PrincessOfThieves wrote: »
I agree. I used to chat a lot in game, but nowadays I am trying to avoid it when possible.
I very rarely swear and never use slurs, but I've heard of people getting banned for typos, benign jokes and the like. I understand that some level of moderation is needed, but I think that there is a difference between saying something extremely racist/sexist/homophobic and simple banter between friends.
OtarTheMad wrote: »
And like I said Arcanist will very likely get nerfed and people will think they won until the score pushing sweats pick another class to stack and that will be at the top and then people will be calling for that class next. It never ends.
You can do the entire game on any class you want, only when you get to the top 5% of the game like HM sweats leaderboard stuff does Arc show that it dominates because of how the game is set up. Thats the real reason it dominates too is because NPC’s are stupid, they don’t dodge or CC break or counter or heal… makes them easy.
Question is: why does it matter that HM sweats use Arc to get high scores? Not like you can’t do the content on another class, might just take more effort and have a more complicated rotation but you can get it done. Arc being used by that population, which is a small part of the game, doesn’t hurt anyone.
manukartofanu wrote: »
This matters because people build their characters based on what they see on YouTube and play the classes they are advised to. The Arcanist has only exacerbated the "put on a ring and don't worry about it" situation, where people first had to farm the ring, to simply "create an Arcanist and don't worry about it." The Arcanist is now the answer to any question about "I can't kill/pass something."
As for statistics, they're collected only by those same 5% of players—though I would even say it's not 5%, but 1%. We work with what we have. I would love to see stats from ZOS showing how many players simply run dungeons (even normals) and what classes are represented there. I have a feeling that half of the DPS in those dungeons are Arcanists. The problem is that an inexperienced Arcanist doesn’t deal 10% more damage than an inexperienced anyone else—they deal twice as much damage.
I stopped chatting in game too because I don't want to get flagged and banned for whatever ZOS finds offensive. It's so weird that so many of us play in a state of fear because of the heavy handed moderation. These forums are the same where so many people are afraid to post. It gets too stressful when you're afraid of angering ZOS so a lot of people just play less and post less then eventually leave.Oceanchanter wrote: »The news about people getting flagged and suspended for private chats due to the automatic system did confirm my fears it's risky to talk other things than business.
OtarTheMad wrote: »
Or people could just try out the classes for themselves and see what works for them. The Arc needs some adjustments but I just don’t feel it’s OP based on how average it is in PvP. Let’s be real, overland, delves, public dungeons, dungeons and even some normal trials can be done on anything. The only time you need good dps or anything to worry about is anything vet HM.
Take me for example, I don’t do trials. Arc is real nice, I enjoy the class a lot because of my personal issues it helps. However, I’d rather play my Necro or Sorc because I’ve done more on them, so I have Oakensoul builds on them. I tried out other things and that’s what works for me, that and my Ice build Warden.
I realize people will always go with YouTube builds, nothing wrong with that but people should also just see what else they like.
I like trials. I don't get invites as oakensorc. Easy as.
Even my guild has started score runs and stopped doing the casual vet runs they used to do that I loved. I can't get into score runs. The bias is real.
And we're specifically talking pve here.
I like trials. I don't get invites as oakensorc. Easy as.
Even my guild has started score runs and stopped doing the casual vet runs they used to do that I loved. I can't get into score runs. The bias is real.
And we're specifically talking pve here.
KromedeTheCorrupt wrote: »ZOS has stated in their own words even if there is a small portion of players on old consoles they would not drop support. So theoretically that also means if they lose 1K players on newer consoles due to hardware limitations, lag, dc, whatever because of old hardware. Thats just how it’s going to be, even if it means keeping those 100 players who still play on old consoles. So it’s a lose/lose situation where everybody else has to suffer because of people still playing old consoles. I mean if you can’t buy a newer system with all due respect why are you playing video games and not working if your finances are that bad.
moderatelyfatman wrote: »
I keep hearing this over and over again about ESO being 10 years old and therefore too old to continue.
Then I think about Guild Wars 2 which is 2 years older, Final Fantasy 14 which came out in 2010 and World of Warcraft that is on it's 20th anniversary.
The point is, the latter three games resemble fit and active fifty year olds who can still run marathons: no one is going to mistake them for new games but they still play well and give their playerbase value for money.
In the case of ESO, the lack of care and technical debt has left us with a game that has aged far faster than it should.
The second thing to consider is if ESO2 came out, would you immediately buy it based on your experienced of ESO1? I'm thinking of the damage that a game like Starfield has done to the anticipation of Elderscrolls 6.
OtarTheMad wrote: »
Or people could just try out the classes for themselves and see what works for them. The Arc needs some adjustments but I just don’t feel it’s OP based on how average it is in PvP. Let’s be real, overland, delves, public dungeons, dungeons and even some normal trials can be done on anything. The only time you need good dps or anything to worry about is anything vet HM.
Take me for example, I don’t do trials. Arc is real nice, I enjoy the class a lot because of my personal issues it helps. However, I’d rather play my Necro or Sorc because I’ve done more on them, so I have Oakensoul builds on them. I tried out other things and that’s what works for me, that and my Ice build Warden.
I realize people will always go with YouTube builds, nothing wrong with that but people should also just see what else they like.
manukartofanu wrote: »
Let's be real, if you're talking about PvE based on PvP experience, you're just trying to substitute concepts.
The point isn't that the content is impossible to complete — all of it can be done, including all vet HMs, without an Arcanist. The point is that with an Arcanist, it's much easier to do. And when the choice comes down to spending 100-200 hours gaining experience on another class, including practicing on a dummy, or just building an Arcanist and smashing heads right now with minimal effort, most people choose the latter.
Unfortunately, even those who have already spent tons of time learning to play something else are forced to switch to an Arcanist simply because an average Arcanist deals more damage than the best players on other classes. So you're left with no choice but to play one to perform better, making life easier for yourself and everyone else.
The Arcanist in ESO PvE isn’t just OP; it can be used as the very definition of OP.
OtarTheMad wrote: »
Easier does not mean OP, more used than any other class does not mean OP. People following the leader blindly and not just doing the content does not mean it’s OP. Does it need changes? Sure. Heck, it might speak more to how dungeons and trials are built than how Arc was built.
I am not talking about PvE based on PvP experience. All I have ever said in any post concerning nerfing a class, any, is that every aspect of the game should be taken into consideration.
Arc will get overnerfed, and I say this because ZOS has a history of it. I would love to be wrong but it’ll happen and you all will just see what I mean when I say over and over that nerfing isn’t the answer. Adjusting the stuff I mentioned before might be a good first step.
manukartofanu wrote: »
Why are you writing all this? Just to argue for the sake of arguing? Pulling a couple of phrases out of context and presenting counterarguments against them is not the level of a constructive discussion. Sorry.
The Arcanist is OP because of how much damage it deals. That’s where this whole conversation started. Due to its simplicity, the worse someone plays, the more benefit they get from using the Arcanist. Now, usage frequency isn’t inherently OP, but it points to something being OP – it’s the main metric to check if something is overpowered or not. To see how many people actually want to play the Arcanist because they like the concept itself, yeah, you’d need to nerf it into the ground and see how many Arcanists remain.
For example, if the beam dealt the same amount of total damage across all enemies as it currently deals to a single target, with the damage split evenly among enemies. If the number of players stays the same, okay, we’ll admit that people just like playing it. If not, then it means it was OP, and people were forced to play it because of that. So far, for a year and a half, we haven’t had the chance to see this.
And yes, it’s impossible to overnerf this thing. The kind of adjustment I gave as an example will never happen. And even if they reduce its beam damage by 20%, it will still dominate at lower skill levels, and people will still pick it for its damage to clear basic vet content.
miloflipper wrote: »All classes can tank and heal, everything getting samey easy and boring? The game has a lot of potential, if people can stop complaining about how OP one class is over another and instead concentrate on making each class excel in certain areas so that when the group is balanced they will cut through content like a knife through butter - this is a GOOD thing! Example, an Arcanist is great at AOE - why you wanna make other classes just as good or nerf the Arcanist in this defining ability? YOU ARE MAKING THE GAME BORING when you do this! Sorcerers are great at single target take downs... why you wanna increase Nightblade damage to the same level? STOP IT! LOL! THINK!
Is it? From what I've heared plenty of people quit WoW already as people don't like most of the systems and the mythic+ progression or whatever it is called. I stopped playing WoW mid way through WoD as there was basically noone playing in open world anymore and everyone was just sitting in their garrison.And Wow is doing really great and no wonder. The world soul saga will most likely be a grand success, at least the first part of it looks like it brought back the old times glory. Even during the first light hours there is plenty of hustle going on.
manukartofanu wrote: »
What about the cost-effectiveness of new battlegrounds? And what about the cost-effectiveness of home tours? And so on and so forth.
tomofhyrule wrote: »
The big problem is that the not-as-good raid leads look at what the super sweats are doing, and then they think that's the only way to do things. Because the alternative would be admitting that said raid lead is honestly not as good at the game as they think they are.
Ever since Oakensorc got nerfed, people are now saying that they can't do anything because of the nerf. Which is not entirely true - I've done trifectas in this patch with Oakensorcs in the group. My Coral Aerie was three Oakensorcs and a DK tank. It just requires you to do two things:The first point is as before - you still need to practice and get good at that build. Yes, you can be 'good' or 'bad' at an Oakenbuild - my Oathsworn tri was also three Oakensorcs, but one DPS had the wrong CP and another of them even forgot the ring in the first place and we still got it and didn't realize the problems until afterwards since the DPS were just that good at the game. But the other point does require a raid lead who's open-minded enough to say "hey, this build isn't the super sweat build, but that's still okay." And for a lot of high-but-not-top level raid leads, anything but the sweatiest of the sweaty builds is not acceptable. But these are the people who would rather have an Arcanist that's getting basement-level DPS over an excellent Oakensorc because they think the DPS comes exclusively from having the "right" class.
- Oakensorc does still have a skill set to do and you can have good and bad Oakensorcs, so it's not just "put on Oakensoul and have max possible DPS"
- A raid lead needs to let you into the group.
So yes, you can still get trifectas with pretty well any build, provided you have a group who accepts you. Some class/role combos are going to inherently be less effective, but the only time that could be a detriment is if we're specifically talking about the latest trial trifectas. But it also requires a raid lead who's willing to let people in even if they're not the sweatiest, which is not necessarily something that ZOS controls. And if you have a good raid lead, they'll be able to see that a good Oakensorc is doing better than someone who got an Arcanist and a build online because they heard that that was the 'best,' and doesn't know how to use it at all.
Sounds like ZOS can fix this easily. Just undo the nerf to oblivion updates that they did to one bar Oakensoul sorcerer. And then arcanist would have real competition for easy to play and effective PvE DPS. And since I have both an arcanist alt and a sorcerer alt this change would not hurt me at all.
dk_dunkirk wrote: »
T
I don't know it for a fact, but I expect you can do any vet content with all oakensorc DPS's, if they can parse over 90K. Can any point to any fight in a vet trial or dungeon that requires more than 95K * 8 (or 2)? Honestly, any vet trial I've seen where we're doing 500K DPS or better, we're just flying through.
Agreed. I started to run with a serious trial guild a few months ago. Got all my toons all geared up according to their demands. Then they started saying that oakensorcs need not apply. It didn't affect me, because I was -- of course -- running an arcanist as DPS, but it still rankled me, and I stopped caring about the sweaty trial scene.
There's a serious class imbalance here. Serious trial groups are expecting 5-7 arcanists all wearing azureblight for trash. It's obvious that ZOS needs to address this unequivocal preference for DPS, but they cannot rebalance it by nerfing the arcanist. It will kill the meta and crush the endgame scene. No one wants to go back to lower overall DPS.
ZOS is stuck. Their only path forward is to buff the other classes. I would love it if they DID buff oakensorcs back to what they were (they won't, but I'd love it), but everything else needs work too.
Most oakensoul sorcs do not do 90k+ My top parse with it is 80k and I definitely do not get that high in content.
Most oakensoul sorcs do not do 90k+ My top parse with it is 80k and I definitely do not get that high in content.
Most oakensoul sorcs do not do 90k+ My top parse with it is 80k and I definitely do not get that high in content.
Then ZOS should undo some of the oakensoul sorc nerfs, so that they can do 90k to 95k. Which is nowhere near as high as the skilled LA weavers. I have seen video parses of 140k+ parses on other classes. Also, I see that arcanist is not the highest parse class, and there are You Tube posts saying that their arcanist parse dropped when ZOS already nerfed arcanist.
I think that there is a real demand from players for easy to play and effective DPS, that does just enough damage so that they can still get invited to a PvE group. I do not think that everyone likes to do the high APM required for skilled LA weaving. Or even can do that high APM for any length of time, either because it hurts their hands, or their internet connection and/or the game servers will not allow it consistently. Or they can't do the APM in a PvE DLC trial or dungeon because of the game mechanics.
But every time ZOS introduces an easy to play and effective DPS class, the forum lights up with posts insisting that it be nerfed to oblivion.
How do nerf a class to oblivion updates help with the population shrinking problem?
TwiceBornStar wrote: »I'm one of those players who said that it's okay to cut down on the content for a while if that means bug fixes and quality of life improvements, so if you want to blame somebody..
I'm *that* dude!
miloflipper wrote: »All classes can tank and heal, everything getting samey easy and boring? The game has a lot of potential, if people can stop complaining about how OP one class is over another and instead concentrate on making each class excel in certain areas so that when the group is balanced they will cut through content like a knife through butter - this is a GOOD thing! Example, an Arcanist is great at AOE - why you wanna make other classes just as good or nerf the Arcanist in this defining ability? YOU ARE MAKING THE GAME BORING when you do this! Sorcerers are great at single target take downs... why you wanna increase Nightblade damage to the same level? STOP IT! LOL! THINK!
TwiceBornStar wrote: »I'm one of those players who said that it's okay to cut down on the content for a while if that means bug fixes and quality of life improvements, so if you want to blame somebody..
I'm *that* dude!
TwiceBornStar wrote: »I'm one of those players who said that it's okay to cut down on the content for a while if that means bug fixes and quality of life improvements, so if you want to blame somebody..
I'm *that* dude!
dk_dunkirk wrote: »
Me too. We don't need another cut-and-paste approach to a zone with a story that goes nowhere, another dungeon and trial, a new ToT deck, a handful of useless mythics, another half dozen sets that 1) no one will ever use and 2) will force balance issues between PVE and PVP, and -- of course -- a bunch of achievements buried behind various other parts of the game.
OTOH, the 95-page thread about the ongoing performance problems and the seemingly endless complaints about PVP make it feel like we're not getting the other work either.