The Gold Road Chapter – which includes the Scribing system – and Update 42 is now available to test on the PTS! You can read the latest patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/656454/
Class Identity: 5 Points
-
reiverx✭✭✭✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
Yes, it's totally fine., When a player just presses a button to attack a random target simply because they have their ultimate up and that unthinking action results in a "fun and entertaining" moment, I have absolutely no problem with that. That fight is taking place in front of a keep with players all over the place. Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else? And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG. No, he had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate. There is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, that's precisely the gameplay that might motivate me to put up with PvP's awful performance. If we can not have such moments under those circumstances, then when can we? The answer is never because you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions in a game where death has absolutely zero consequences.
I've heard these arguments for 6 years, you don;t need to boldface and italics them as if they are somehow things I never considered. I never mained a DK so I don;t want to hear that I am somehow biased or an advocate for them. 90% of my playtime in PvP has been on magicka toons with a heavy reliance on ranged combat. I understand what Reflective Wings does and what it is like to fight against them. You want to talk about balance? How is it balanced or "fair" that certain classes have no choice but to stand their ground and die when the enemy zerg comes, and yet other classes can just say, "nope, I'm leaving, good bye!"? Where was the counterplay for Templars and DKs? Oh, gone because the same classes that could escape railed against Wings and stuff like the original Eclipse. Mag sorcs and Mag NBs want to be able to get into a 1v1 cage match with classes with no mobility but also want the mobility to duck out whenever things get tough. LOL, where's the balance concern there? Why do you suppose that for years sorcerers and nightblades were the goto picks for anyone who even dared to solo? So, no, I never had a problem with a class I was never invested in being able to reflect because that same class had no counterplay when grossly outnumbered. But then again, I was never stubborn enough to bang my head against a wall when there are other targets to drop my meteor on. And if I really was intent on hitting a DK with a meteor, that option was available to me via the various double reflect mechanics, which DKs could do nothing about.
But this is all moot now anyway since ZOS has has taken away DKs signature toy, they have also ruined Nightblades. So we are governed by the principle that balancing means watering down the distinctive things we can do lest some random PuG who is zerging and mindlessly presses buttons might not wind up the subject of an admittedly fun and entertaining Twitch clip.
I get that you are passionate, as we all are, but it's disappointing to see your emotion overcome objectivity. I can see that you are getting into some silly arguments:
"And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG."
That's a strawman (no one "act[ed]" as if Alcast "just had to press a button to delete that PuG").
"...you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions..."
Another strawman (no one cares about feeling sorry for the other player, I have been talking about how skills are balanced in a way that impacts both players' experiences).
"No, [Alcast] had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate."
You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as "mindless" yet you applaud the guy who left the safety of his keep and exposed himself to getting outnumbered without an ultimate. At least, in this instance, it is likely that the player who dropped the meteor can be easily resurrected and continue contributing to his alliance's siege of the keep, while Alcast, if defeated, is at risk of being unable to be resurrected in the midst of enemies (unless there is a forward camp), thus weakening his alliance's defense -- all so he could get a single kill during the battle for a keep?
Do you see how the intelligence argument gets a little murky here? There are multiple ways of viewing this, so you can't blame this overwhelmingly on your judgement of the other player's intelligence. On the flipside, I imagine most of us would have done the same thing Alcast did in that same situation to get that sweet highlight. None of this means, however that a single button press from a readily available, slottable skill should be able to both cancel the damage of an ultimate AND return the damage.
Yes, I am passionate, but that does not invalidate my arguments for lack of objectivity.
And while we're talking strawmen, let's address yours: "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor." No and I did not make a "judgement of the other player's intelligence." I trashed the strategy they used. I made a judgement regarding the action of just dropping a meteor on a player at max range with no follow up. It's perhaps a understandable inference. Sort of like the inference I made when you asked "to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance" and "How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?" as caring about the experience of the other player.
Because you asked to consider the other player, that's why I looked at the clip. Yes, I trashed the strategy of the player who dropped the meteor because it was objectively bad. Yes, I applauded what Alcast did because his actions actually resulted in the death of his target and it was "fun and entertaining" as you admit. The conjecture that Alcast may have put himself in a dangerous position if the keep was flagged and if there was no forward camp does not have anything to do the issue. Besides, that's a lot of hypotheticals and it's clear you did not watch the video as closely as I did or you would have known the keep was not bursted. Alcast's strategy and action could certainly be critiqued as being a too much of a glory hound, but to compare it his opponent's is being disingenuous.
If there are multiple ways of viewing this, why do you keep repeating that those people who disagree with you are either not being objective and "anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively." Multiple ways perhaps, but not objective ways.
Although I don't agree with the position that an ultimate should not be reflected, I do maintain there is a logic and objectivity, to use a word getting thrown around, to believing that. While I contend the game would be more fun to play if that feature were reintroduced, it's just that, a contention. The example shown in the video was 100% avoidable and so I do not see it as being problematic.
Nice job cutting out part of my quote so you could change the context (see bold^). The full context of the quote says, "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as 'mindless'..."
Weird how you cut that out so you could ONCE AGAIN, set up another strawman. Get that junk out oh here. You're just hurting your own credibility with that nonsense.
The only person who's hurting their own credibility here is you. As pointed out earlier, why is it fine that sorc's can streak away into the sunset or NB's perma cloak to negate anything you can deal to them but it's unfair that wings can reflect ranged abilities? People like you are the reason why ZOS has gotten rid of so many unique and interesting mechanics in the game which gave every class their identity. Oh and before you start calling me a DK main or something, my main is a magicka nb, the very class which wings 100% countered.
"People like you are the reason why ZOS has gotten rid of so many unique and interesting mechanics in the game which gave every class their identity."
That's a bold, inaccurate statement. Check out the original class rep Dragonknight thread... you know, the one designed to give us players the platform to list 2 pain points. You'll see my post on the first page, and you'll see that I used one of my two available pain points to advocate for DK escapability. That was in May 2018. So don't even try using the examples of sorc streak/nb permacloak against me. I've wanted DK mobility/escapability for a long time, and when the opportunity rose where we might have a chance to actually be heard, I used one of my two bullets in the DK thread to advocate for it. No one listened.
Clearly, "people like [me]" aren't the problem.
Class reps are the lorem ipsum of ESO.0 -
Varana✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Might I try guessing: That there may have been a legitimate reason to nerf some abilities, e.g. wings (not to what it is now but to tone it down a notch); that awesome video clips come at a cost, and in PvP that cost is another player's awesome clip of "see how I totally nuked that guy with a giant spacexplosion!"; that nostalgia might not always be the best judge; and that they maybe should try balancing awesomeness and fairness.2 -
PhoenixGrey✭✭✭✭✭
✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
Back then i could say a lot of classes were fun and you could just open world PVP on them. Right now, although the options have increased in numerical sense, the number of viable options outside a zerg have decreased.
Currently, I cannot even imagine playing a Mag DK open world as it will be horse simulator followed by getting zerged down. Was wings really that OP in the context of a non mobile easy to zerg down class? I wouldn't think so.
Mag DK is in such a bad shape right now that even a whole patch dedicated to buffing this class would still not convince me to play it. The same can be said for a lot of other specs in this game .Edited by PhoenixGrey on March 18, 2020 8:46PM2 -
ZOS_FalcoYamaokaadminGreetings,
Some posts have been removed due to baiting. Please review our community rules when posting on the forums.0 -
PhoenixGrey✭✭✭✭✭
✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
Yes, it's totally fine., When a player just presses a button to attack a random target simply because they have their ultimate up and that unthinking action results in a "fun and entertaining" moment, I have absolutely no problem with that. That fight is taking place in front of a keep with players all over the place. Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else? And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG. No, he had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate. There is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, that's precisely the gameplay that might motivate me to put up with PvP's awful performance. If we can not have such moments under those circumstances, then when can we? The answer is never because you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions in a game where death has absolutely zero consequences.
I've heard these arguments for 6 years, you don;t need to boldface and italics them as if they are somehow things I never considered. I never mained a DK so I don;t want to hear that I am somehow biased or an advocate for them. 90% of my playtime in PvP has been on magicka toons with a heavy reliance on ranged combat. I understand what Reflective Wings does and what it is like to fight against them. You want to talk about balance? How is it balanced or "fair" that certain classes have no choice but to stand their ground and die when the enemy zerg comes, and yet other classes can just say, "nope, I'm leaving, good bye!"? Where was the counterplay for Templars and DKs? Oh, gone because the same classes that could escape railed against Wings and stuff like the original Eclipse. Mag sorcs and Mag NBs want to be able to get into a 1v1 cage match with classes with no mobility but also want the mobility to duck out whenever things get tough. LOL, where's the balance concern there? Why do you suppose that for years sorcerers and nightblades were the goto picks for anyone who even dared to solo? So, no, I never had a problem with a class I was never invested in being able to reflect because that same class had no counterplay when grossly outnumbered. But then again, I was never stubborn enough to bang my head against a wall when there are other targets to drop my meteor on. And if I really was intent on hitting a DK with a meteor, that option was available to me via the various double reflect mechanics, which DKs could do nothing about.
But this is all moot now anyway since ZOS has has taken away DKs signature toy, they have also ruined Nightblades. So we are governed by the principle that balancing means watering down the distinctive things we can do lest some random PuG who is zerging and mindlessly presses buttons might not wind up the subject of an admittedly fun and entertaining Twitch clip.
I get that you are passionate, as we all are, but it's disappointing to see your emotion overcome objectivity. I can see that you are getting into some silly arguments:
"And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG."
That's a strawman (no one "act[ed]" as if Alcast "just had to press a button to delete that PuG").
"...you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions..."
Another strawman (no one cares about feeling sorry for the other player, I have been talking about how skills are balanced in a way that impacts both players' experiences).
"No, [Alcast] had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate."
You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as "mindless" yet you applaud the guy who left the safety of his keep and exposed himself to getting outnumbered without an ultimate. At least, in this instance, it is likely that the player who dropped the meteor can be easily resurrected and continue contributing to his alliance's siege of the keep, while Alcast, if defeated, is at risk of being unable to be resurrected in the midst of enemies (unless there is a forward camp), thus weakening his alliance's defense -- all so he could get a single kill during the battle for a keep?
Do you see how the intelligence argument gets a little murky here? There are multiple ways of viewing this, so you can't blame this overwhelmingly on your judgement of the other player's intelligence. On the flipside, I imagine most of us would have done the same thing Alcast did in that same situation to get that sweet highlight. None of this means, however that a single button press from a readily available, slottable skill should be able to both cancel the damage of an ultimate AND return the damage.
Yes, I am passionate, but that does not invalidate my arguments for lack of objectivity.
And while we're talking strawmen, let's address yours: "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor." No and I did not make a "judgement of the other player's intelligence." I trashed the strategy they used. I made a judgement regarding the action of just dropping a meteor on a player at max range with no follow up. It's perhaps a understandable inference. Sort of like the inference I made when you asked "to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance" and "How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?" as caring about the experience of the other player.
Because you asked to consider the other player, that's why I looked at the clip. Yes, I trashed the strategy of the player who dropped the meteor because it was objectively bad. Yes, I applauded what Alcast did because his actions actually resulted in the death of his target and it was "fun and entertaining" as you admit. The conjecture that Alcast may have put himself in a dangerous position if the keep was flagged and if there was no forward camp does not have anything to do the issue. Besides, that's a lot of hypotheticals and it's clear you did not watch the video as closely as I did or you would have known the keep was not bursted. Alcast's strategy and action could certainly be critiqued as being a too much of a glory hound, but to compare it his opponent's is being disingenuous.
If there are multiple ways of viewing this, why do you keep repeating that those people who disagree with you are either not being objective and "anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively." Multiple ways perhaps, but not objective ways.
Although I don't agree with the position that an ultimate should not be reflected, I do maintain there is a logic and objectivity, to use a word getting thrown around, to believing that. While I contend the game would be more fun to play if that feature were reintroduced, it's just that, a contention. The example shown in the video was 100% avoidable and so I do not see it as being problematic.
Nice job cutting out part of my quote so you could change the context (see bold^). The full context of the quote says, "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as 'mindless'..."
Weird how you cut that out so you could ONCE AGAIN, set up another strawman. Get that junk out oh here. You're just hurting your own credibility with that nonsense.
The only person who's hurting their own credibility here is you. As pointed out earlier, why is it fine that sorc's can streak away into the sunset or NB's perma cloak to negate anything you can deal to them but it's unfair that wings can reflect ranged abilities? People like you are the reason why ZOS has gotten rid of so many unique and interesting mechanics in the game which gave every class their identity. Oh and before you start calling me a DK main or something, my main is a magicka nb, the very class which wings 100% countered.
"People like you are the reason why ZOS has gotten rid of so many unique and interesting mechanics in the game which gave every class their identity."
That's a bold, inaccurate statement. Check out the original class rep Dragonknight thread... you know, the one designed to give us players the platform to list 2 pain points. You'll see my post on the first page, and you'll see that I used one of my two available pain points to advocate for DK escapability. That was in May 2018. So don't even try using the examples of sorc streak/nb permacloak against me. I've wanted DK mobility/escapability for a long time, and when the opportunity rose where we might have a chance to actually be heard, I used one of my two bullets in the DK thread to advocate for it. No one listened.
Clearly, "people like [me]" aren't the problem.
You want DK's to escape a fight ? We already have sorc and nightblade. DK's are supposed to be able to stand their ground and be hard to zerg down.6 -
Xvorg✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
Yes, it's totally fine., When a player just presses a button to attack a random target simply because they have their ultimate up and that unthinking action results in a "fun and entertaining" moment, I have absolutely no problem with that. That fight is taking place in front of a keep with players all over the place. Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else? And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG. No, he had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate. There is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, that's precisely the gameplay that might motivate me to put up with PvP's awful performance. If we can not have such moments under those circumstances, then when can we? The answer is never because you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions in a game where death has absolutely zero consequences.
I've heard these arguments for 6 years, you don;t need to boldface and italics them as if they are somehow things I never considered. I never mained a DK so I don;t want to hear that I am somehow biased or an advocate for them. 90% of my playtime in PvP has been on magicka toons with a heavy reliance on ranged combat. I understand what Reflective Wings does and what it is like to fight against them. You want to talk about balance? How is it balanced or "fair" that certain classes have no choice but to stand their ground and die when the enemy zerg comes, and yet other classes can just say, "nope, I'm leaving, good bye!"? Where was the counterplay for Templars and DKs? Oh, gone because the same classes that could escape railed against Wings and stuff like the original Eclipse. Mag sorcs and Mag NBs want to be able to get into a 1v1 cage match with classes with no mobility but also want the mobility to duck out whenever things get tough. LOL, where's the balance concern there? Why do you suppose that for years sorcerers and nightblades were the goto picks for anyone who even dared to solo? So, no, I never had a problem with a class I was never invested in being able to reflect because that same class had no counterplay when grossly outnumbered. But then again, I was never stubborn enough to bang my head against a wall when there are other targets to drop my meteor on. And if I really was intent on hitting a DK with a meteor, that option was available to me via the various double reflect mechanics, which DKs could do nothing about.
But this is all moot now anyway since ZOS has has taken away DKs signature toy, they have also ruined Nightblades. So we are governed by the principle that balancing means watering down the distinctive things we can do lest some random PuG who is zerging and mindlessly presses buttons might not wind up the subject of an admittedly fun and entertaining Twitch clip.
I get that you are passionate, as we all are, but it's disappointing to see your emotion overcome objectivity. I can see that you are getting into some silly arguments:
"And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG."
That's a strawman (no one "act[ed]" as if Alcast "just had to press a button to delete that PuG").
"...you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions..."
Another strawman (no one cares about feeling sorry for the other player, I have been talking about how skills are balanced in a way that impacts both players' experiences).
"No, [Alcast] had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate."
You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as "mindless" yet you applaud the guy who left the safety of his keep and exposed himself to getting outnumbered without an ultimate. At least, in this instance, it is likely that the player who dropped the meteor can be easily resurrected and continue contributing to his alliance's siege of the keep, while Alcast, if defeated, is at risk of being unable to be resurrected in the midst of enemies (unless there is a forward camp), thus weakening his alliance's defense -- all so he could get a single kill during the battle for a keep?
Do you see how the intelligence argument gets a little murky here? There are multiple ways of viewing this, so you can't blame this overwhelmingly on your judgement of the other player's intelligence. On the flipside, I imagine most of us would have done the same thing Alcast did in that same situation to get that sweet highlight. None of this means, however that a single button press from a readily available, slottable skill should be able to both cancel the damage of an ultimate AND return the damage.
Yes, I am passionate, but that does not invalidate my arguments for lack of objectivity.
And while we're talking strawmen, let's address yours: "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor." No and I did not make a "judgement of the other player's intelligence." I trashed the strategy they used. I made a judgement regarding the action of just dropping a meteor on a player at max range with no follow up. It's perhaps a understandable inference. Sort of like the inference I made when you asked "to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance" and "How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?" as caring about the experience of the other player.
Because you asked to consider the other player, that's why I looked at the clip. Yes, I trashed the strategy of the player who dropped the meteor because it was objectively bad. Yes, I applauded what Alcast did because his actions actually resulted in the death of his target and it was "fun and entertaining" as you admit. The conjecture that Alcast may have put himself in a dangerous position if the keep was flagged and if there was no forward camp does not have anything to do the issue. Besides, that's a lot of hypotheticals and it's clear you did not watch the video as closely as I did or you would have known the keep was not bursted. Alcast's strategy and action could certainly be critiqued as being a too much of a glory hound, but to compare it his opponent's is being disingenuous.
If there are multiple ways of viewing this, why do you keep repeating that those people who disagree with you are either not being objective and "anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively." Multiple ways perhaps, but not objective ways.
Although I don't agree with the position that an ultimate should not be reflected, I do maintain there is a logic and objectivity, to use a word getting thrown around, to believing that. While I contend the game would be more fun to play if that feature were reintroduced, it's just that, a contention. The example shown in the video was 100% avoidable and so I do not see it as being problematic.
Nice job cutting out part of my quote so you could change the context (see bold^). The full context of the quote says, "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as 'mindless'..."
Weird how you cut that out so you could ONCE AGAIN, set up another strawman. Get that junk out oh here. You're just hurting your own credibility with that nonsense.
The only person who's hurting their own credibility here is you. As pointed out earlier, why is it fine that sorc's can streak away into the sunset or NB's perma cloak to negate anything you can deal to them but it's unfair that wings can reflect ranged abilities? People like you are the reason why ZOS has gotten rid of so many unique and interesting mechanics in the game which gave every class their identity. Oh and before you start calling me a DK main or something, my main is a magicka nb, the very class which wings 100% countered.
"People like you are the reason why ZOS has gotten rid of so many unique and interesting mechanics in the game which gave every class their identity."
That's a bold, inaccurate statement. Check out the original class rep Dragonknight thread... you know, the one designed to give us players the platform to list 2 pain points. You'll see my post on the first page, and you'll see that I used one of my two available pain points to advocate for DK escapability. That was in May 2018. So don't even try using the examples of sorc streak/nb permacloak against me. I've wanted DK mobility/escapability for a long time, and when the opportunity rose where we might have a chance to actually be heard, I used one of my two bullets in the DK thread to advocate for it. No one listened.
Clearly, "people like [me]" aren't the problem.
You want DK's to escape a fight ? We already have sorc and nightblade. DK's are supposed to be able to stand their ground and be hard to zerg down.
Back in the day, DKs had another skill that let them stay their ground and avoid dmg. Temps also had a similar skill. Both mechanics were deleted and templar resorted to Healing, while DKs did it with wings.
Temps became sort of creative at the time too, and the blazeplar build became popular. ZoS didn't like that and did everything possible to nerf it (nerfing malubeth first and the blazing shield), despite it was one of the strongest counters to winged DKs, together with sap tanks.
After both, blazeplars and sap tanks (and magsorc shielded tanks) where erased, the reflect mechanic started to be complained. It became worse with the nerfs to shields. And once the skill was nerfed, all the skills that wings countered were nerfed (specially scatter shot and reach)
What do we learn from this?
Just something that is taught at every school: any specie that becomes extinct will produce an overpopulation of the prey it used to hunt. With no blazeplars and saptanks, DKs became the dominant specie in melee range, so they just needed to slot wings against ranged enemies, something that wasn't much of an option when there were strong melee enemies since most enemies that gave troubles to DKs were melee.
In fact, the only ranged enemy that gave troubles to DK were wardens because racer was unreflectable, unblockable and undodgeable, but kept behind a payroll, so the failure of ZoS was exactly to overestimate the sales of Morrowind... but they didn't counted that the patch was so vilified that people were prone to leave PvP or even the game before trying warden.
At this point, ZoS should go back to the roots to analize their own mistakes if they want to keep the game at a healthy status (not the "healthy" status they think it is now... it takes just a walk around Mournhold to see how bad is the game now)Sarcasm is something too serious to be taken lightly
I was born with the wrong sign
In the wrong house
With the wrong ascendancy
I took the wrong road
That led to the wrong tendencies
I was in the wrong place at the wrong time
For the wrong reason and the wrong rhyme
On the wrong day of the wrong week
Used the wrong method with the wrong technique6 -
Gnortranermara✭✭✭✭✭
✭Whoever is calling the shots on player skills (the combat lead, I'd assume) has a depressing lack of creative vision and mind-boggling misconceptions of the player experience. Skill selection and character building are major CORE gameplay activities for true fans of the Elder Scrolls franchise. Under this team, they've become soulless, empty, inadequate, meaningless choices. The combat changes are consistently the worst part of every single development cycle because they don't have a coherent creative direction and they waste time showboating their own dumb ideas rather than prioritizing actual player desires. They received EXCELLENT player feedback through competent player representatives, then proved themselves to be too egotistical and oblivious to capitalize on the FREE GOLD you delivered them. It's really saddening that one small subset of a much larger dev team is having such a disproportionately negative impact on an otherwise phenomenal game. The skills guy is basically that clueless intern who keeps leaving towels in the patients' abdomen after a flawless surgery by dozens of their peers.1 -
Rikumaru✭✭✭✭✭
✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »@IAVITNI - I am a PvP player, so I am hardly biased against them. And even then, what does it matter? Regardless of whoever it is you want to blame, the point remains that ZOS has always over-simplified, nerfed, and water-downed gameplay.GrumpyDuckling wrote: »PhoenixGrey wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Czekoludek wrote: »GrumpyDuckling wrote: »I remember how awesome it felt to reflect a meteor in the enemies face and leaping after him with my Stam DK. As an enemy you would only do that a few times, till you learned to not drop meteors on Dragonknights (or take the risk). But learning something so simple had to be nerfed! And now the fun is gone, wings has been reduced to a pile of garbage (from a DK perspective). Sure it still might be strong, but it is for sure NOT fun to use.
I wish they would delete Stonefist, I dislike the current form heavily. However, ZOS spent a whole 2-3 patches to complete this one skill, so I doubt they will change it again.
About the cast time on Stonefist, I find it interesting to see that both Fragmented/Igneous Shield and Stonefist have the same lenghty animation, yet Stonefist gets a cast time and the other one not?
I get the gist of what you are saying, but the meteor example is extreme. Wings was definitely a problem when it's status as a regular skill allowed it to not only cancel damage from meter (an ultimate that was already noticeably telegraphed), but also reflect that damage. Yes, it was unique and could make for funny clips like that, but it was also quite silly how imbalanced it was.
So balanced means boring? Wings mitigated a lot of my main toolkit but it was definitely fun ability to use and one of dks signature move. Also it was useless against melee so not "one defense skill to mitigate it all"
Nope. Balance doesn't have to be boring.
Everyone's idea of balance is pretty different which is why its pointless beyond a certain extent.
Games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not balanced and boring like whatever the current *** is.
Actually consider the example I was referring to when you run it through a "fun and entertaining" checker. @Alcast posted a video of a regular slottable skill (one that can be activated at any time) completely mitigating the damage of as well as reversing the damage of an ultimate skill (one that has to be built up to use and by design is stronger than other skills).
Fun and entertaining is great, but you also have to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance. Their ultimate was not only useless against the opponent, but also harmful to them -- all because a player could use an easily slottable, readily available skill (wings) that effectively allowed them to use 2 ultimate skills at once against the other player (the reflected meteor and the leap). How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?
That example truly is a balance concern, and anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively. Hence why I called it an "extreme" example.
It's also a bummer that someone with the platform and potential influence of @Alcast basically calls the wings/meteor interaction from the video a L2P issue. He didn't recognize any sort of imbalance in the video and simply says, "But learning something so simple had to be nerfed!"
Again, I see that as a bummer. I would hope that someone who ZOS has, in the past, given their ears to (whether they listen or not) would have better recognition of L2P and balance. This example was just too extreme, which is why I said I understood the gist of what he was saying, but wanted to point out that it was extreme.
OK, let's look at the clip again.
OK, let me consider the experience of the other player. The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation. This is a zerg-surfing PuG who simply launched that Meteor because they had their ultimate bar filled. I respect these players' enthusiasm for continually participating in a game mode where they are typically overmatched in competitive situations, but ZOS cannot save these players or suddenly make them effective when they play as in the video above where they are just pressing buttons hoping to impede their opponents.
You are writing as if that player was somehow forced to use the meteor and unfairly got punished for doing so. They weren't. They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get and if such mindless button-mashing does not have any potential gameplay consequences, then we aren;t going to have any "fun and entertaining" moments per your quote.
That is not a balance concern. That is not even a L2P concern. That is an example of a person who was just pressing buttons without any thought or concern for what might happen next. Alcast's assessment of that video is on point and it's unfortunate that ZOS does not really heed what he says.
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range and had no strategy that entailed a strategy to follow up the ultimate without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
This particular wings/meteor example is more than simply the target's defensive capabilities, and you know it. Meteor is a noticeably telegraphed ultimate that gives Alcast a few seconds to cast wings (a regularly available, easily-castable skill), and with a simple button press he can delete the damage done. That's totally fine. Congrats, Alcast, you played defense that canceled the damage of an ultimate by having 3 seconds to press a single button. But it should stop there. That simple, easy, single-button defense against an ultimate shouldn't allow him to also send an ultimate worth of damage back to the player.
C'mon @Joy_Division , I shouldn't have to explain to you how that is a balance concern.
Yes, it's totally fine., When a player just presses a button to attack a random target simply because they have their ultimate up and that unthinking action results in a "fun and entertaining" moment, I have absolutely no problem with that. That fight is taking place in front of a keep with players all over the place. Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else? And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG. No, he had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate. There is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, that's precisely the gameplay that might motivate me to put up with PvP's awful performance. If we can not have such moments under those circumstances, then when can we? The answer is never because you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions in a game where death has absolutely zero consequences.
I've heard these arguments for 6 years, you don;t need to boldface and italics them as if they are somehow things I never considered. I never mained a DK so I don;t want to hear that I am somehow biased or an advocate for them. 90% of my playtime in PvP has been on magicka toons with a heavy reliance on ranged combat. I understand what Reflective Wings does and what it is like to fight against them. You want to talk about balance? How is it balanced or "fair" that certain classes have no choice but to stand their ground and die when the enemy zerg comes, and yet other classes can just say, "nope, I'm leaving, good bye!"? Where was the counterplay for Templars and DKs? Oh, gone because the same classes that could escape railed against Wings and stuff like the original Eclipse. Mag sorcs and Mag NBs want to be able to get into a 1v1 cage match with classes with no mobility but also want the mobility to duck out whenever things get tough. LOL, where's the balance concern there? Why do you suppose that for years sorcerers and nightblades were the goto picks for anyone who even dared to solo? So, no, I never had a problem with a class I was never invested in being able to reflect because that same class had no counterplay when grossly outnumbered. But then again, I was never stubborn enough to bang my head against a wall when there are other targets to drop my meteor on. And if I really was intent on hitting a DK with a meteor, that option was available to me via the various double reflect mechanics, which DKs could do nothing about.
But this is all moot now anyway since ZOS has has taken away DKs signature toy, they have also ruined Nightblades. So we are governed by the principle that balancing means watering down the distinctive things we can do lest some random PuG who is zerging and mindlessly presses buttons might not wind up the subject of an admittedly fun and entertaining Twitch clip.
I get that you are passionate, as we all are, but it's disappointing to see your emotion overcome objectivity. I can see that you are getting into some silly arguments:
"And let's not act if Alcast just had to press a button to delete that PuG."
That's a strawman (no one "act[ed]" as if Alcast "just had to press a button to delete that PuG").
"...you're asking us to feel sorry for someone who is putting zero thought behind their actions..."
Another strawman (no one cares about feeling sorry for the other player, I have been talking about how skills are balanced in a way that impacts both players' experiences).
"No, [Alcast] had to willingly leave the safety of his keep and jump in the middle of enemy players sieging a keep, exposing himself to getting Xv1ed having just blown his own ultimate."
You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as "mindless" yet you applaud the guy who left the safety of his keep and exposed himself to getting outnumbered without an ultimate. At least, in this instance, it is likely that the player who dropped the meteor can be easily resurrected and continue contributing to his alliance's siege of the keep, while Alcast, if defeated, is at risk of being unable to be resurrected in the midst of enemies (unless there is a forward camp), thus weakening his alliance's defense -- all so he could get a single kill during the battle for a keep?
Do you see how the intelligence argument gets a little murky here? There are multiple ways of viewing this, so you can't blame this overwhelmingly on your judgement of the other player's intelligence. On the flipside, I imagine most of us would have done the same thing Alcast did in that same situation to get that sweet highlight. None of this means, however that a single button press from a readily available, slottable skill should be able to both cancel the damage of an ultimate AND return the damage.
Yes, I am passionate, but that does not invalidate my arguments for lack of objectivity.
And while we're talking strawmen, let's address yours: "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor." No and I did not make a "judgement of the other player's intelligence." I trashed the strategy they used. I made a judgement regarding the action of just dropping a meteor on a player at max range with no follow up. It's perhaps a understandable inference. Sort of like the inference I made when you asked "to consider the experience of the player on the other side of that combat instance" and "How fun and entertaining is it for the player who cast the meteor?" as caring about the experience of the other player.
Because you asked to consider the other player, that's why I looked at the clip. Yes, I trashed the strategy of the player who dropped the meteor because it was objectively bad. Yes, I applauded what Alcast did because his actions actually resulted in the death of his target and it was "fun and entertaining" as you admit. The conjecture that Alcast may have put himself in a dangerous position if the keep was flagged and if there was no forward camp does not have anything to do the issue. Besides, that's a lot of hypotheticals and it's clear you did not watch the video as closely as I did or you would have known the keep was not bursted. Alcast's strategy and action could certainly be critiqued as being a too much of a glory hound, but to compare it his opponent's is being disingenuous.
If there are multiple ways of viewing this, why do you keep repeating that those people who disagree with you are either not being objective and "anyone with enough experience with how the game operates and plays can recognize it as such if they look at everything that happens in that video objectively." Multiple ways perhaps, but not objective ways.
Although I don't agree with the position that an ultimate should not be reflected, I do maintain there is a logic and objectivity, to use a word getting thrown around, to believing that. While I contend the game would be more fun to play if that feature were reintroduced, it's just that, a contention. The example shown in the video was 100% avoidable and so I do not see it as being problematic.
Nice job cutting out part of my quote so you could change the context (see bold^). The full context of the quote says, "You have spent two posts trashing the intelligence of the player who dropped the meteor, often referring to their actions as 'mindless'..."
Weird how you cut that out so you could ONCE AGAIN, set up another strawman. Get that junk out oh here. You're just hurting your own credibility with that nonsense.
The only person who's hurting their own credibility here is you. As pointed out earlier, why is it fine that sorc's can streak away into the sunset or NB's perma cloak to negate anything you can deal to them but it's unfair that wings can reflect ranged abilities? People like you are the reason why ZOS has gotten rid of so many unique and interesting mechanics in the game which gave every class their identity. Oh and before you start calling me a DK main or something, my main is a magicka nb, the very class which wings 100% countered.
"People like you are the reason why ZOS has gotten rid of so many unique and interesting mechanics in the game which gave every class their identity."
That's a bold, inaccurate statement. Check out the original class rep Dragonknight thread... you know, the one designed to give us players the platform to list 2 pain points. You'll see my post on the first page, and you'll see that I used one of my two available pain points to advocate for DK escapability. That was in May 2018. So don't even try using the examples of sorc streak/nb permacloak against me. I've wanted DK mobility/escapability for a long time, and when the opportunity rose where we might have a chance to actually be heard, I used one of my two bullets in the DK thread to advocate for it. No one listened.
Clearly, "people like [me]" aren't the problem.
So you want DK to be just like the mobile classes and not have it's own unique strengths, it's own weaknesses? Yeah I'm pretty sure on who's the problem here.Overload rework. Power Overload now does physical damage and grants you the power of a tornado: You throw a brick at the target with a light attack, and you hammer your head into that brick with every heavy attack. We have decreased its Ultimate cost, but increased the chance that you get stuck in the animation.3 -
IAVITNI✭✭✭✭✭so anyways, about poor game design decisions resulting in low tier and reskinned gameplay...
The point of bringing up DK wings was to show that instead of introducing actual counterplay to wings the devs chose to dumb down the mechanic. This is the direction they tend to take and what people tend to confuse as the devs advertise these types of changes as an introduction of counterplay.
The existence of 100% mitigation is fine so long as there is counterplay outside of "don't do anything for 4 seconds" or the need to adjust a build to deal with a singular ability. The changes to wings did not introduce counterplay, they weakened the mechanic and inadvertently weakened an iconic DK skill that contributed to class identity. No counter-play was introduced because ranged builds tend to still behave the same.They either wait out the duration too save resources or ignore wings and keep throwing out damage. The difference now is that instead of the skill being overbearing to range, it is now useless to the caster, especially in relation to 100% mitigation + 3 seconds of free offensive damage that wings previously was.
This was a dumbing down of mechanics that lowered the skill ceiling. Wings was strong (as it should be) and was iconic. I highlighted 2 options of how actual counter play could have been introduced to balance wings without removing the unique reflect mechanic, but they would take more effort, something ZoS seems to only direct towards the Crown store.
Also please stop quoting the same string. It keeps @ me but I'm no longer interested in this conversation since as per forum tradition it's devolved.1 -
Joy_Division✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭"GrumpyDuckling wrote:
Definition of Intelligence:
the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intelligence
Quotes from @Joy_Division :
"The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation."
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range, had no strategy that entailed following up the ultimate, and did so without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
"Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else?"
Nah, you're absolutely right, you in no way provided commentary on the player's intelligence...
All of those quotes are in direct reference to the strategy they are using or their build. The terrible tactics in that video need to be clearly called out because bad strategy or just poor gameplay should not be used as an example of how to balance the game. Just because you think I'm insulting the actual player does change the fact that the player got the ultimate reflected back at them because they used poor judgement.
Which is the whole point. You keep repeating your belief that a skill should not reflect on ultimate, but that's looking at things in a vacuum. A player can;t have the meteor reflected back at them if they don't use it against a Dragonknight with wings up or if they use a double reflect. As long as there are ways to defeat DK Wings, then a player wont get a meteor reflected back at them unless these use poor tactics like the player in Alcast's video.
People came up with numerous ideas with how to reform Wings. Did ZOS listen? No. Because they held an unshakable view that DK Wings was a balance concern and thus the subject was a non-starter. This is precisely why things should not be viewed in a vacuum because that leads to uncompromising positions. This is why we shouldn't look at the video and just proclaim DK Wings is problematic. Without destroying the class's identity, how might it be possible to keep the DK's reflect without making it so burdensome?
One attractive idea was to set DK Wing's such that it only reflected projectiles that were cast from over 15 meters away (thus enabling close ranged attacks to bypass the Wings).
ZOS already had 2 skills which always defeated Wings: the Templar Eclipse and Defensive Posture. It's no surprise that these two unique skills no longer possess that functionality. Which is the whole point of this thread: ZOS has gotten rid of many of the options we once had. More such skills would allow players a means to defeat Wings.
Other people have suggested shortening the duration so it could only be used reactively rather than allowing a DK 100% uptime.
The point is there are other measures that could have been taken to reform the skill to keep what was an interesting and entertaining mechanic, but that path has not been taken because ZOS just chose to take an absolutist position that Wings ability to reflect just had to go. This was why I challenged your contention that the video showed what was an extreme balance issue. It was more the case of showing a player who played poorly. If we just go with the view that Wings should just not reflect a meteor, then there is no possibility for compromise.7 -
reiverx✭✭✭✭✭I have to wonder how the class reps really feel about the direction of the game.
A lot of people say that the views on here aren't the majority player view. But in my experience, at least on PS4 NA, it is. There is a huge growing concern about the endless gutting of classes. Text chat is filled with it.
4 -
Drdeath20✭✭✭✭✭
✭You can only get 2 of these. Choose wisely!
1.Strong and unique class skills/abilities
2.Decent balance between classes
3.Continue to get more powerful and get more content/stuffEdited by Drdeath20 on March 19, 2020 1:01PM1 -
Xvorg✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭You can only get 2 of these. Choose wisely!
1.Strong and unique class skills/abilities
2.Decent balance between classes
3.Continue to get more powerful and get more content/stuff
1 and 2
each class has different strenghts and that's why I came with the example of blazeplars and sap tanks, 2 classes that on their own right could counter a class that used to prey on them just by adjusting their build...Sarcasm is something too serious to be taken lightly
I was born with the wrong sign
In the wrong house
With the wrong ascendancy
I took the wrong road
That led to the wrong tendencies
I was in the wrong place at the wrong time
For the wrong reason and the wrong rhyme
On the wrong day of the wrong week
Used the wrong method with the wrong technique2 -
GrumpyDuckling✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Joy_Division wrote: »"GrumpyDuckling wrote:
Definition of Intelligence:
the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intelligence
Quotes from @Joy_Division :
"The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation."
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range, had no strategy that entailed following up the ultimate, and did so without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
"Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else?"
Nah, you're absolutely right, you in no way provided commentary on the player's intelligence...
All of those quotes are in direct reference to the strategy they are using or their build. The terrible tactics in that video need to be clearly called out because bad strategy or just poor gameplay should not be used as an example of how to balance the game. Just because you think I'm insulting the actual player does change the fact that the player got the ultimate reflected back at them because they used poor judgement.
Which is the whole point. You keep repeating your belief that a skill should not reflect on ultimate, but that's looking at things in a vacuum. A player can;t have the meteor reflected back at them if they don't use it against a Dragonknight with wings up or if they use a double reflect. As long as there are ways to defeat DK Wings, then a player wont get a meteor reflected back at them unless these use poor tactics like the player in Alcast's video.
People came up with numerous ideas with how to reform Wings. Did ZOS listen? No. Because they held an unshakable view that DK Wings was a balance concern and thus the subject was a non-starter. This is precisely why things should not be viewed in a vacuum because that leads to uncompromising positions. This is why we shouldn't look at the video and just proclaim DK Wings is problematic. Without destroying the class's identity, how might it be possible to keep the DK's reflect without making it so burdensome?
One attractive idea was to set DK Wing's such that it only reflected projectiles that were cast from over 15 meters away (thus enabling close ranged attacks to bypass the Wings).
ZOS already had 2 skills which always defeated Wings: the Templar Eclipse and Defensive Posture. It's no surprise that these two unique skills no longer possess that functionality. Which is the whole point of this thread: ZOS has gotten rid of many of the options we once had. More such skills would allow players a means to defeat Wings.
Other people have suggested shortening the duration so it could only be used reactively rather than allowing a DK 100% uptime.
The point is there are other measures that could have been taken to reform the skill to keep what was an interesting and entertaining mechanic, but that path has not been taken because ZOS just chose to take an absolutist position that Wings ability to reflect just had to go. This was why I challenged your contention that the video showed what was an extreme balance issue. It was more the case of showing a player who played poorly. If we just go with the view that Wings should just not reflect a meteor, then there is no possibility for compromise.
It is really difficult to approach your arguments with credibility and assume you are trying to be objective when you can't admit that you are wrong. I even posted the definition of intelligence for you.
Intelligence, per definition, consists of the ability to understand a new or trying situation, and you are directly questioning the player's ability to understand the new or trying situation they are in.
I mean, c'mon, @Joy_Division you literally wrote, "Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else?"
That is direct commentary on the player's intelligence, per the definition of intelligence. It is very clear.
Concerning the specific wings/meteor example. I think it is extreme when a single, easily slottable and readily available skill gives a player the ability to press a single button, within a 3 second window, to both completely mitigate and return the damage of an ultimate ability.
Though I don't think your arguments are very strong against my claim that wings/meteor is an extreme example, it is clear that you are unwavering and do not see things the same way. I don't think there is much more to gain from this back and forth.
Be well.1 -
PreechrSoul ShrivenFrom the perspective of a new player, the thing all MMOs change themselves to attract, I can tell you why this conversation is interesting to me. I've played most other PvE-centric MMOs out there, so I'm pretty familiar with the nerf train and the protracted arguments it creates on forums. Before starting into ESO, I was aware that the development team was right in the middle of a re-balancing process that involved homogenizing the various classes, which sounds pretty bad honestly, but I joined up anyway.
I had thought that maybe once ESO fixed all its earlier problems it would have become that mythical "game I've always wanted to play," with distinctive classes, engaging combat, enough interesting skill choices that meta-gaming wouldn't over-ride player agency, and maybe even a PvP system that had an answer to the zerg.
I also wanted a huge, immersive world with great writing and questing, but ESO delivers on those points really well. These are the elements that will keep me in the game for now, where those other issues are the stuff I'll have to consider later when I'm deciding on whether to stick with it once I'm bored with making alts and leveling them up.
Despite this thread going fairly off the rails, the original post speaks directly to my major concerns... again, as a new player that's not a twelve year old that has never played an MMO before. Inexperienced children should not really, in my opinion, be the target market of any studio running an MMO. Kids play phone games. The kids that play MMOs are generally the children of MMO players, and I'm pretty sure those kids and the people like me out there that ZOS wants to sign up are not looking for a simple, easy game to play. I've seen many other complex and fun games dumbed-down to the point of becoming boring, and that's why I left. Leaving those games is why I'm here, and I'm enjoying myself so far, hoping this re-balancing effort doesn't ruin this game, too.
To be blunt, color-coding lightshows based on class is not a feature to me. In fact, I would rather my class come as a surprise to other players because I'm doing things with my choices that are unexpected from my class. Expending effort toward something like this is the first sign to me that the development team is thinking like coders rather than coding like players. Same can be said for homogenizing class skills. Yes, all the other MMOs are doing it, but that doesn't mean its what players want. What this trend signifies is that those that write software tend to think in categories and have become over-reliant on dismissing complaints from their users.
Yes, gamers will complain about literally anything in forums. While the easy response is to ignore them, the better long-term response is to get engaged and get to the root of what they are complaining about. While it may make perfect sense to a coder to boil down class skills into A, B, C, D and E with categories for DPS, Tanking and Healing in the player's choice of colors and animations, this is not how you differentiate classes if you're thinking like a player. This is actually dangerously close to merely providing the appearance of choice.
But class identity is not defined only by skills, either. Fighting effectively is also largely affected by buffs and debuffs, another area currently being standardized, but also another way in which class identity could be strengthened if used intelligently. However its done, though, its important to make sure each class brings something to the table that other classes cannot. This cannot be just one or two signature skills that are slightly different than the signature abilities of other classes and it certainly should not be boiled down to what color their skills emit.
Right now you have minor and major buffs and debuffs spread out across class skills, weapon skills and all the various armor set bonuses. Anybody can provide pretty much anything, regardless of class choice. You could limit some majors to certain appropriate classes, or you could improve some majors and assign them out as class buffs/debuffs.
Speaking of set bonuses, there are far too many of those in the world with only a relative few that anyone would want. Why not take a pass at some of those rarely used sets with a mind toward class or even race related bonuses?
Additionally, as others have said already, the various types of damage and where they come from is fairly messy, and this is another area that could go into defining what each class really is, especially if a little work was put into making each type of damage unique rather than just something else that needs to be separately mitigated.
There are probably a few other sources for making classes distinctive, but as others in this thread and I'm sure countless others have already stated, the best thing a developer can give any player is a powerful and impactful choice. Is it scary to risk overpowering a class skill? I'm sure it is, but please keep in mind that underpowered skills are really very boring.
ESO is a great game, but it is in a unique position to offer what none of its competitors will: actual choice instead of the illusion of choice. Yes, we all know that all the other MMOs out there have made their games boring and bland grinders, and we know they are making money at it. I'll tell you a little secret, though: Whenever I talk to players about starting up on a new game, they ask me what makes this new one different. Sure, they all consider the hassles of starting over at level 1 in a world they don't know, but they are always willing to consider it for the right game.
As I said, ESO already has great stories, writing and an incredible world. If you can add to that gameplay based in real, distinct and powerful choices, your players would have something to sell their friends that play other games on.
And, unfortunately, this is exactly where the disconnect lies: Gamers prefer choices that make them different and better in some ways, while most of the people making games seem to prefer choosing to do whatever everyone else is doing.
Please don't fall into that trap.4 -
Drdeath20✭✭✭✭✭
✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »"GrumpyDuckling wrote:
Definition of Intelligence:
the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intelligence
Quotes from @Joy_Division :
"The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation."
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range, had no strategy that entailed following up the ultimate, and did so without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
"Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else?"
Nah, you're absolutely right, you in no way provided commentary on the player's intelligence...
All of those quotes are in direct reference to the strategy they are using or their build. The terrible tactics in that video need to be clearly called out because bad strategy or just poor gameplay should not be used as an example of how to balance the game. Just because you think I'm insulting the actual player does change the fact that the player got the ultimate reflected back at them because they used poor judgement.
Which is the whole point. You keep repeating your belief that a skill should not reflect on ultimate, but that's looking at things in a vacuum. A player can;t have the meteor reflected back at them if they don't use it against a Dragonknight with wings up or if they use a double reflect. As long as there are ways to defeat DK Wings, then a player wont get a meteor reflected back at them unless these use poor tactics like the player in Alcast's video.
People came up with numerous ideas with how to reform Wings. Did ZOS listen? No. Because they held an unshakable view that DK Wings was a balance concern and thus the subject was a non-starter. This is precisely why things should not be viewed in a vacuum because that leads to uncompromising positions. This is why we shouldn't look at the video and just proclaim DK Wings is problematic. Without destroying the class's identity, how might it be possible to keep the DK's reflect without making it so burdensome?
One attractive idea was to set DK Wing's such that it only reflected projectiles that were cast from over 15 meters away (thus enabling close ranged attacks to bypass the Wings).
ZOS already had 2 skills which always defeated Wings: the Templar Eclipse and Defensive Posture. It's no surprise that these two unique skills no longer possess that functionality. Which is the whole point of this thread: ZOS has gotten rid of many of the options we once had. More such skills would allow players a means to defeat Wings.
Other people have suggested shortening the duration so it could only be used reactively rather than allowing a DK 100% uptime.
The point is there are other measures that could have been taken to reform the skill to keep what was an interesting and entertaining mechanic, but that path has not been taken because ZOS just chose to take an absolutist position that Wings ability to reflect just had to go. This was why I challenged your contention that the video showed what was an extreme balance issue. It was more the case of showing a player who played poorly. If we just go with the view that Wings should just not reflect a meteor, then there is no possibility for compromise.
It is really difficult to approach your arguments with credibility and assume you are trying to be objective when you can't admit that you are wrong. I even posted the definition of intelligence for you.
Intelligence, per definition, consists of the ability to understand a new or trying situation, and you are directly questioning the player's ability to understand the new or trying situation they are in.
I mean, c'mon, @Joy_Division you literally wrote, "Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else?"
That is direct commentary on the player's intelligence, per the definition of intelligence. It is very clear.
Concerning the specific wings/meteor example. I think it is extreme when a single, easily slottable and readily available skill gives a player the ability to press a single button, within a 3 second window, to both completely mitigate and return the damage of an ultimate ability.
Though I don't think your arguments are very strong against my claim that wings/meteor is an extreme example, it is clear that you are unwavering and do not see things the same way. I don't think there is much more to gain from this back and forth.
Be well.
Im with ya on this but do you think we could move on from 1 specific example (that wasnt even the majority of his original post [i believe shards was talked about much more]) and get back to the theme of joy's original post?
From my take joy has a desire to go back to classes having strong skills and in general more dynamic game play. Games too old and at this point its just howling at the moon. I could be wrong, in fact often i am. What is your take?2 -
Drdeath20✭✭✭✭✭
✭You can only get 2 of these. Choose wisely!
1.Strong and unique class skills/abilities
2.Decent balance between classes
3.Continue to get more powerful and get more content/stuff
1 and 2
each class has different strenghts and that's why I came with the example of blazeplars and sap tanks, 2 classes that on their own right could counter a class that used to prey on them just by adjusting their build...
Ok but what reason would people have to continue playing? For a good amount of time people will be happy but not for forever, then what. Once they farmed their final set and played it to boredom. As sad as it sounds the grind is necessary. If you introduce new classes, armor sets, skill lines, as well as other combat stuff it will create imbalances.
The most effective way to keep people playing is to give them new content but the supply never meets the demand. The next best way is to give them shiny new stuff worth the time drain that it takes to get it. Adding any new and more powerful stuff to the game will always create imbalance bcz not everything is effected equally by changes.
My Point is its rare to get a game that has all 3. At times some games do but it does not last and eventually the pendulum swings the other way.Edited by Drdeath20 on March 19, 2020 5:46PM1 -
Xvorg✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭You can only get 2 of these. Choose wisely!
1.Strong and unique class skills/abilities
2.Decent balance between classes
3.Continue to get more powerful and get more content/stuff
1 and 2
each class has different strenghts and that's why I came with the example of blazeplars and sap tanks, 2 classes that on their own right could counter a class that used to prey on them just by adjusting their build...
Ok but what reason would people have to continue playing? For a good amount of time people will be happy but not for forever, then what. Once they farmed their final set and played it to boredom. As sad as it sounds the grind is necessary. If you introduce new classes, armor sets, skill lines, as well as other combat stuff it will create imbalances.
The most effective way to keep people playing is to give them new content but the supply never meets the demand. The next best way is to give them shiny new stuff worth the time drain that it takes to get it. Adding any new and more powerful stuff to the game will always create imbalance bcz not everything is effected equally by changes.
My Point is its rare to get a game that has all 3. At times some games do but it does not last and eventually the pendulum swings the other way.
Actually they failed in end game content not becuase t was bad but because they just looked at PvP as end game. IC was the first attempt to add somethng else to end game PvP and failed.
They should have made the pvp much more dynamic and not only focused on cyro.Sarcasm is something too serious to be taken lightly
I was born with the wrong sign
In the wrong house
With the wrong ascendancy
I took the wrong road
That led to the wrong tendencies
I was in the wrong place at the wrong time
For the wrong reason and the wrong rhyme
On the wrong day of the wrong week
Used the wrong method with the wrong technique0 -
Faulgor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭You can only get 2 of these. Choose wisely!
1.Strong and unique class skills/abilities
2.Decent balance between classes
3.Continue to get more powerful and get more content/stuff
Only 2? I'd be happy if we got at least 1 of those.
#1: Skills have been stripped of their unique effects continuously since release.
#2: Eh maybe? It's not as bad as it used to be.
#3: Last year saw an unprecedented barrage of nerfs. My chars are still ~20% weaker than a year ago. Vertical progression has been halted altogether. I would love to get more powerful for once, that would be great.Alandrol Sul: He's making another Numidium?!?
Vivec: Worse, buddy. They're buying it.2 -
pieratsos✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭GrumpyDuckling wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »"GrumpyDuckling wrote:
Definition of Intelligence:
the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intelligence
Quotes from @Joy_Division :
"The other player is at maximum range, did not even try to engage Alcast in a meaningful way, and got hit with a 13.8K Take Flight which means they have either zero concept or care for self-preservation."
"They chose to unthinkingly launch a meteor at a player who was at maximum range, had no strategy that entailed following up the ultimate, and did so without any consideration for the target's defensive capabilities. This is about as baseline brainless as you can get..."
"Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else?"
Nah, you're absolutely right, you in no way provided commentary on the player's intelligence...
All of those quotes are in direct reference to the strategy they are using or their build. The terrible tactics in that video need to be clearly called out because bad strategy or just poor gameplay should not be used as an example of how to balance the game. Just because you think I'm insulting the actual player does change the fact that the player got the ultimate reflected back at them because they used poor judgement.
Which is the whole point. You keep repeating your belief that a skill should not reflect on ultimate, but that's looking at things in a vacuum. A player can;t have the meteor reflected back at them if they don't use it against a Dragonknight with wings up or if they use a double reflect. As long as there are ways to defeat DK Wings, then a player wont get a meteor reflected back at them unless these use poor tactics like the player in Alcast's video.
People came up with numerous ideas with how to reform Wings. Did ZOS listen? No. Because they held an unshakable view that DK Wings was a balance concern and thus the subject was a non-starter. This is precisely why things should not be viewed in a vacuum because that leads to uncompromising positions. This is why we shouldn't look at the video and just proclaim DK Wings is problematic. Without destroying the class's identity, how might it be possible to keep the DK's reflect without making it so burdensome?
One attractive idea was to set DK Wing's such that it only reflected projectiles that were cast from over 15 meters away (thus enabling close ranged attacks to bypass the Wings).
ZOS already had 2 skills which always defeated Wings: the Templar Eclipse and Defensive Posture. It's no surprise that these two unique skills no longer possess that functionality. Which is the whole point of this thread: ZOS has gotten rid of many of the options we once had. More such skills would allow players a means to defeat Wings.
Other people have suggested shortening the duration so it could only be used reactively rather than allowing a DK 100% uptime.
The point is there are other measures that could have been taken to reform the skill to keep what was an interesting and entertaining mechanic, but that path has not been taken because ZOS just chose to take an absolutist position that Wings ability to reflect just had to go. This was why I challenged your contention that the video showed what was an extreme balance issue. It was more the case of showing a player who played poorly. If we just go with the view that Wings should just not reflect a meteor, then there is no possibility for compromise.
It is really difficult to approach your arguments with credibility and assume you are trying to be objective when you can't admit that you are wrong. I even posted the definition of intelligence for you.
Intelligence, per definition, consists of the ability to understand a new or trying situation, and you are directly questioning the player's ability to understand the new or trying situation they are in.
I mean, c'mon, @Joy_Division you literally wrote, "Why couldn't the PuG use a minutia of brainpower to target someone else?"
That is direct commentary on the player's intelligence, per the definition of intelligence. It is very clear.
Concerning the specific wings/meteor example. I think it is extreme when a single, easily slottable and readily available skill gives a player the ability to press a single button, within a 3 second window, to both completely mitigate and return the damage of an ultimate ability.
Though I don't think your arguments are very strong against my claim that wings/meteor is an extreme example, it is clear that you are unwavering and do not see things the same way. I don't think there is much more to gain from this back and forth.
Be well.
The problem is that u are looking at each skill individually and trying to pass a judgment of whether it is balanced or not without looking at the classes and how each skill is used. You are essentially treating all classes in the same way and the only outcome u get like this is homogenization and stripping everything unique about the classes.
That's not a wings specific problem. Streak and cloak as mechanics for example are also overloaded and broken when u isolate them. But they are not when u look at the whole picture and how the classes are designed and what they give to their perspective classes.
Same with wings. DK is a melee brawler with limited mobility and extremely limited range capabilities that is designed to hold its ground and bring players to melee range. They are not ranged nuke juggernauts like sorcs. Reflect as a mechanic is broken when it's used by a sorc because of how sorcs are designed. Reflect as a mechanic is helping DKs do what they were designed to do and making players think how they approach a fight with a DK. That's class identity and making people think and adapt to their opponents. That's healthy for the game and player skill and that was joy's argument.
Now if wings as an ability and not as a mechanic is problematic then yes address it so it's not a passive one button reflect all style of play. Which was also joy's argument and listed other solutions to wings like lowering duration to limit its effectiveness without altering reflect as a mechanic which is what made DKs unique and gave them an identity.
It's not that joy didn't address ur argument. He actually did. You just chose to ignore it like u did with so many others in this thread, derailed his argument and accused him of strawman and judging the intelligence of people which ironically is a strawman argument in itself while repeating the same argument which is the whole freaking problem in the first place. It's ur approach and how u pass judgements on various skills that is the issue that results in homogenization, standardization and stripping class identity.3 -
Drdeath20✭✭✭✭✭
✭You can only get 2 of these. Choose wisely!
1.Strong and unique class skills/abilities
2.Decent balance between classes
3.Continue to get more powerful and get more content/stuff
Only 2? I'd be happy if we got at least 1 of those.
#1: Skills have been stripped of their unique effects continuously since release.
#2: Eh maybe? It's not as bad as it used to be.
#3: Last year saw an unprecedented barrage of nerfs. My chars are still ~20% weaker than a year ago. Vertical progression has been halted altogether. I would love to get more powerful for once, that would be great.
Touche!
At beta you had strong class skills + quasi balance, everything was new bcz game was new and laughably easy. OG lead combat designer
Then VR ranks and CP hit + trials + DLCs + sewers etc, slightly harder content... at that time it was still strong class skills + new stuff but balance was a joke. Wrobble as lead combat designer
The last couple years we have an overall nerfing down of class skills from nerfmire till now and overall harder content. Since then we have had weak class skills + quasi balance + new stuff. Began with wrobble and now into wheeler as lead combat designer.
The players wanted balance and endgame and ZoS responded.Edited by Drdeath20 on March 20, 2020 12:02PM0 -
Drdeath20✭✭✭✭✭
✭You can only get 2 of these. Choose wisely!
1.Strong and unique class skills/abilities
2.Decent balance between classes
3.Continue to get more powerful and get more content/stuff
1 and 2
each class has different strenghts and that's why I came with the example of blazeplars and sap tanks, 2 classes that on their own right could counter a class that used to prey on them just by adjusting their build...
Ok but what reason would people have to continue playing? For a good amount of time people will be happy but not for forever, then what. Once they farmed their final set and played it to boredom. As sad as it sounds the grind is necessary. If you introduce new classes, armor sets, skill lines, as well as other combat stuff it will create imbalances.
The most effective way to keep people playing is to give them new content but the supply never meets the demand. The next best way is to give them shiny new stuff worth the time drain that it takes to get it. Adding any new and more powerful stuff to the game will always create imbalance bcz not everything is effected equally by changes.
My Point is its rare to get a game that has all 3. At times some games do but it does not last and eventually the pendulum swings the other way.
Actually they failed in end game content not becuase t was bad but because they just looked at PvP as end game. IC was the first attempt to add somethng else to end game PvP and failed.
They should have made the pvp much more dynamic and not only focused on cyro.
Yeah the ball was dropped from the get go and ever since. Dont get me wrong, its a great game but the potential was there to be something more and instead we got this.Edited by Drdeath20 on March 20, 2020 11:45AM0 -
Drdeath20✭✭✭✭✭
✭If the skills were soo powerful 5/6 years ago, then how come soo many people struggled soo much killing mudcrabs! Checkmate!!!Edited by Drdeath20 on March 20, 2020 11:42AM0 -
Charon_on_Vacation✭✭✭✭the issue at hand seems quite simple.
balancing around a lot of diverse and interesting skills is a lot harder than balancing around bland and homogenized ones.
the team was and still is struggling with balance, so a choice was made to make it easier on them.
the thought that a certain population of the game would be totally fine with non-balanced and/or asymmetric skills didn't cross their mind or was dismissed.
class identity is also a double-edged sword, where part of the community wants it, and another part prefers to be able to do everything with every class the same way.
they just chose to take the easy way out and tried to make it possible for every class to do everything with homogenized skills.
way less work than achieving the same goal while keeping class identiy and niches that are meaningful.
a course correction would entail a lot of work and i don't think they are able or willing to take the time for it.Edited by Charon_on_Vacation on March 20, 2020 12:10PM2 -
I_killed_Vivec✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭One of the giveaways about class identity/skill uniformity is given in the dev's justification for nerfs/buffs.
Skills have to be equivalent, should cost the same, do similar damage.... DoTs should last the same time, do the same damage, convey similar additional effects...
But that is not how the game should be if you want class identity. It isn't how it should be if you want rock/paper/scissors.
Unfortunately that kind of class identity is far more complex. How do you make a DK master of melee without making it overpowered? Or a sorc master of ranged attacks without making it invulnerable? Or a nightblade a lethal assassin without making it impervious to counters? Or a templar effective in combat without undoing its healing capabilities?
It's a hard problem, so they just go with DoT: does x damage over y seconds, costing z magica; spammable does x damage, costs y, gives a stun for 3 seconds... and then people bicker about which is slightly better, why they need to rely on weapon skills, not class skills, and why DKs don't have an execute.2 -
newtinmpls✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭I want unique and powerful class skills.
I want all classes to be competitive
I want to continue to get powerful and get new and better stuff.
You can choose 2.
I want no classes and just "skill lines" or maybe just "skills"Tenesi Faryon of Telvanni - Dunmer Sorceress who deliberately sought sacrifice into Cold Harbor to rescue her beloved.
Hisa Ni Caemaire - Altmer Sorceress, member of the Order Draconis and Adept of the House of Dibella.
Broken Branch Toothmaul - goblin (for my goblin characters, I use either orsimer or bosmer templates) Templar, member of the Order Draconis and persistently unskilled pickpocket
Mol gro Durga - Orsimer Socerer/Battlemage who died the first time when the Nibenay Valley chapterhouse of the Order Draconis was destroyed, then went back to Cold Harbor to rescue his second/partner who was still captive. He overestimated his resistance to the hopelessness of Oblivion, about to give up, and looked up to see the golden glow of atherius surrounding a beautiful young woman who extended her hand to him and said "I can help you". He carried Fianna Kingsley out of Cold Harbor on his shoulder. He carried Alvard Stower under one arm. He also irritated the Prophet who had intended the portal for only Mol and Lyris.***Order Draconis - well c'mon there has to be some explanation for all those dragon tattoos.
House of Dibella - If you have ever seen or read "Memoirs of a Geisha" that's just the beginning...
Nibenay Valley Chapterhouse - Where now stands only desolate ground and a dolmen there once was a thriving community supporting one of the major chapterhouses of the Order Draconis0
