nb_rich wrote: »

Its interesting to read a PvP perspective. Cause im only a PvE person and it seems we have similar issues. No diversity in builds no more.

Its funny people say to just play how you like blah blah blah but like you mentioned in PvP your just so much weaker then others not using one of the main set ups.

For PvE the only good thing is you can complete content with pretty much any build, but for optimized groups, tanks and healers are not changing set ups for one or two people when everyone else is pretty much using the same class lines/skills. Arcanist was already over powered prior to subclassing but other classes had buffs or set ups like EC Crow that made every class still useful, now that is over with since everyone can just add whatever skill line they need with Fatecarver.

From a PvE perspective, I feel like if the Arcanist class did not exist, PvE players wouldn’t be having this discussion and peoples builds would be way more diverse.

bro i shudder to imagine what this has done to hardcore pve raids. cuz yea.... people can say play as you like.... but thats like telling someone who races motorcycles that he should take his 50 cc and race the 250cc's. no one would ever do that. they would just get on the 250 because obviously the 50cc is obsolete and useless.

my biggest concern is how does zos go forward from here? i honestly have no idea. maybe standardize all damage skill lines (1 per class) by giving them all 10% crit damage? but in my opinion, the trend of giving every skill every buff is ruining the game. so then what? take away all crit damage passives? probably the better choice. but there will be an uproar.

then we got other cans of worms

infinite sustain whle blocking (plar/den/cro).... so do you nerf the templar rune? the warden netch? and whatever the cro tether is? they can stack all 3 to regen while blocking. but in trying to balance that you further ruin solo classes and support builds. do we want to chase support builds off? does cro need another nerf? they cant even run their class currently because of the pet cap.

do you assign skill lines a role? and only allow 1 role per toon (no stacking 3 defence or 3 offence). i mean idk im just spitballing ideas.

this thing is a disaster and idk how you would ever balance it, without ruining all the other classes and dumbing the game down.

i dont think you can really roll it back at this point. they SOLD it as a feature sadly.

do you make everything the same? thats definately boring.

idk man i can tell you one thing tho.... would have been way easier to just listen to the community that this was a terrible idea.... but here we are..... hemorrhaging players at an unsustainable rate with no solution in sight.... and the majority of solutions im seeing thrown around are even worse than the initial problem and just compound issues.

I didn't think the game could become more bland, but subclassing proved me wrong. No class has an identity now, had this been from the very beginning of the game and without a class system it would have worked. Not a fan of the usual, "punishment for asking" mechanic of needing 2 skill points per skill and passive either.

I was disappointed as others have stated the there are only a few subclasses to that make sense to choose.

Making free the whole reason most players purchased a previous chapter was also just a slap in the face.


I found that the whole subclass experience was not really rewarding or fun. I was hoping that this would be part of the Account Wide Achievements, but nope. Had to completely level again at the cost of 2 skill pints each the "SubClass" selected. So i only did one character out my full compliment of characters.

So, in a game open to the general public, some people are toxic. And guess what - they can be found participating in all aspects of the game. I've encountered them in dungeons and trials, at spellscar, in a public dungeon, in pvp... I've even encountered toxic players in the housing community. It's really not mind blowing news. With a large enough sample size, one will encounter such people anywhere and everywhere.

Making it into this fake "us vs. them" thing based on the parts of the game we prefer, as some always do, is ridiculous... and imo little more than a way to absolve ourselves of examining our own behavior and that of the communities we're part of.

Love how people make up scenarios in their head to get bent out of shape about. Lol

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hi all. Thank you for highlighting this. This seems like unintended behavior. The idea was to give access to still view the older housing threads, but have posting happening in the main game systems category. We got user feedback that we had too many categories, so we tried to consolidate some. But Vanilla has some odd things happening on the backend that makes interacting with the category funky.

I think there are two factors that combine to make the current layout more confusing than it was intended to be.

1) "Game Systems" as a catch-all category is a vague name that doesn't actually tell people what topics are discussed in the folder.

2) Meanwhile, there are subfolders with names and descriptions that invite discussion of those topics, but there's no indication that these are meant to be read-only archives of older, inactive threads.

If I were a newcomer to the forum who wanted to discuss housing, I would first have to click around to even land on the Game Systems folder, and then I would see the Housing subforum and think that's the place to be. Then I would either be confused why I couldn't post in any of the threads, or be confused why some threads worked and some didn't.

The fact that some people can still post in the archived folders/threads is its own functionality issue, but if you decide to keep the layout as it currently is, then labeling the old folders as archives and changing the descriptions to explain that they're read-only would be helpful.

We will have more info on the Writhing Wall event next month. But to answer the main question, PC and console will start at the same time. So no two week delay between platforms.