me, but a 12-man Ball Group at times can do it all on its lonesome and to greater impact. That stacking of abilities and their specific interaction with the servers is worth looking into on ZOS's part, even if the players aren't to blame for doing the optimal method of empowering their group.

Definitely not the case for me, faction stacks always generate more lag for me. I also find that people sometimes experience lag differently. I can have the worst performance one night and a friend not in my group playing at the same time will experience no lag at all. Even more so between factions. A few years ago we'd get the slow bug, where everyone moved in slow motion, but it only ever affected 1 faction at a time, the other 2 could move freely around you.

There definitely was a time though when a certain 24 man ball group would generate by far more lag than any faction stack I've run across. But I haven't seen any group lately have that bad of an effect on the server. Like I said, could be different for you, not trying to discredit you.

I do agree though that the sheer amount of defense power these groups have should be adjusted. People harp on hots a lot but zos has nerfed healing in battlespirit before and it didn't change much. I think the bigger issue is they keep introducing more sets and defensive mechanics that just exponentially increase a groups survivability; it's not just one thing it's a combo of a lot of things. shields are out of control now due to arcanist, scribing, new sets, and the stacking of ult gen sets which allows groups to run really fast barrier rotations. That and nerfing aoe damage over the years certainly didn't help things.

Not to go off on too long of a tangent but if they do decide to go through with this, it would be a perfect opportunity to address this issue. Still don't have high hopes for this.

Joy_Division · December 2024

Tiny!

I don;t think the skill changes will be very dramatic. This is ZOS we are talking about. The same ZOS who has a mountain of problems to fix with BGs, who never finished hybridization, who is ditching chapters for seasonal (i.e. less content). There is a zero percent chance they are going to devise entire new lines of PvP skills for 7 classes + weapons + other skills lines.

What I bet ZOS does is take the existing skills already in the game and simplify them so they do less server calculations.

I'm not sure why ZOS thinks this will do anything significant on it's own. I'd bet trash sets like Rush of Agony output a lot more calculations than my trusty Piercing Javelin, to say nothing of the 12 stacking HoTs and AoE shield spamming going on the player using Rush of Agony. If ZOS were serious about trying to limit the calculations, they'd have to give us Ravenwatch 2.0.

But it was a dead server. They could easily bribe people to play there by finally giving us what we've asked for so long: 1) higher pop cap and 2) no stacking HoTs under the justification of limiting calculations. That would probably bring literally every non ball group player. People would have fun for about a half an hour before they realized that with nerfed skills and no abusive procs, hardly anyone would ever die.

The_Meathead · December 2024

Joy_Division wrote: »

2) no stacking HoTs under the justification of limiting calculations. That would probably bring literally every non ball group player.

I honestly feel that if they did only this change (and also limiting shields the same), whichever server they chose would become the most populated.

If not overnight, every time a player sighs in frustration at the Ball Group zooming around inside a Keep, it would grow by one and keep growing until Gray Host was just a husk with Ball Groups wondering why the game's so dead.

If only.

tinythinker · December 2024

Joy_Division wrote: »

Tiny!

Hello! o/

Joy_Division wrote: »

I don;t think the skill changes will be very dramatic. This is ZOS we are talking about. The same ZOS who has a mountain of problems to fix with BGs, who never finished hybridization, who is ditching chapters for seasonal (i.e. less content). There is a zero percent chance they are going to devise entire new lines of PvP skills for 7 classes + weapons + other skills lines.

What I bet ZOS does is take the existing skills already in the game and simplify them so they do less server calculations.

I see what you mean, but even taking existing class skills and simplifying them/changing how they work just a little is how they started the shift in FFXIV. Not saying that that game's example is the road ZOS will or should take, it's just the only thing I'm aware of that is similar to the wording from the letter.

Either way, with any kind of "PvP-specific (and more performant) skills that replace the standard player [class] skills" model, the number of available skills are likely to be reduced because as you note, it is unlikely ZOS would want to have to change every class skill to be suited for PvP. Maybe 6 to 12 skills (5-10 regular skills + 1-2 ultimate?) for each class, mostly reworks but maybe one or two new ones? Plus the two existing Assault and Support skill lines? Who knows? Not me

I guess they could be reworking (or as the letter frames it, replacing) all class skills, but that would be a lot of extra effort to make and balance and update.

Joy_Division wrote: »

I'm not sure why ZOS thinks this will do anything significant on it's own. I'd bet trash sets like Rush of Agony output a lot more calculations than my trusty Piercing Javelin, to say nothing of the 12 stacking HoTs and AoE shield spamming going on the player using Rush of Agony.

Yeah, in one of my replies I mentioned sets, too. ZOS have choices on what to do. The game I used as an example (which may be absolutely nothing like what ZOS intends) just made gear impotent. You can PvP naked in that game and it makes no difference. I don't see that happening in ESO given how popular gear set acquisition and theory crafting is in this game.

I can see using Battle Spirit for limiting or removing cross-healing and cross-shielding, reducing how often sets can proc by giving them (longer? fixed?) cool downs, reducing/capping the number of targets affected by procs, adding back soft caps on character stats, etc. I can actually see all of those and one or two more things happening, but again, wait and see I suppose.

But I would still like to see more reasons for groups to split up, regardless of whether what I just described also goes in, especially if they want a higher concurrence of players. As I wrote an age ago, I still think that giving meaningful objectives across the map and sufficient rewards for hitting them would help. Especially if the viable populations were raised as much as ZOS says they are targeting. For example, the longer a keep goes without changing ownership, the bigger whatever the rewards.

Joy_Division wrote: »

If ZOS were serious about trying to limit the calculations, they'd have to give us Ravenwatch 2.0. But it was a dead server. They could easily bribe people to play there by finally giving us what we've asked for so long: 1) higher pop cap and 2) no stacking HoTs under the justification of limiting calculations. That would probably bring literally every non ball group player. People would have fun for about a half an hour before they realized that with nerfed skills and no abusive procs, hardly anyone would ever die.

Hmmm. Maybe my memory is faulty, but I played quite a bit of ESO PvP from 2014-2015 and early 2016 when populations were larger, and I recall that whether people died seemed like more a balance in terms offense vs. defensive power multiplied by skill and factors like being overwhelmed 20 to 1 by half a faction rolling to a keep or outpost with 4-5 defenders. Though, holding out until the cavalry arrived was immensely fun. ZOS kept trying to get the balance between dying too quickly (i.e. insta-kill) or too slowly right, but there were times it worked pretty well.

Maybe no one will be interested in that type of gameplay anymore. But I'm not sure how much it could hurt to try to bring back performance and a broader appeal to the playerbase, since large-scale zone PvP with siege offense and defense is something that, as demonstrated by the past decade and a half, can draw and keep an audience. Not sure what PvE activity-type in ESO manages to stay as interesting without constant new content, but even with a much reduced population Cyrodiiil has kept going.

tinythinker · December 2024

The_Meathead wrote: »

show previous quotes

Joy_Division wrote: »

2) no stacking HoTs under the justification of limiting calculations. That would probably bring literally every non ball group player.

I honestly feel that if they did only this change (and also limiting shields the same), whichever server they chose would become the most populated.

If not overnight, every time a player sighs in frustration at the Ball Group zooming around inside a Keep, it would grow by one and keep growing until Gray Host was just a husk with Ball Groups wondering why the game's so dead.

If only.

I wonder if that will come first. I mean, they could introduce all of the proposed changes at once, but adding them one at a time would seem to be best for faster improvement and also testing each change's actual impact on players' collective interest.

Oh, and we need a name. A name for this experimental campaign... serious answers, puns, and exasperated sighs and groaning noises are all fair game.

xylena_lazarow · December 2024

The_Meathead wrote: »

Gray Host was just a husk with Ball Groups wondering why the game's so dead

It already is that, which is probably why they're doing this. If the new ruleset nukes the ball meta, I'm in.

tinythinker · December 2024

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

show previous quotes

The_Meathead wrote: »

Gray Host was just a husk with Ball Groups wondering why the game's so dead

It already is that, which is probably why they're doing this. If the new ruleset nukes the ball meta, I'm in.

Oh, well, there's our first potential name for the experimental campaign: Ball Nuker.

zammo · January 2

DOA.

They've explicitly listed this as an experiment, going further to say that any experiments "may or may not be fleshed out into full game systems". That and there's no specified timeline for any of the experiments, other than to say at some point in the future ("some of which you may see on the live servers as tests in 2025 and beyond"). Already given themselves the get out.

Like everything else so craved over the years by the PvP community, if we ever get to see this, it will be left unfinished, and with a lot to be desired.

It's yet another way to keep us on the hook. How did the previous PvP update announcement pan out?

RaidingTraiding · January 2

Honestly the easiest way (definitely not the best)to kill the ball meta is to keep doing what they're doing. making the game so unbearable to play everyone leaves including the ball groups. I know quite a handful of guilds have left and the remaining ones are consolidating members. you probably see a lot of the same players in what you think are different groups.

Cast_El · January 4

Reduce "free damage" from proc set by 50% in pvp, and we are good to go

RaidingTraiding · January 5

Cast_El wrote: »

Reduce "free damage" from proc set by 50% in pvp, and we are good to go

Yeah not sure why they wanted proc sets to crit again.

What I don't understand is why they felt the need to nerf harmony and proxy det but buff proc sets. Honestly the one they they accomplished by doing that is making ball groups harder to kill. Now you lack the up front burst damage to kill those groups so it's harder for vd to work on them cause you can't get them low, but at the same time pugs will still die because they're getting hit with 20-30k vds, not to mention over 10k rush procs. At least harmony and proxy det were harder to do and required coordination and timing, rather than mostly free damage from procs.

Major_Mangle · January 5

RaidingTraiding wrote: »

show previous quotes

Cast_El wrote: »

Reduce "free damage" from proc set by 50% in pvp, and we are good to go

Yeah not sure why they wanted proc sets to crit again.

What I don't understand is why they felt the need to nerf harmony and proxy det but buff proc sets. Honestly the one they they accomplished by doing that is making ball groups harder to kill. Now you lack the up front burst damage to kill those groups so it's harder for vd to work on them cause you can't get them low, but at the same time pugs will still die because they're getting hit with 20-30k vds, not to mention over 10k rush procs. At least harmony and proxy det were harder to do and required coordination and timing, rather than mostly free damage from procs.

Harmony was heavily abused by ballgroups and organized comps to effortlessly offer off-gcd nuke potential. It didn´t require any effort whatsoever and if you played on PC you´d just keybind your synergy button to the mousewheel and spam that whenever it was ready to use some synergies. It was a necessary change to nerf harmony if you ask me (personally would´ve gone with another route than ZOS did but it is what it is)

Reduce "free damage" from proc set by 50% in pvp, and we are good to go

To be fair, I find the usage of stat sets a much much bigger issue these days compared proc sets that offers a little bit of free damage. The are a few exceptions of damage procs that could use some adjustment, but with emphasis on FEW. A much bigger issue are the overabundance of stat-/and group buff sets (and utility sets like Rush of Agony) combined with scribing skills that offers a power creep that has completely broken the game from a balance PoV. If you want a more balanced PvP (and PvE to be honest), you ask ZOS to reduce the effectiveness of stat- and buff sets in the game.

DeadlySerious · January 5

They should focus on balancing what they've already put in game first. If they can't fix what they've already got, they can't be trusted to create a new system. And, fixing what they've already got would eliminate the need for a new system.

So ya, just start with the easy stuff like RoA and too much cross healing in groups first, then see where we're at.

RaidingTraiding · January 6

Major_Mangle wrote: »

show previous quotes

RaidingTraiding wrote: »

Cast_El wrote: »

Reduce "free damage" from proc set by 50% in pvp, and we are good to go

Yeah not sure why they wanted proc sets to crit again.

What I don't understand is why they felt the need to nerf harmony and proxy det but buff proc sets. Honestly the one they they accomplished by doing that is making ball groups harder to kill. Now you lack the up front burst damage to kill those groups so it's harder for vd to work on them cause you can't get them low, but at the same time pugs will still die because they're getting hit with 20-30k vds, not to mention over 10k rush procs. At least harmony and proxy det were harder to do and required coordination and timing, rather than mostly free damage from procs.

Harmony was heavily abused by ballgroups and organized comps to effortlessly offer off-gcd nuke potential. It didn´t require any effort whatsoever and if you played on PC you´d just keybind your synergy button to the mousewheel and spam that whenever it was ready to use some synergies. It was a necessary change to nerf harmony if you ask me (personally would´ve gone with another route than ZOS did but it is what it is)
show previous quotes

Reduce "free damage" from proc set by 50% in pvp, and we are good to go

To be fair, I find the usage of stat sets a much much bigger issue these days compared proc sets that offers a little bit of free damage. The are a few exceptions of damage procs that could use some adjustment, but with emphasis on FEW. A much bigger issue are the overabundance of stat-/and group buff sets (and utility sets like Rush of Agony) combined with scribing skills that offers a power creep that has completely broken the game from a balance PoV. If you want a more balanced PvP (and PvE to be honest), you ask ZOS to reduce the effectiveness of stat- and buff sets in the game.

I think you missed my point. Harmony was also used back then to kill ball groups and it wasn't as easy to pull off in a small group. Now instead of hitting 20-30k+ synergies you hit that amount with vd instead, plus pull sets perfectly group players up for you. Difference is if you're not a ball group you don't have enough damage currently to get vd to proc on a ball group, but ball groups still have the ability to nuke without synergies with high proc damage. And now ball groups heavily abuse pulls sets which is miles easier to use than synergies, no question about that. Ball groups will always have the ability to nuke, itd be nice if the ability to nuke ball groups wasnt taken away from non ball groups.

LittlePinkDot · January 8

tinythinker wrote: »

Not much information yet other than plans for "experimenting with a Cyrodiil campaign where all classes will have PvP-specific (and more performant) skills that replace the standard player skills", but if it worked to greatly increase performance would it be worth it to learn a new set up of PvP-only class skills?

One might guess that these skills would require far fewer server checks, at least. Assuming the pace of and feel of combat still flows as it would on a low lag campaign, does the fact that the skills would differ from the PvE skills line matter?

Think ESO call of Duty/Destiny 2.

Joy_Division · January 8

RaidingTraiding wrote: »

show previous quotes

Major_Mangle wrote: »

RaidingTraiding wrote: »

Cast_El wrote: »

Reduce "free damage" from proc set by 50% in pvp, and we are good to go

Yeah not sure why they wanted proc sets to crit again.

What I don't understand is why they felt the need to nerf harmony and proxy det but buff proc sets. Honestly the one they they accomplished by doing that is making ball groups harder to kill. Now you lack the up front burst damage to kill those groups so it's harder for vd to work on them cause you can't get them low, but at the same time pugs will still die because they're getting hit with 20-30k vds, not to mention over 10k rush procs. At least harmony and proxy det were harder to do and required coordination and timing, rather than mostly free damage from procs.

Harmony was heavily abused by ballgroups and organized comps to effortlessly offer off-gcd nuke potential. It didn´t require any effort whatsoever and if you played on PC you´d just keybind your synergy button to the mousewheel and spam that whenever it was ready to use some synergies. It was a necessary change to nerf harmony if you ask me (personally would´ve gone with another route than ZOS did but it is what it is)

Reduce "free damage" from proc set by 50% in pvp, and we are good to go

To be fair, I find the usage of stat sets a much much bigger issue these days compared proc sets that offers a little bit of free damage. The are a few exceptions of damage procs that could use some adjustment, but with emphasis on FEW. A much bigger issue are the overabundance of stat-/and group buff sets (and utility sets like Rush of Agony) combined with scribing skills that offers a power creep that has completely broken the game from a balance PoV. If you want a more balanced PvP (and PvE to be honest), you ask ZOS to reduce the effectiveness of stat- and buff sets in the game.

I think you missed my point. Harmony was also used back then to kill ball groups and it wasn't as easy to pull off in a small group. Now instead of hitting 20-30k+ synergies you hit that amount with vd instead, plus pull sets perfectly group players up for you. Difference is if you're not a ball group you don't have enough damage currently to get vd to proc on a ball group, but ball groups still have the ability to nuke without synergies with high proc damage. And now ball groups heavily abuse pulls sets which is miles easier to use than synergies, no question about that. Ball groups will always have the ability to nuke, itd be nice if the ability to nuke ball groups wasnt taken away from non ball groups.

As someone who ran in a group, I can say we never worried about a pug, solo person, or evem a small scale group (on their own) killing us with harmony. It certainy would never happen now with 10K perma aoe shields up. Harmony was only dangerous from other ball groups becauss only they had enough conduits banners and graveyards to coordinate together. In short harmony, like everythung else in this game, disproportionately favored ball groups and made them easier to play. Except azureblight, which of course zos neefed

RaidingTraiding · January 9

Joy_Division wrote: »

show previous quotes

RaidingTraiding wrote: »

Major_Mangle wrote: »

RaidingTraiding wrote: »

Cast_El wrote: »

Reduce "free damage" from proc set by 50% in pvp, and we are good to go

Yeah not sure why they wanted proc sets to crit again.

What I don't understand is why they felt the need to nerf harmony and proxy det but buff proc sets. Honestly the one they they accomplished by doing that is making ball groups harder to kill. Now you lack the up front burst damage to kill those groups so it's harder for vd to work on them cause you can't get them low, but at the same time pugs will still die because they're getting hit with 20-30k vds, not to mention over 10k rush procs. At least harmony and proxy det were harder to do and required coordination and timing, rather than mostly free damage from procs.

Harmony was heavily abused by ballgroups and organized comps to effortlessly offer off-gcd nuke potential. It didn´t require any effort whatsoever and if you played on PC you´d just keybind your synergy button to the mousewheel and spam that whenever it was ready to use some synergies. It was a necessary change to nerf harmony if you ask me (personally would´ve gone with another route than ZOS did but it is what it is)

Reduce "free damage" from proc set by 50% in pvp, and we are good to go

To be fair, I find the usage of stat sets a much much bigger issue these days compared proc sets that offers a little bit of free damage. The are a few exceptions of damage procs that could use some adjustment, but with emphasis on FEW. A much bigger issue are the overabundance of stat-/and group buff sets (and utility sets like Rush of Agony) combined with scribing skills that offers a power creep that has completely broken the game from a balance PoV. If you want a more balanced PvP (and PvE to be honest), you ask ZOS to reduce the effectiveness of stat- and buff sets in the game.

I think you missed my point. Harmony was also used back then to kill ball groups and it wasn't as easy to pull off in a small group. Now instead of hitting 20-30k+ synergies you hit that amount with vd instead, plus pull sets perfectly group players up for you. Difference is if you're not a ball group you don't have enough damage currently to get vd to proc on a ball group, but ball groups still have the ability to nuke without synergies with high proc damage. And now ball groups heavily abuse pulls sets which is miles easier to use than synergies, no question about that. Ball groups will always have the ability to nuke, itd be nice if the ability to nuke ball groups wasnt taken away from non ball groups.

As someone who ran in a group, I can say we never worried about a pug, solo person, or evem a small scale group (on their own) killing us with harmony. It certainy would never happen now with 10K perma aoe shields up. Harmony was only dangerous from other ball groups becauss only they had enough conduits banners and graveyards to coordinate together. In short harmony, like everythung else in this game, disproportionately favored ball groups and made them easier to play. Except azureblight, which of course zos neefed

as someone who ran in both 2-6 man groups AND 12 man groups i can say you 100% could kill a ball group as a small group with harmony back then. Maybe the very best ball groups wouldn't die to it without help, but low to upper middle tier groups could die to it without outside help. With the right build and comp you could hit 20-30k crit gravity crushes vs groups, more vs pugs. along with other synergies, ults, and aoes this was enough aoe burst to kill ball groups. nova was the main heavy hitter followed by standard, graveyards, and ignites, and last damage orbs and conduits. few groups used it because it wasn't brain dead easy to coordinate with as a small group. As a ball group it was easier because you have so many synergies available and a lot more dds, so a lot of non ult synergies could be used for big damage hits. Again, like I said multiple times, it doesnt matter that it was powerful because ball groups will ALWAYS have the ability to nuke pugs. What makes it easier now to nuke pugs even with harmony gone is the fact that pugs get pulled in to your bomb meaning on average more pugs will be caught in a bomb. before you'd only hit those who are in the bomb radius and those who follow you into chokes. Doesn't matter that harmony is nerfed because in most cases now and in the past, it's easy to overdamage pugs. A lot of people don't understand this, all they saw was a big synergy number on their recap. Pugs now still die just as fast as back then, it's just the damage looks different on your recap, but it's still enough to erase your health bar instantly. Again I want to emphasize it's so much easier now because pulls bring in more people to your bomb and you can lock people in for longer if you mistimed your damage, which also makes it more forgiving for the group doing the bombing.

Because you only mentioned banners, conduits, and graveyards, that tells me whatever group you were in most likely heavily favored survivability over maximum damage output, which is fine. Only using those synergies in your comp was the "meta" for ball groups at the time. Again this is fine, it meant groups could last longer at the expense of some damage. Different groups have different comps and goals. If that's the case I could see why you would think smaller groups weren't a threat back then. Just those synergies you mentioned won't net you the highest damage. That's another reason why you didn't see many smaller groups bomb larger groups, most groups have an ego and are afraid to die so they build to have just enough damage while also trying to build as tanky as possible. even with harmony as broken as you say it was, building for a more damage oriented group meant you'd have to sacrifice survivability and it would force you to play smarter knowing you couldnt tank everything, that made that comp harder to play. Now with that damage nerfed you for sure can't take on a decent ball group on your own.