Prionyx wrote: »

Why are you all talking about "accessibility"? How many players that ACTUALLY NEED accessibility features(and not just lazy people) have you personally met? I've spent over 15000 hours in this game and I've met just a few. People who need accessibility features are less than 0.1%. Why should 99.9% constantly suffer because of 0.1%? Jesus even if these builds were nerfed by 50% it would still be enough for 99.9% of the content. "Accessibility" builds should not perform better than regular builds that requiere skill to play. There are accessibility features in other games, for example there is a damage helper or smth in wow which pressed damage skills for you, which is basically the same thing as arcanist, but it presses them slowly and you'd be better of actually playing if you want efficiency. It's not the case with arcanist builds, they take no skill to play and are better than regular builds. They need a hard nerf, not just these sets pity nerfs

Who are you to decide who deserves an "accessible" build and what choices they should have?

I can assure you, you don't really know how many disabled players you've met. It's not something everyone is going to announce. People sometimes game to get away from their RL issues and enjoy playing and being treated like everyone else.

I don't like the arcanist class at all, but there should always be different ways to play the game. Not only for accessibility, but also choice. The whole 2 bar key mashing "skill" isn't good for your hands over extended periods. So we absolutely shouldn't be pushing players to do that anyway IMHO.

The focus on maxing numbers and rotation in ESO is partly why we've ended up with high DPS beam builds. Because lower damage builds will get you kicked from some groups. Now if the player gets an easier build until they learn to weave better, other players get in a tizzy because they achieve higher damage. Maybe we should stop judging players on how they get the DPS and just focus on our own contribution in the group.

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Just wanted to follow up here. The team has seen the feedback here and this thread along with others has been shared. We fixed a handful of bonus effects that were incorrectly multiplicative instead of additive, which resulted in their power being reduced. This was covered in the Update 50 PTS patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/8455634/#Comment_8455634

We know this doesn't address all of the concerns here, but the team is looking at your feedback to better address the commentary here. There is no intention to shut out accessibility or accessibility options for combat. We are keeping an eye on threads like this and adjust once we get more data and feedback.

When you guys started on U35, the combat team wanted more data too. Several years later, it's still maligned because the core idea was flawed and it devasted progression communities as a result.

It's the same thing here.

These kinds of decisions having lasting impacts. ESO will - and ESO has - lost players because you keep reducing HA playstyles. It's not about getting more data, it's about leaving the playstyles people love - and need - alone.

Please, stop being so data focused. Combat changes should be focused on QoL, rewarding experimentation, and getting more people into more content. Instead, there's a history of playstyles and sets being introduced only to be squashed several patches later. It's not fun guys.

Right now, the best thing the Combat Team could do is get on stream and crunch numbers on their ideas. Players are reporting a pretty big dip in HA power, and you're asking for more data. Join the conversation. Show us how the changes are going to increase accessibility. If ZOS can't articulate how combat changes actually HELP people, then they'll lose control of the narrative and lose players as a result.

Hi, everyone. As we wrap up week 4 of our Update 49 PTS, we wanted to circle back to this thread and provide an update. We, too, would like to do more with the ESO PTS, and while the Update 49 PTS was only 4 weeks, we are exploring options that would allow us a little more flexibility with the schedule while not putting our build and cert schedules at risk.

With how Seasonal content is releasing in a more staggered manner, it makes more sense that the PTS would be a little more fluid, too. You're seeing a little of that already with how the PTS Tamriel Tome and Night Market will remain on the PTS server for additional testing and feedback after the Update 49 PTS concludes. This works because those two features are launching after Update 49, as part of Season Zero.

While we haven't solidified the exact plan yet, we wanted you to know we do hear you and are talking about options. Thanks again, and we hope everyone has a great weekend.

Repetitive stress injuries can be aggravated by ESO's style of weaving. In general, that style of gameplay is not the best for hand health when done for extended periods and RSIs are common in gamers.

hoangdz wrote: »

xylena wrote: »

Last PTS you said DK was broken. It's not. It's clearly the new standard

I hope you understand that when all classes have been reworked, we are back straight to square one like with 1.0 classes. The only difference is that powercreep has gone through the roof. Builds are now dishing out 8k+ DPS and tanking 7k-8k DPS like a joke, with stats that has never existed in the game.

You know what this does? It's only going to separate the gap between casual players and sweaty ones even more. If ZOS wanted to give power to pure classes build, they should have done with class masteries and call it a day, We'd never end up in this predicament if they followed this path instead of reworking a class one at a time.

You'd also wind up with an outdated combat system with many unutilized terrible abilities, dated VFX and generally unappealing combat system for the wider MMORPG audience.

Class (and weapon) reworks have to happen and it's a big reason why ESO has been receiving a lot of positive attention lately from people tuning in from other MMORPGs.

Obviously you cannot do all of them at once... or redesign things into mediocricity, who'd be hyped about that?

As a PvEer I actually do find it personally weird to remove the Trade bars from this event. I don't think that's a fair call, and I didn't mind doing IC and Cryodiil Town Dailies for these.

I really question the removal of Trade Bars from Whitestrake's.

While I can see the idea behind making it a more drop-in mini-event like the BG weekends, the fact does remain that MYM is the only PvP-centric event. And, as much as many PvErs gripe about it, it did encourage more population to get into PvP, at least for a time.

I remember when I started playing this game, and I was extremely anti-PvP. I straight up skipped the first PvP event I faced (it was an IC event) because I hated the idea of PvP. But as I got more into the game, I would use MYM to poke around in PvP. And I found out... well, I still don't like playing PvP, but I would go in for the events to get some achievements I didn't think I'd get.

I can agree that the old MYM-style of getting tickets from the dailies was unfun, especially since it was common for questgivers to be camped by gankers. But ZOS should be more encouraging of players to go into other modes, not give them ways to avoid them.
And I can't help but notice that a lot of the "oh, we're making the experience better for new/solo players" things ZOS is doing this year is coming at the expense of the vets: no new Dungeons (but you get an event zone that you can just zergsurf! and solo dungeons are coming!), removal of unlocked PvP campaigns (but if you want to play with your friends, just go into Vengeance!), and now removal of a major enticement to get people into PvP (but you can get the Trade Bars from Veterancy!).

It feels icky, tbh.

All I can say is that I hope you consider adding Trade Bars to the Pelinal boxes.