MincMincMinc wrote: »

Bring on the max movement speed snowtreaders aoe hot spammer troll build. Atleast if ballgroups get trolled maybe the server wont lag as much when they die out.

I think that most groups are going to be aggressively reporting people who do not respond to cease and desist DMs.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Hey gang!

Thanks for all the responses to our post/poll and voting on the 2 options for Update 49 regarding Battlespirit changes in regards to HoT stacking. Based on your votes and internal discussions, we will be moving forward with the 33% healing taken reduction being triggered at 8 HoTs for Update 49.

We saw your feedback about 50% being too punitive, so we dialed that back to 33% to still have a real effect you can feel in combat. We also saw the concerns that 3 HoTs to trigger this was just way too low and would basically be up at all times, so we upped that to make it less frequent to turn on/off.

These two paragraphs tell me that ZOS does not consider HoT stacking to be an issue at all. It doesn't trigger until the 8th HoT is activated and then it is only reduced by 33%. What's the point of even implementing this change? It will not make a noticeable difference in the problem nor will it reduce player complaints. I have to ask again, do the people at ZOS actually play Cyrodiil on the live servers against live human players, especially during EU or NA prime time when ball groups are online? It certainly seems like they do not.

React wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Hey gang!

Thanks for all the responses to our post/poll and voting on the 2 options for Update 49 regarding Battlespirit changes in regards to HoT stacking. Based on your votes and internal discussions, we will be moving forward with the 33% healing taken reduction being triggered at 8 HoTs for Update 49.

We saw your feedback about 50% being too punitive, so we dialed that back to 33% to still have a real effect you can feel in combat. We also saw the concerns that 3 HoTs to trigger this was just way too low and would basically be up at all times, so we upped that to make it less frequent to turn on/off. Post U49 launch we will be monitoring feedback and checking in to gather your thoughts once it's been live and you've been able to see the effects in small and large scale battles.

We also wanted to take this time to state this is not the end all, be all solution for stacking concerns in Cyrodiil. We plan to look into Battlespirit considering damage shields in combination with healing/HoTs, as well as in group vs. out of group origination of beneficial effects. There currently are no hard dates for those additions, but wanted to let you know we are seeing your feedback, and looking to continue adding to Battlespirit in the future.

This last paragraph was really great to read. It is wonderful to hear that some of the most talked-about pain points are under close consideration for future adjustment.

It's good to hear this isn't the end-all solution to this issue. The value is very likely not high enough to make a difference to the groups it should be targeting, and the solution itself just isn't ideal as a whole. Many of us would much rather see a limit placed on same morph HOT stacking, such as 1-2 of any same morph HOT.

Looking forward to seeing what the team comes up with as a more permanent solution in regards to HOT stacking, and also what will be done about shielding and some of the other issues frequently discussed in these threads.

Yes many of us which makes me wonder why this feedbacks not heard but ah well

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Bring on the max movement speed snowtreaders aoe hot spammer troll build. Atleast if ballgroups get trolled maybe the server wont lag as much when they die out.

I think that most groups are going to be aggressively reporting people who do not respond to cease and desist DMs.

Yeah cuz we all know group reporting is a reliable thing to listen too, I bet this is going to go over well. At what point will we need to hire ESO lawyers on retainer to plead your case whether cease and desist DM should be binding or not?

I bet this is going to lead to another petty Tbag banning situation.

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Bring on the max movement speed snowtreaders aoe hot spammer troll build. Atleast if ballgroups get trolled maybe the server wont lag as much when they die out.

I think that most groups are going to be aggressively reporting people who do not respond to cease and desist DMs.

Yeah cuz we all know group reporting is a reliable thing to listen too, I bet this is going to go over well. At what point will we need to hire ESO lawyers on retainer to plead your case whether cease and desist DM should be binding or not?

I bet this is going to lead to another petty Tbag banning situation.

That's my point.

ZOS has created a really sketchy situation by allowing outside-of-group heals to count toward the penalty, one that empowers both bad actors who want to grief and troll as well as dubious group-reporting retaliation.

I will tell you, though, if some random healer is following me around and does not respond to /say and /w to stop then I probably will report them as well.

It will be bad times to be a pug healer for all sides.

ZOS made that bed and the rest of us will have to lay in it.

Medium-term, there really needs to be a player toggle to either enable or disable your availability to be healed/buffed from out-of-group sources. That would solve the griefing/trolling issue completely.

Yeah we should atleast push zos to tell us whether playing a healer is a potentially bannable offense or not. Does this allow groups to put out restraining orders preventing allies from going to the same keeps?

MincMincMinc wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Bring on the max movement speed snowtreaders aoe hot spammer troll build. Atleast if ballgroups get trolled maybe the server wont lag as much when they die out.

I think that most groups are going to be aggressively reporting people who do not respond to cease and desist DMs.

Yeah cuz we all know group reporting is a reliable thing to listen too, I bet this is going to go over well. At what point will we need to hire ESO lawyers on retainer to plead your case whether cease and desist DM should be binding or not?

I bet this is going to lead to another petty Tbag banning situation.

That's my point.

ZOS has created a really sketchy situation by allowing outside-of-group heals to count toward the penalty, one that empowers both bad actors who want to grief and troll as well as dubious group-reporting retaliation.

I will tell you, though, if some random healer is following me around and does not respond to /say and /w to stop then I probably will report them as well.

It will be bad times to be a pug healer for all sides.

ZOS made that bed and the rest of us will have to lay in it.

Medium-term, there really needs to be a player toggle to either enable or disable your availability to be healed/buffed from out-of-group sources. That would solve the griefing/trolling issue completely.

Yeah we should atleast push zos to tell us whether playing a healer is a potentially bannable offense or not. Does this allow groups to put out restraining orders preventing allies from going to the same keeps?

This is a very interesting conversation.

Why in the world would ZOS roll with a “penalty” solution for people trying to help!

The scenario that comes to mind immediately for me: ballgroups playing defense in a keep are going to be penalized majorly by the pugs defending. Offensive ballgroups running trains won’t be, cause their pugs won’t be around. 7/10 times it takes a ballgroup playing defense to wipe another one training a keep. It’s literally just going to make them stronger on offense.

Wuuffyy wrote: »

Lord_Hev wrote: »

This cannot just be polled and go with the majority but not have the foresight as a team to understand nuance. This is a rushed mechanic that [rewards] / [is affected] by griefing...

Player agency should never ever be compromised by someone else. Either do the implementation the proper way, or do not do it at all. This is a horrible, rushed change that WE have to deal with. If this can't be coded in a short time frame to exclude the coding rules that prevent burst heals and SELF heals from being exempt, then this has no business being tested on a live server "short term." I'm not a guinea pig.

I am, guinea me up. I’ve been one for YEARS with the rampant healing and defense making either mass gatherings or smaller yet still substantial organized gatherings simply win-by-default because of numbers and ability to lazily throw out any actives alone. I’ll take addressing the problem in any way now and continuing to workshop it (over the next 3 months or so) than keeping it the same as is.

This changes just benefits organized groups and gatherings... this is yet ANOTHER failed attempt that will hurt unorganized pugs even more.

I can't wait to grab a few friends and spam hots on people to reduce healing !

Same faction griefers have never had it so good

Please turn off outside group healing if you actually want this to be a positive change....

MincMincMinc wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Bring on the max movement speed snowtreaders aoe hot spammer troll build. Atleast if ballgroups get trolled maybe the server wont lag as much when they die out.

I think that most groups are going to be aggressively reporting people who do not respond to cease and desist DMs.

Yeah cuz we all know group reporting is a reliable thing to listen too, I bet this is going to go over well. At what point will we need to hire ESO lawyers on retainer to plead your case whether cease and desist DM should be binding or not?

I bet this is going to lead to another petty Tbag banning situation.

That's my point.

ZOS has created a really sketchy situation by allowing outside-of-group heals to count toward the penalty, one that empowers both bad actors who want to grief and troll as well as dubious group-reporting retaliation.

I will tell you, though, if some random healer is following me around and does not respond to /say and /w to stop then I probably will report them as well.

It will be bad times to be a pug healer for all sides.

ZOS made that bed and the rest of us will have to lay in it.

Medium-term, there really needs to be a player toggle to either enable or disable your availability to be healed/buffed from out-of-group sources. That would solve the griefing/trolling issue completely.

Yeah we should atleast push zos to tell us whether playing a healer is a potentially bannable offense or not. Does this allow groups to put out restraining orders preventing allies from going to the same keeps?

This is a very interesting conversation.

Why in the world would ZOS roll with a “penalty” solution for people trying to help!

The scenario that comes to mind immediately for me: ballgroups playing defense in a keep are going to be penalized majorly by the pugs defending. Offensive ballgroups running trains won’t be, cause their pugs won’t be around. 7/10 times it takes a ballgroup playing defense to wipe another one training a keep. It’s literally just going to make them stronger on offense.

Its just that zos cant get higher ups to commit more time to pvp. Due to pve reasons and DLC quota, they dug themselves a hole creating so many stacking issues in combat. PvE is hardly affected, other than some metas trivializing build diversity and due to the nature of only killing mobs faster. PvP just gets the brunt of it because how uncoordinated and coordinated build differences work, players also get frustrated and upset when they die to factors outside of their control.

Preventing stacking of effects soft caps how exponential your group's output can be, without prevention a group player's output basically goes to the moon compared to a noncoordinated. To change stacking code you basically need to go create pvp versions or branches of all of the skills/sets in the game and change them to not stack. Obviously you can see why zos higher ups are not wanting to sign off on that just yet.

Its much easier to hold over cyrodil with blankets until the new midsized gamemode comes out and hope that reducing the player count solves the pvp issues...............if we were at 1800 with 24 man groups supposedly on launch and after several reductions we are at 300 and 12 person groups, is the new gamemode going to be 180 with 6 person group sizes?.........When that doesn't work after a few years of bloating, is the solution going to be to cut it down again? How long until we only have bg sized solo que matches?

I’d argue they wouldn’t have to do “PvP skills” to make them not stack, they said they were apprehensive about it cause it wasn’t previously received that well. But as others have pointed out, it was a different game back then, and I think I remember the main issue being stam builds at the time only ran vigor/rally. Not being able to small scale without a mag healer back then would have been an issue if vigor wasn’t stacking. The game has changed and they shouldn’t be using outdated info/feedback as an excuse not to actually implement a better real solution.

SneaK wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Bring on the max movement speed snowtreaders aoe hot spammer troll build. Atleast if ballgroups get trolled maybe the server wont lag as much when they die out.

I think that most groups are going to be aggressively reporting people who do not respond to cease and desist DMs.

Yeah cuz we all know group reporting is a reliable thing to listen too, I bet this is going to go over well. At what point will we need to hire ESO lawyers on retainer to plead your case whether cease and desist DM should be binding or not?

I bet this is going to lead to another petty Tbag banning situation.

That's my point.

ZOS has created a really sketchy situation by allowing outside-of-group heals to count toward the penalty, one that empowers both bad actors who want to grief and troll as well as dubious group-reporting retaliation.

I will tell you, though, if some random healer is following me around and does not respond to /say and /w to stop then I probably will report them as well.

It will be bad times to be a pug healer for all sides.

ZOS made that bed and the rest of us will have to lay in it.

Medium-term, there really needs to be a player toggle to either enable or disable your availability to be healed/buffed from out-of-group sources. That would solve the griefing/trolling issue completely.

Yeah we should atleast push zos to tell us whether playing a healer is a potentially bannable offense or not. Does this allow groups to put out restraining orders preventing allies from going to the same keeps?

This is a very interesting conversation.

Why in the world would ZOS roll with a “penalty” solution for people trying to help!

The scenario that comes to mind immediately for me: ballgroups playing defense in a keep are going to be penalized majorly by the pugs defending. Offensive ballgroups running trains won’t be, cause their pugs won’t be around. 7/10 times it takes a ballgroup playing defense to wipe another one training a keep. It’s literally just going to make them stronger on offense.

Its just that zos cant get higher ups to commit more time to pvp. Due to pve reasons and DLC quota, they dug themselves a hole creating so many stacking issues in combat. PvE is hardly affected, other than some metas trivializing build diversity and due to the nature of only killing mobs faster. PvP just gets the brunt of it because how uncoordinated and coordinated build differences work, players also get frustrated and upset when they die to factors outside of their control.

Preventing stacking of effects soft caps how exponential your group's output can be, without prevention a group player's output basically goes to the moon compared to a noncoordinated. To change stacking code you basically need to go create pvp versions or branches of all of the skills/sets in the game and change them to not stack. Obviously you can see why zos higher ups are not wanting to sign off on that just yet.

Its much easier to hold over cyrodil with blankets until the new midsized gamemode comes out and hope that reducing the player count solves the pvp issues...............if we were at 1800 with 24 man groups supposedly on launch and after several reductions we are at 300 and 12 person groups, is the new gamemode going to be 180 with 6 person group sizes?.........When that doesn't work after a few years of bloating, is the solution going to be to cut it down again? How long until we only have bg sized solo que matches?

I’d argue they wouldn’t have to do “PvP skills” to make them not stack, they said they were apprehensive about it cause it wasn’t previously received that well. But as others have pointed out, it was a different game back then, and I think I remember the main issue being stam builds at the time only ran vigor/rally. Not being able to small scale without a mag healer back then would have been an issue if vigor wasn’t stacking. The game has changed and they shouldn’t be using outdated info/feedback as an excuse not to actually implement a better real solution.

Well i just say they would need to do the pvp and pve split skills because good luck convincing trial groups they cant stack 2x of some effect. With vengeance they already implemented a system that lets them have pve and pvp versions of the skills, so it is do-able, just creates twice the work for zos.

Originally hots/dots didnt stack which prevented abuse and single BIS meta builds being copied 12x while also providing calculation culling for the server during high stress lag inducing scenarios like breach fights. Then afterwards we entered the age where cyro groups could just stack everyone with vigor. Which lead current resolving which didnt stack......unless you were in a zerg or ballgroup, then only you could abuse stacking echoing. Which for a while before subclass/hybridization meant that stam players simply could not be of much benefit for small group play because you brought next to nothing to the table in terms of group heals unless you had something like stamden polar wind in meta.

Other than completely preventing stacking, there is the option of limited stacking like you could have 3 vigors on you at a time for instance. The loss here is that it wouldnt prevent abusive BIS proc set or dot metas like if you remember the summeset sloads meta where youd have groups of people all running sloads and the soul skill doing like 5-10k undodgeable oblivion damage a sec per player stack. With group stacking you basically just died if you were not a templar that could purge back to back........With 3x you would atleast curb the coordinated group abuse though and achieve the original goal.

SneaK wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Bring on the max movement speed snowtreaders aoe hot spammer troll build. Atleast if ballgroups get trolled maybe the server wont lag as much when they die out.

I think that most groups are going to be aggressively reporting people who do not respond to cease and desist DMs.

Yeah cuz we all know group reporting is a reliable thing to listen too, I bet this is going to go over well. At what point will we need to hire ESO lawyers on retainer to plead your case whether cease and desist DM should be binding or not?

I bet this is going to lead to another petty Tbag banning situation.

That's my point.

ZOS has created a really sketchy situation by allowing outside-of-group heals to count toward the penalty, one that empowers both bad actors who want to grief and troll as well as dubious group-reporting retaliation.

I will tell you, though, if some random healer is following me around and does not respond to /say and /w to stop then I probably will report them as well.

It will be bad times to be a pug healer for all sides.

ZOS made that bed and the rest of us will have to lay in it.

Medium-term, there really needs to be a player toggle to either enable or disable your availability to be healed/buffed from out-of-group sources. That would solve the griefing/trolling issue completely.

Yeah we should atleast push zos to tell us whether playing a healer is a potentially bannable offense or not. Does this allow groups to put out restraining orders preventing allies from going to the same keeps?

This is a very interesting conversation.

Why in the world would ZOS roll with a “penalty” solution for people trying to help!

The scenario that comes to mind immediately for me: ballgroups playing defense in a keep are going to be penalized majorly by the pugs defending. Offensive ballgroups running trains won’t be, cause their pugs won’t be around. 7/10 times it takes a ballgroup playing defense to wipe another one training a keep. It’s literally just going to make them stronger on offense.

Its just that zos cant get higher ups to commit more time to pvp. Due to pve reasons and DLC quota, they dug themselves a hole creating so many stacking issues in combat. PvE is hardly affected, other than some metas trivializing build diversity and due to the nature of only killing mobs faster. PvP just gets the brunt of it because how uncoordinated and coordinated build differences work, players also get frustrated and upset when they die to factors outside of their control.

Preventing stacking of effects soft caps how exponential your group's output can be, without prevention a group player's output basically goes to the moon compared to a noncoordinated. To change stacking code you basically need to go create pvp versions or branches of all of the skills/sets in the game and change them to not stack. Obviously you can see why zos higher ups are not wanting to sign off on that just yet.

Its much easier to hold over cyrodil with blankets until the new midsized gamemode comes out and hope that reducing the player count solves the pvp issues...............if we were at 1800 with 24 man groups supposedly on launch and after several reductions we are at 300 and 12 person groups, is the new gamemode going to be 180 with 6 person group sizes?.........When that doesn't work after a few years of bloating, is the solution going to be to cut it down again? How long until we only have bg sized solo que matches?

I’d argue they wouldn’t have to do “PvP skills” to make them not stack, they said they were apprehensive about it cause it wasn’t previously received that well. But as others have pointed out, it was a different game back then, and I think I remember the main issue being stam builds at the time only ran vigor/rally. Not being able to small scale without a mag healer back then would have been an issue if vigor wasn’t stacking. The game has changed and they shouldn’t be using outdated info/feedback as an excuse not to actually implement a better real solution.

Well i just say they would need to do the pvp and pve split skills because good luck convincing trial groups they cant stack 2x of some effect. With vengeance they already implemented a system that lets them have pve and pvp versions of the skills, so it is do-able, just creates twice the work for zos.

Originally hots/dots didnt stack which prevented abuse and single BIS meta builds being copied 12x while also providing calculation culling for the server during high stress lag inducing scenarios like breach fights. Then afterwards we entered the age where cyro groups could just stack everyone with vigor. Which lead current resolving which didnt stack......unless you were in a zerg or ballgroup, then only you could abuse stacking echoing. Which for a while before subclass/hybridization meant that stam players simply could not be of much benefit for small group play because you brought next to nothing to the table in terms of group heals unless you had something like stamden polar wind in meta.

Other than completely preventing stacking, there is the option of limited stacking like you could have 3 vigors on you at a time for instance. The loss here is that it wouldnt prevent abusive BIS proc set or dot metas like if you remember the summeset sloads meta where youd have groups of people all running sloads and the soul skill doing like 5-10k undodgeable oblivion damage a sec per player stack. With group stacking you basically just died if you were not a templar that could purge back to back........With 3x you would atleast curb the coordinated group abuse though and achieve the original goal.

Maybe I’m remembering the change that made Resolving Vigor as only a self heal… that was harmful to Stam group utility.

Regardless, I think removing stacking same skill HoTs is a better solution than penalizing healers. The HoT being reapplied in theory should refresh, just not stack. It would make BG comps more thoughtful and harder to achieve the current success they have, without villainizing the random mutagen spamming pug.

Uh yes we are agreeing there. Resolving became a self heal only because combat back then basically made it so 3-6 man groups were near unkillable with 6 vigors stacking. Except with echoing they just raised that bar up so itd be for larger groups were the only ones that could achieve that level.....now we see all the solo and smallmans struggling to fight larger groups.

Yes removing pvp heal stacking would be a good solution and could even help performance by culling ticks and subsequent procs. Diversity wise it also gives a reason for everyone to not run the same skills too. Like how back in the day youd have people running mutagen or rapid regen. Now adays for most skills we only see people run the obviously better morph. In todays copy/paste subclassing reality we could use literally any reason to branch out from the meta.

Kickimanjaro wrote: »

here's a crazy thought: since so much of the talk on HoT stacking is basically about echoing vigor, and that's so great rn because it's stamina based and two casts can hit the whole group, what if echoing vigor instead cost magicka? it would be prevented in negates and maybe scale differently?

I'm much more interested in actually fixing balance with the same skills in both PvE and PvP rather than creating an entirely different game for PvP. I want this because, as primarily a PvP player, I don't want to be completely clueless when I try to play PvE content. I like that PvP requires knowledge of the game, abilities, and gear, and I want that knowledge to be applicable elsewhere.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Yes removing pvp heal stacking would be a good solution and could even help performance by culling ticks and subsequent procs. Diversity wise it also gives a reason for everyone to not run the same skills too. Like how back in the day youd have people running mutagen or rapid regen. Now adays for most skills we only see people run the obviously better morph. In todays copy/paste subclassing reality we could use literally any reason to branch out from the meta

While I'm not fully convinced that just removing all heal stacking in PvP is the fix, I agree with everything else here. We need more diversity in builds.

ideally pve and pvp builds should be the same. The problem is that the ESO group content model doesnt support this. If eso is to survive its worth thinking about adding group content that incentivises well rounded builds ( like pvp does) while still maintaining a group-centric theme. There are ways to do this and ive thought it was critical for a long time as we see demand for raid like content diminish in games like wow and others. Players wants are changing and you have to change with
them or dissappear.

Major_Toughness wrote: »

Personally I think 33% at 8 HoTs is not enough, although it is a good start and can be reviewed in future. I would prefer eiither

1. 33% at 5
2. 50% at 8

Imo, allow 1 version of a hot, total. So 1 echoing and 1 of other vigor morph. It will be hard to get enough total hots, to keep them all up. If that's not enough, cap all hots to 6 total.

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

I do not know what is meta in PvE, but how would removing HoT stacks cripple the PvE community?

Surely they aren’t all just spamming the same heals? Real question, I’m clueless in PvE.

vigor is about the only heal you'll see more then 2 sources of as i dont recall sorcs bird having an hot with its heal and even thats not really used outside a few runs where heal checks are really noticeable, but mainly you have 2 healers that layer their heals for their group

Knowing this, it does not seem there should be a valid concern for PvE raid leads if they were to just remove stacking HoTs. There is plenty of reliable HoTs for 2 healers to divvy out amongst a comped PvE group.

SneaK wrote: »

Knowing this, it does not seem there should be a valid concern for PvE raid leads if they were to just remove stacking HoTs. There is plenty of reliable HoTs for 2 healers to divvy out amongst a comped PvE group.

There are hardmode trials where the incoming damage and heal checks are punishing, and DPS should stack vigor if you want a chance at a trifecta. vSE HM (Chimera requires groups to split up and there's 4 random assigned rooms, so you aren't guaranteed a healer) and vOC HM (3rd boss is so spread out that it's safer to layer 8 vigors for redundancy) come to mind.