PLEASE do not ignore pure class concerns

SilverBride

I won't try subclassing because I refuse to destroy the class identity I have built my characters with. But regardless of how anyone feels about that, I haven't seen anyone dispute that pure classes are getting nerfed and will be weaker than subclassed characters, and that is what the biggest issue is for many of us.

If other players want to subclass then they should go for it, but it is coming at the expense of those of us that wish to remain true to their class.

I once thought that their announcement to increase overland difficulty was the most disappointing thing I had ever heard, but subclassing blows that out of the water. There is a part of me in all my characters and seeing them become basically useless for anything combat related is beyond disappointing.

CaptainRele

I don't mind if subclassed builds have more power than monoclassing, but nerfing monoclassed builds (daedric prey not buffing set summoned pets, dk sustain nerfs, plar beam unsustainable on stam, etc) specifically because of the fear of subclassing interactions is where I get upset. Every nerf coming through because of subclassing concerns could have been lessened with just a little more care for the classes that own that skill line, not the subclassers hijacking it.

ceruulean

Pure classes and sub class should be equal in power. If you subclass, you must sacrifice class synergy to obtain more flexibility or special abilities from other classes. In this case, limitations make it more engaging to build and theorycraft. Instead of having dedicated tank/heal/dps lines, each line needs a mixture of offense, sustain, or defense. That way, you cannot just cherry pick efficient lines for your role. The DLC classes and nightblade need to be brought in line similar to sorc/dk/plar.

For example, the arcanist Herald of the Tome line should have the Remedy Cascade book beam on it, because that's the "book theme" skill line, and put Inspired Scholarship on the Curative Runeform, since that skill is mainly a sustain and crux generator. Then switch the crit damage passive with the healing passive from Curative. This way, the Herald of the Tome line is not so densely packed with easy dps passives. Curative Runeform can be renamed to Mystic Runeforms or whatever.

Another example is for nightblades, make the Pressure Points passive only apply if a Shadow skill is slotted. That way, "non-native nightblades" won't have insane crit chance, which is a highly coveted stat.

BattleAxe

SilverBride wrote: »

BattleAxe wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Jack of all trades means they are spreading their skills out over multiple roles. How could that possibly be as strong as the pure class that builds their character for one specific role?

Becuz they are giving up skill lines with passives that don’t align with their specific role and taking skill lines with passives that further boost their role.

Pure classes can do this within their own class and the weapon and guild skills lines.

Not exactly as u don’t have to give up to class skill lines for guild skill lines u get passives from class skill lines whether u use class skills or not unless passive specifies specific skill interaction. You give up the class tanking skill line for a damage skill line to increase damage but lose some survivability just as an example

ForumBully

tomofhyrule wrote: »

ForumBully wrote: »

What some call "pure" classes, I call chosing to ignore stronger options

Yes. That’s the problem. It shouldn’t be stronger. It should be balanced.

If we’re really expected to build our characters however we want (which for some people actually means “I want the three default lines”), then there really shouldn’t be a power delta greater than about 5% in order to keep balance. If one setup is giving you about 50+% more power than others (including the base Classes, since you can’t even start playing with until you hit Lv 50 anyway), then that signifies that the game balance is off and deserves a correction.

The problem is being able to correct these unbalanced skill line combos without affecting the builds that use one line but not the other.

So you expect every choice to have equal potential...good luck

BattleAxe

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Let’s just do this as a thought experiment then.

If it were true that a pure class were a “Jack of all trades” and a Subclassed build were a “focused to a specific role,” then that would mean that Subclasses would be much better in places like vet group content, but places where players need to be able to perform all roles on the same character (like PvP or solo arenas) would favor said Jack-of-all-traded builds.

So do pure classes blow any and all subclassed builds out of the water in vMA or in duels? If not, this argument is fundamentally flawed.

In vMA if u deal enough damage you don’t need to tank or heal if u kill enemies before they damage you. Now pvp related thts its own bag and often will come down to player skill and knowledge

VoidCommander

I still think they should have simply allowed for one additional subclass.

Tariq9898

tomofhyrule wrote: »

ForumBully wrote: »

What some call "pure" classes, I call chosing to ignore stronger options

Yes. That’s the problem. It shouldn’t be stronger. It should be balanced.

If we’re really expected to build our characters however we want (which for some people actually means “I want the three default lines”), then there really shouldn’t be a power delta greater than about 5% in order to keep balance. If one setup is giving you about 50+% more power than others (including the base Classes, since you can’t even start playing with until you hit Lv 50 anyway), then that signifies that the game balance is off and deserves a correction.

The problem is being able to correct these unbalanced skill line combos without affecting the builds that use one line but not the other.

Well said. I get that ZOS wants players to interact with their new system for business purposes. But a power gap greater than 5% between pure and subclass is too much. Especially when multiplied by the number of players within a group.

Right now, subclassing has a whopping 40,000 extra DPS than pure classes on parses. And that’s just ONE person. Now imagine if all 10 DPS used subclassing. This isn’t a power creep. It’s a power blowout.

When Arcanist and Necro first came out, they were overpowered. But NOT “40k extra DPS” level of overpowered. The gap between pure and subclass need to be significantly closer.

Yudo

Never appreciated hybridization, but at least there is a way to still play according to choice and be in line with others to some extend.

With subclassing, feels like forced EOL for existing customers whom have been subscribed to the class system for years and an attempt to migrate them into a new system. But why? Just for the opportunity of pitching the term "subclassing" within a short deadline?

I hope ZOS will hustle on the feedback, though my expectation is that this will roll out no matter. If they take a few extra weeks would that make a difference? Is great that many want to play subclass, nice! But don't just push out pure classes.
Add to the systems, not subtract and exchange.
The gap is too large, pure classing is not incentivised well.

Personally, I will not use subclassing. I did not ask for this. I want to play my pure class and I don't want to feel *** about it.

sarahthes

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Let’s just do this as a thought experiment then.

If it were true that a pure class were a “Jack of all trades” and a Subclassed build were a “focused to a specific role,” then that would mean that Subclasses would be much better in places like vet group content, but places where players need to be able to perform all roles on the same character (like PvP or solo arenas) would favor said Jack-of-all-traded builds.

So do pure classes blow any and all subclassed builds out of the water in vMA or in duels? If not, this argument is fundamentally flawed.

A vMA build and a dueling build are also highly specialized. They aren't Jack of all trades. It's just that the considerations are different.

I would expect that for some base classes, subclassing is more important than others for clearing that content. It depends on the individual class toolkit, but now some classes have additional options for sourcing what their class doesn't bring natively (what they would get from world/guild/alliance/weapon skills now).

sarahthes

SilverBride wrote: »

I won't try subclassing because I refuse to destroy the class identity I have built my characters with. But regardless of how anyone feels about that, I haven't seen anyone dispute that pure classes are getting nerfed and will be weaker than subclassed characters, and that is what the biggest issue is for many of us.

If other players want to subclass then they should go for it, but it is coming at the expense of those of us that wish to remain true to their class.

I once thought that their announcement to increase overland difficulty was the most disappointing thing I had ever heard, but subclassing blows that out of the water. There is a part of me in all my characters and seeing them become basically useless for anything combat related is beyond disappointing.

For the content you complete (as you've shared on the forums) it literally won't matter whether you subclass or not.

The gap is only significant in endgame, whether PvP or PvE.

ForumBully

There has never been a time in the game where the classes were balanced against each other, now with subclassing people expect this to be balanced at release?

SilverBride

sarahthes wrote: »

For the content you complete (as you've shared on the forums) it literally won't matter whether you subclass or not.

The gap is only significant in endgame, whether PvP or PvE.

I hope you are right.

Dark_Lord_Kuro

Sub class was an awefull idea. I personnally plan to just ignore it as i have absolutly no interest in it.
Why would my firemahe forget is fire skill for any other? This goes for all my character. Hopefully next year we get something that is worthwile