Best Of
Re: Restoration Staff spammable?
Kind of. Sometimes combat prayer is used as a spammable and radiating regeneration one could argue is a semi-spammable with how often you have to cast it.
Soarora
5
Re: Can/will they improve the character creator?
I do not think you have an accurate understanding of the situation.ImmortalCX wrote: »You say you have a history with the game, but admit you don't know about the lore, in spite of declaring yourself the arbiter of what appearence and poses are appropriate for each race. You dismiss anyone who disagrees with you as "playing barbie dress up" and not being real 'experienced' gamers like you, but you're only able to articulate your point as "make it look like WoW because that's what I'm used to".
Honestly you'd be more likely to get support for your idea if you weren't so condescending about it, and tried to understand that different art styles and especially lore are valid and different people will genuinely like different things. At the moment it comes across as if you have very little experience with MMOs or RPGs outside the one game and you're getting thrown off by things being different.
Edit: Also if you're experience with ESO is from when it launched you might remember that the races and character creator were the same before the game had any microtransactions, and the decision on the art style was made when they were intending to make a 100% subscription based game with no microtransactions or additional costs, before they discovered there wasn't enough demand for that. I know "it sucks because of monetisation" seems like a safe, easy win when complaining about any game, but in this case it makes no sense which makes it a pretty weak argument.
I care about systems. I care about itemization. I care about progression. I care about rewards.
Its possible to play a game for 2500 hours and not know lore or details of different races. Part of that reason is because every PC looks nearly identical. Underneath all the technicolor microtransaction you can't tell one from race from another.
I am against microtransactions when they dominate a game. The Barbie Dreamhouse playstyle epitomizes what ESO has become. I think its cool when it subsides the rest of us and keeps the servers going. But when the people engaged in that playstyle resist changes that could potentially grow the playerbase, that is when its problematic.
Anyone who comes to ESO from any other modern RPG will immediately see the dated character models and base their decision to play based on that. I think that is a factual statement.
This thread has shown a ton of resistance to suggestions to improve the character models. (All of my suggestions are based on what is "state of the art" in other games.) I think that is also a factual statement.
So there is a group of players who I have dubbed "Barbie Dreamhouse" players who are obviously attached to their purchases and cosmetic decisions, (who probably pay more than people in my category), yet who may also lead to the demise of the game if they threaten to regequit if the character models are updated. That is why the Barbie Dreamhouse players are so vocal here. They are screaming, "Keep your hands off my microtransaction cosmetics!"
I think I have an accurate understanding of the situation.
I'm sure people will be happy to see additional options in the character creator (adornments, markings, nose shapes and such), wider sliders for body types, more customization via in game rewards. What many people do not want is to log in one day and find out that their character (that they spent a lot of time creating) looks unrecognizable. So, adding options is a yay, taking away is a nay.
It has nothing to do with crown store. People get attached to the looks of their characters, some even have backstories for them (I personally do not, but I know that it's important for some players).
As for what other games do, current pseudo realistic models is what I personally like about ESO. I definitely do not want to see cartoonish WoW models or anime like FF14 models make their way into ESO.
Re: Can/will they improve the character creator?
ImmortalCX wrote: »You say you have a history with the game, but admit you don't know about the lore, in spite of declaring yourself the arbiter of what appearence and poses are appropriate for each race. You dismiss anyone who disagrees with you as "playing barbie dress up" and not being real 'experienced' gamers like you, but you're only able to articulate your point as "make it look like WoW because that's what I'm used to".
Honestly you'd be more likely to get support for your idea if you weren't so condescending about it, and tried to understand that different art styles and especially lore are valid and different people will genuinely like different things. At the moment it comes across as if you have very little experience with MMOs or RPGs outside the one game and you're getting thrown off by things being different.
Edit: Also if you're experience with ESO is from when it launched you might remember that the races and character creator were the same before the game had any microtransactions, and the decision on the art style was made when they were intending to make a 100% subscription based game with no microtransactions or additional costs, before they discovered there wasn't enough demand for that. I know "it sucks because of monetisation" seems like a safe, easy win when complaining about any game, but in this case it makes no sense which makes it a pretty weak argument.
I care about systems. I care about itemization. I care about progression. I care about rewards.
Its possible to play a game for 2500 hours and not know lore or details of different races. Part of that reason is because every PC looks nearly identical. Underneath all the technicolor microtransaction you can't tell one from race from another.
I am against microtransactions when they dominate a game. The Barbie Dreamhouse playstyle epitomizes what ESO has become. I think its cool when it subsides the rest of us and keeps the servers going. But when the people engaged in that playstyle resist changes that could potentially grow the playerbase, that is when its problematic.
Anyone who comes to ESO from any other modern RPG will immediately see the dated character models and base their decision to play based on that. I think that is a factual statement.
This thread has shown a ton of resistance to suggestions to improve the character models. (All of my suggestions are based on what is "state of the art" in other games.) I think that is also a factual statement.
So there is a group of players who I have dubbed "Barbie Dreamhouse" players who are obviously attached to their purchases and cosmetic decisions, (who probably pay more than people in my category), yet who may also lead to the demise of the game if they threaten to regequit if the character models are updated. That is why the Barbie Dreamhouse players are so vocal here. They are screaming, "Keep your hands off my microtransaction cosmetics!"
I think I have an accurate understanding of the situation.
Form everything you’ve said in this thread and others, I feel that this is not the game for you.
ESO struggled in its early days. It’s precisely because they pivoted to cater to the hardcore RPG players who are very into lore and character (you know, the fans of the game series from which this is from…) that the game started to thrive. But yes, that means the “typical MMO I-only-play-for-rewards-and-screw-the-story” people got left in the dust.
Also trying to reduce people to “Barbie Dreamhouse” just because their playstyle is different than yours is not going to win you any fans either. And I can assure you that there are a fair number of people who can knock out trifectas like it’s nothing and will spend hours making sure their character looks good while doing so.
It’s the RP and Character Creation and Housing communities that are carrying this game. Full stop. We pay the subs, we pay for Crowns, we want this game to succeed because we like having our world. Having someone come in — someone who admits they can’t even be bothered to spend a cent of their own money to keep the servers online — and tell us that we’re the problem is… a choice.
Re: Should ESO have more 3-piece sets?
Since they need to be redone anyway they could look into redoing the base game zone sets as 3 pieces, maybe with the lesser cost/slots needed some could actually be of some use
There's a video/spreadsheet by a YouTuber named Skinnycheeks who presented an idea of a bunch of sets getting changed into 3 piece sets, or at least re-tuning the 5's to be more useful. A lot of his ideas seem really fun and exciting. I'd love if ZOS did something in that aim.
Malyore
6
Re: Can we redistribute CP's in one tree only?
When you redistribute, it doesn't reset your points to zero. It simply allows you to pull points off of a perk/passive and place them elsewhere. If you don't want to change blue and red, then just don't touch those trees.
Re: Is it fair gameplay to use use Rush of Agony to pull players long distances and through objects?
ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »Hi everyone. We’ve had some conversations yesterday about this discussion, the Rush of Agony set, and the more recent community concerns and reports. This also included consideration for the overall feedback since we released the set.
To give a little background, all movement-type actions and skills, including pulls, have the potential to be impacted by variables including character movement speed and position, high ping, the amount of data being sent between the server and the client, and anything that negatively impacts server and client latency (including attacks by bad actors). What this can result in with any pull-type action or skill, not just the Rush of Agony set pull, is cases where the client thinks the target is in one spot and the server thinks it’s in another. One of the reasons this has been surfacing more with Rush of Agony is due to how popular the set is – more people using the set creates more opportunities for the pull to be impacted.
We have some work in progress that aims to reduce the overall amount of data being sent back and forth between the client and server, investigations into some known crashes related to player bonuses, and additional logging that will help us better identify crash and disconnect causes.
For the Rush of Agony set, specifically, we are looking at a few options to help reduce the chances of the current issue where some player characters are getting into a bad state after being a target of the pull. One possible solution we are considering is having the pull bring the target player back to a specific location instead of to the source player. This will decrease the amount of movement-related data the client needs to send to the server, though it could still happen. This is still in discussion as a potential option and not locked in. We're also discussing options to reduce the overall frequency at which a player could be pulled by this set.
These changes require some dev and engineering work to be done and tested, so realistically we are looking at Update 46 timing at the earliest. Thank you for all the input and suggestions related to this.
This very much reads like someone who never actually played against the set and just read the cliff notes. I do fully agree the locational desync is a big factor to look at, and agree that from a development standpoint pulling to a set point is more logical and helps avoid the described issues.
But while we are looking at the set, I hope we arent ignoring the part where it doesnt apply CC immunity when it pulls you.... because... like Every other form of crowd control, it should apply a crowd control immunity if it successfully controls you. "Frequency" is due to be looked at, damage component should also be looked at considering how stacked this set is. The set is also popular because it is so stacked. If you were given 2 choices with no consequences, to have a screwdriver with a broken tip or a drill with every standard bit included, youd take the drill. RoA is the drill in this scenario, very few other sets can stack up against its frequency, damage, and sheer power via a CC that doesnt apply CC immunity, letting you follow up with a hard CC and making players lose control for usual 2 full GCDs.
Re: Is it fair gameplay to use use Rush of Agony to pull players long distances and through objects?
Alchimiste1 wrote: »emilyhyoyeon wrote: »I can't understand the insistence of a small vocal minority to remove every unique/interesting set from the game.ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »Hi everyone. We’ve had some conversations yesterday about this discussion, the Rush of Agony set, and the more recent community concerns and reports. This also included consideration for the overall feedback since we released the set.
To give a little background, all movement-type actions and skills, including pulls, have the potential to be impacted by variables including character movement speed and position, high ping, the amount of data being sent between the server and the client, and anything that negatively impacts server and client latency (including attacks by bad actors). What this can result in with any pull-type action or skill, not just the Rush of Agony set pull, is cases where the client thinks the target is in one spot and the server thinks it’s in another. One of the reasons this has been surfacing more with Rush of Agony is due to how popular the set is – more people using the set creates more opportunities for the pull to be impacted.
We have some work in progress that aims to reduce the overall amount of data being sent back and forth between the client and server, investigations into some known crashes related to player bonuses, and additional logging that will help us better identify crash and disconnect causes.
For the Rush of Agony set, specifically, we are looking at a few options to help reduce the chances of the current issue where some player characters are getting into a bad state after being a target of the pull. One possible solution we are considering is having the pull bring the target player back to a specific location instead of to the source player. This will decrease the amount of movement-related data the client needs to send to the server, though it could still happen. This is still in discussion as a potential option and not locked in. We're also discussing options to reduce the overall frequency at which a player could be pulled by this set.
These changes require some dev and engineering work to be done and tested, so realistically we are looking at Update 46 timing at the earliest. Thank you for all the input and suggestions related to this.
It's definitely a small vocal minority who hates RoA for sure!
Oh really ?
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/671959/get-rid-of-rushing-agony-from-pvp-right-now-please#latest
I think this thread here would say otherwise. It has some of the highest engagement of likes of any I've seen.
I was being sarcastic and I figured the cheesy for sure! made it obvious but I see not.
To anyone who agreed when they thought I was serious: it's pretty clear spending 10min in Cyrodiil in game that effectively nobody likes that set. It's not a forum complainers issue.
Re: Group Finder: Players skipping and intentionally breaking quests.
People having the time to read/listen to the quests they're on is a baseline expectation in a video game. Speed-running at a dead run is not. People trying to read their quests isn't your major time loss factor in a PuG - it's the fact that you're choosing to run 20 PuGs in a day. That's on you. That's a long-winded and tiresome false equivalency, @frogthroat . But continue pretending they're the same thing, I guess.
Re: Group Finder: Players skipping and intentionally breaking quests.
People having the time to read/listen to the quests they're on is a baseline expectation in a video game. Speed-running at a dead run is not. People trying to read their quests isn't your major time loss factor in a PuG - it's the fact that you're choosing to run 20 PuGs in a day. That's on you. That's a long-winded and tiresome false equivalency, @frogthroat . But continue pretending they're the same thing, I guess.
That is a baseline expectation if and only if there is only one correct way to play the game. But this is an MMO. You are not the only player.
Also, only the first couple of paragraphs are strictly relevant. The rest was explaining I do something in the middle, fast but consider other - up to a point. And a personal anecdote about a particularly bad experience that is the other side of the coin of this debate.
Both sides have their arguments, and there are tools to customise your experience to your liking.
But a random dungeon with random people is not that place. If you expect that a random group lets you take all the time you need, you're going to have a bad time. Likewise, if you expect to speedrun 20 RNDs in a row with randoms, you're going to have a bad time.
Best, I find, is to accept that a random run is random.
Re: Is it fair gameplay to use use Rush of Agony to pull players long distances and through objects?
TheAwesomeChimpanzee wrote: »ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »With Whitestrakes coming up I thought it would be nice to have some clarification, as to not risk being banned. This set is being commonly used in Cyrodiil to pull in odd ways, and I haven't seen an official response from ZoS. Is this a feature and acceptable use of the set, or does this enter the realm of exploiting and potential banning?
The use as being discussed in this thread will not get you banned. That said, we are taking a look at this set for some potential changes in the future.
Well, now that we finally have confirmation that the set is not bugged and is working as intended, I’ll be sure to start using it exactly as designed—pulling people from absurd distances and through solid walls, just as the devs have clarified it should function.
I’d like to apologize to everyone I’ve argued with in the forums over the past few days. In the end, we should have had this clarification much sooner from a developer to save us all the time and back-and-forth on this specific topic of wether or not this was exploiting an unintended game mechanic. Now we know it’s not a bug or an exploit by definition—but an intended mechanic. The devs confirmed the set works as designed, because otherwise it would be in violation of segment 5.2 of the TOS that was alluded to earlier on this thread. Now there’s no reason not to take full advantage of it with no risk of getting banned.
[snip]
[Edit to remove video]
Amazing video! I'll definitely be trying this out since it isn’t considered an exploit—thanks for the clarification, Gina. Glad to finally have confirmation that this is working as intended. Now we can all use it freely without worrying about bans. Appreciate the insight!
