Please communicate with us ZOS. This is a major update.

SkaiFaith · May 15

tomofhyrule wrote: »

SkaiFaith wrote: »

Renato90085 wrote: »

SkaiFaith wrote: »

While it's surely possible to agree that it feels like there's been silence from devs this PTS cycle, I also have the feeling there's been "players silence" - I'm not saying players haven't made their voice heard, but it seems to me there have been fewer inputs from players than past PTS cycles.

I think I didn't hear anything about the new Trial. The dedicated feedback page is almost empty and YouTube algorithm didn't show me any video about it (which is unusual).
I tried searching for an image of the new Event Mount and... Not a single one in the whole internet.

As I said, it feels like fewer players engaged, so maybe as a result devs didn't talk much. Maybe they got less data than they expected.

here have mount
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/676340/new-trial-mount-skin-pts#latest

and my friend have some in PTS doing hard mode but not many,zos change 2(3?)time new trial in 3/4 patch, so we are waiting live patch
but they discussed more about leaving the game or not .

Thank you but I was talking about the Event Mount, the one that comes from the Event Tickets - "Julianos Law Dwarven Spider" or something along this line, can't recall the specific name, sorry...

Here it is.

Cool! Thanks a lot! I'll try to get it then

(Sorry for the OT)

ItsNotLiving · May 15

Dalsinthus wrote: »

SkaiFaith wrote: »

While it's surely possible to agree that it feels like there's been silence from devs this PTS cycle, I also have the feeling there's been "players silence" - I'm not saying players haven't made their voice heard, but it seems to me there have been fewer inputs from players than past PTS cycles.

I think I didn't hear anything about the new Trial. The dedicated feedback page is almost empty and YouTube algorithm didn't show me any video about it (which is unusual).
I tried searching for an image of the new Event Mount and... Not a single one in the whole internet.

As I said, it feels like fewer players engaged, so maybe as a result devs didn't talk much. Maybe they got less data than they expected.

I've noticed the same. This is undoubtedly the biggest change to our characters in the history of the game, but there is relatively little buzz or conversation happening in the forums and channels that I frequent. When they changed the Bosmer stealth passive we had a 100 page thread, but here the subclassing feedback thread has like 7 or 8 pages total of feedback. I go to YouTube daily and have only seen a small number of creators posting about this (notably Skinny, Ninjapulls, 8pups). Yes there are threads like this one but it seems rather quiet for the scale of the change we're about to experience.

To me this new system seems very half baked and not ready for launch. I'm very nervous for what is coming.

Why would I as a player write a 10 page essay on why this system will make the game unplayable in all forms of endgame when ZoS will simply ignore it and wedge through whatever changes they want. It’s a broken game now I’m moving on and more and more people that I interact with are too.

SaintJohnHM · May 15

They only bothered to comment on another post hardly anyone is following: "...deep dive on subclassing in the coming weeks...". It seems like they need to take some time to make up some excuses for this multiclassing garbage and pretend they had a vision for it when they're obviously just floundering around and don't know why their new system sucks for many of us. I'm sure it'll be about as useful and as likely as the "big chunk of combat updates in week 4 of pts" that never arrived.

icapital · May 15

imagine my shock when we're 3 pages in and still no reply from Zos.

NoSoup · May 15

Xarc wrote: »

I think from ZOS's point of view, it's the "wait and see" method.

What do you want them to say? "Yes, we love our new subclass system, we're making the final adjustments thanks to PTS, but we can't wait for it to be live"? That kind of message is a bit pointless.

From our perspective, it's the same, we have to wait.
For my part, I uninstalled the PTS, after the first update of the pts. I understood that despite the numerous feedback from the burning forum, their decision was made. I saw what I had to see... I'm enjoying the last moments of the game without this class anarchy, and then, well, I'll adapt. What other choice do I have?
This subclass system is just another step towards making ESO Classic one day a reality.

Wait and see is probably the only viable solution. Given the share number of different combinations there will never be the population on the PTS to viably weed out all the balance issues. The only plausible action is to take it live and then be quick with addressing issues.

Mayrael · May 16

SwimsWithMemes wrote: »

Mayrael wrote: »

MorallyBipolar wrote: »

ForumBully wrote: »

If they give me Vengeance I'll spend more time in the game, otherwise...I can't see this making Cyrodiil better than it was when I decided to leave, so maybe not yet.

As a PvP main if they force vengeance mode on us I'll stop logging into the game all together. At that point ESO will be a completely different game than what I purchased in 2014 for the implicit purpose of PvP end game activities.

Same here. Vengeance was pitched to us as a test campaign, but it feels counterintuitive to ESO’s core—freedom to choose and build our characters however we want.

Edit:
About subclassing.

Subclassing is designed to be embraced. If you choose to stick with a "pure" class for personal reasons, that's just a self-imposed limit—nobody's forcing you to stay pure; it's your own mindset (just like staying pure magicka or pure stamina would be)

The ability to mix and match skill lines is a nod to players of less competitive classes, bringing them closer to the S+ tier. Many players don’t want to juggle multiple characters just to stay efficient. They’d rather invest in one character without feeling punished for a suboptimal choice or being forced to start over due to balance changes in updates.

This ties into another big plus: balance and future updates. With subclassing, we can look forward to patches with hope instead of dread. In the past, players feared their class getting nerfed or others being buffed. Now, you can simply swap skill lines and adapt. Sure, it gives meta-chasers more options, but overall, it makes balancing the game much easier.

As for communication, ZOS doesn’t have to bend to every player’s demands. They’re sharing their plans and vision, and they’re moving forward with it. We can voice our disappointment, but that doesn’t mean they’ll abandon their direction. They might make tweaks, but the core plan stays intact.

1. I think Vengeance would be not the sole campaign, if it returned permanently.

2. It's not "just" a self imposed limit.
a) the idea of it being a "limit": Why should it be suboptimal compared to subclassing? Why can't they be equally viable? It wouldn't be a limit in this case.
b) subclassing is a also a grind, for no real reason. The cynic may see it as a chance to sell skyshard packs & an artificial boost of engagement on the release of a season pass (e.g., exp grinding on existing characters), for a lack of engaging content

3. If you think this will improve a diversity of classes in content, that is (to me) an erroneous assumption. Sure, you might have 1-2 of each class in a trial, but game optimisation will mean there will be *less* choice for being closer to the S+ tier than before. If Arcanist beam build is simpler and stronger than every other build, over time, other builds will die if they don't offer uniqueness. Uniqueness is antithetical to providing every class with every option.

4.Single character preference:
a) I am not sure you have anything beyond anecdotes to offer the view that people prefer a single character. As a counter-anecdote, I enjoy having characters for different themes. My Bosmer Warden does nature stuff. My Arcanist does the Hermaeus Mora stuff (and Breton stuff). My imperial does PvP, I their homeland. For my Sorc, he was exclusively for the Daedric War storyline & then spent his retirement grinding solo content.
b) on being forced to start over on balance updates, this is exactly what will happen! When a skill line is nerfed, you will probably go and grind the next best thing. That skill line might also be best with another armor set, so you'll need to re-gear more than ever before.

5. balance and future updates: Balancing is primarily done based on an optimised/over performing basis. It is rare that underperformance is a core consideration of balancing. "Simply swap skill lines" again requires a substantial time investment to grind that line if you haven't before (although you would refund the skill points at this time, still need to level the line at the double exp requirement). It makes balancing the game easier, because there will likely only be 1 popular build (AKA a homogenisation of the game). Further, it reduces the viability of alternative builds. E.g. if a skill line is nerfed because it is strong, the S+ build goes and takes the next best skill line. Every non-S+ build relying on that skill line will generally, be far worse off. It will suck.

6. Communication: we don't want to control ZOS, we want to understand the reasoning behind their choices and importantly, people want to know that their concerns are valid and being taken on board. Players spend much more time on the game than developers, both on the hardcore level and as an overall group. Players may be bad at recognizing solutions, but they are excellent at identifying problems. We really don't know what any core plan is beyond the superficial, let alone have received communication about the why.

1. I agree, that seems like the most likely option.
2. You can focus purely on magicka or stamina now, but that’s a choice you’re making, not a system restriction. Same there’s nothing stopping you from going multi-class. Subclassed skill lines are account-wide, so you don’t have to grind them for every character. Have you tried leveling them on the PTS? It takes about 30 minutes to max out a skill line to 50—hardly a hardcore grind. On a side note, MMOs and games in general need some level of grind. Without it, there’s no sense of achievement.
3. There might be fewer ways to reach new S+ tier (and that’s just your assumption, let’s not pretend otherwise), but the content isn’t changing. If you can hit the current S+ tier with subclassing, it will make clearing content easier. No one’s forcing you to chase the new S+ tier.
4. a) I’m one of those people who prefers focusing on one character at a time, and I know at least a dozen others who feel the same. Sure, I have 20 characters, but I usually stick to one for a longer stretch, with rare exceptions.
b) Nope, once a skill line is leveled, it stays leveled. Yes, it requires a one-time light grind (see point 2), but after that, you’re immune to balance changes.
5. If everyone picks the same skill line, two things happen:
a) Everyone has access to it, so no one’s left out.
b) It’ll get adjusted or nerfed for overperforming, and that affects everyone equally.
Overall, it’s a fairer approach.
6. Players often have subjective opinions based on their own vision of how things should be, but they miss the bigger picture. That applies to both of us. I like the new system because it fits my playstyle; you don’t. We both think we’re right, but ultimately, ZOS decides. I’ve taken breaks after patches that felt like too much, but I had to either get over it or decide whether to keep playing or walk away. That’s just how it goes.

Roctan · May 16

The Risks of Introducing Subclassing Without Broad Testing or Clear Communication

While subclassing has the potential to bring exciting new gameplay opportunities to ESO, implementing such a foundational change without thoroughly testing it in high-population environments like Cyrodiil poses serious risks to the game’s balance, performance, and player trust.

Cyrodiil and other large-scale PvP or PvE environments act as stress tests for any new mechanics. If subclassing isn't exposed to those conditions during testing, we risk discovering game-breaking bugs, performance drops, or imbalance only after the update goes live—when it's far harder to adjust without major disruption.

What’s even more concerning is the current lack of communication and responsiveness to player feedback on this topic. For a change of this magnitude, players expect:

Regular updates from ZOS on what’s being tested, adjusted, or reconsidered

Acknowledgement of community concerns, especially from high-end and PvP players

A clearly communicated roadmap on how subclassing will be tuned going forward

If subclassing is pushed through without sufficient testing and without visible developer dialogue, it could erode community confidence—not just in this system, but in ZOS's commitment to collaboration with its players.

Please consider expanding testing to broader systems like you did with Cyrodiil and increasing developer presence in discussions before finalizing such a transformative update.

Rungar · May 16

the silver lining here is that zos doesn't have to balance classes anymore, just skill lines and specific skills which are outliers which is a better process. It also gives players adaptability if you don't like certain changes or just want to try something new.

while change can be hard, sometimes its for the best and i think this is one of those cases. If they truely want new blood, they will have to make more substantial changes than this.

ItsNotLiving · May 16

Rungar wrote: »

the silver lining here is that zos doesn't have to balance classes anymore, just skill lines and specific skills which are outliers which is a better process. It also gives players adaptability if you don't like certain changes or just want to try something new.

while change can be hard, sometimes its for the best and i think this is one of those cases. If they truely want new blood, they will have to make more substantial changes than this.

Yeah they don’t have to balance classes but do I trust them to balance skills? Did Merciless Resolve need a buff? Necromancer skills somehow got nerfed again for no reason and Templar still does no damage. I just have zero faith in the devs for this game I guess.

icefyer_ESO · May 16

Roctan wrote: »

If subclassing is pushed through without sufficient testing and without visible developer dialogue, it could erode community confidence—not just in this system, but in ZOS's commitment to collaboration with its players.

Please consider expanding testing to broader systems like you did with Cyrodiil and increasing developer presence in discussions before finalizing such a transformative update.

You say that like confidence in collaboration didn't die a long, long time ago with how silent they've been, saying they want to improve communication repeatedly for years and then just...never doing it.

React · May 16

Rungar wrote: »

the silver lining here is that zos doesn't have to balance classes anymore, just skill lines and specific skills which are outliers which is a better process. It also gives players adaptability if you don't like certain changes or just want to try something new.

while change can be hard, sometimes its for the best and i think this is one of those cases. If they truely want new blood, they will have to make more substantial changes than this.

This system is drastically more complex to balance, because of the increased number of interactions between skills and passives. Suggesting that they're more likely to do a good job balancing this system when they couldn't or wouldn't balance the current system has no merit whatsoever.

SilverBride · May 16

Kevin recently replied about communication in this thread. Click spoiler to read the post.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/677566/improved-communication-a-modest-proposal/p1

Hi all, just wanted to follow up on this thread. Appreciate the overall conversation here. Sorry in advance, this is going to be a long one.

So to start, we have been making strides in communication on a few fronts. So we have worked on a few community Q&As already this year and working on finishing up our remaining PvP centered ones, where we have directedly answered player questions. We also have AMA's planned for this year as well, so stay tuned to those. We just had our ESO Direct (less than a month ago), which has a good chunk of info on what we are currently working on and soon to release items. We had several communication fronts through out the Vengeance Campaign Test and during the PTS cycle portion of the test where we directly answered user questions. Additionally, we opened a few pipelines for the community to voice bugs and pain points they would like addressed so that we can get the teams on those tasks during our year of transition. Also pipelines to help with ongoing lag issues, which our engineers have been able to make some strides and implement new tech to help better identify issue points (noted in past patch notes). And we can't forget the Guild Summit we held with guild leaders in March to get their thoughts on guild improvements and overall game pain points. Things we are targeting in future updates and were asked by players and answered directly. These are on top of working on getting better messaging for maintenance windows and other smaller items that impact the day to day experience.

While this isn't direct communication, we also have the Kinda Funny Podcast Series where we are discussing the dev process from the early days to now. So that should give some general development insight from Rich and Matt.

That doesn't mean things are perfect. I was just in some meetings earlier this week about more ways we can improve communication over the next several months. But we believe are headed in the right direction. And these changes were based on player feedback from the end of the year.

We know there are more things you want us to talk about. Things like Overland difficulty and other wide systems changes like that. There are some things that are too early to share and can (most likely will) go through quite a bit of change before they are ready to be talked about. Not talking about final product here, just generally. However, the community team is talking to dev teams to see what we can talk about and when, because we do know you want info earlier.

As for dev blogs on systems, we have done those and continue to do them. We had one in the last 30 days focusing on the new Player Response Systems that you can check out here. We have definitely also done many of these in the past around Trials encounters, Item Set philosophy, etc. If you would like more deep dives and philosophy talks, we can flag that for the web team to take a look at how they can prioritize that.

We also try to inject some of that commentary in Dev Comments in the patch notes. I recently got feedback that folks would like more of those outside the confines of combat, so this is something we are working to incorporate that in the U47 Patch Note cycle.

On a personal note, I was wanted to acknowledge the taking a page from other devs book comment. We constantly are looking at what fellow teams in the space are doing. But we also have to scale expectations accordingly. The teams mentioned are awesome and do great work. They are also pretty different in size compared to us. So we have to scale the work we can do accordingly. @Freelancer_ESO gets to the heart of the matter, and it plays into the overall point here.
Freelancer_ESO wrote: »
I think you'd run into the issue that pushing a greater focus on communication could easily end up taking development time away from actually developing for little actual gains.
Bar the "little actual gains" line because communication is always important and holds everything together, the overall point is this is a balancing act. Let's take PTS for example. We have teams that reading your feedback and implementing what they can during the PTS cycle. Doing all of that is a tight turn around and then getting those all prepped for patch notes is a lot. It's why we try to provide what we can in the dev commentary. Having said all of that, we understand that you want more conversations. It is a process we are working through (and have started with the PvP Q&As) to make sure we can hit an appropriate balance, but we are talking about this and working on ways to support it. So we are looking at what other teams are doing and seeing how they can work for us and ultimately work for you.

I said it would be a long one, right! We know this isn't the immediate fix to your concerns, be we are taking the steps to get to where you want us to be. We hope some of the communications from the first 4 months have shown our commitment here, but fully understand more needs to be done to get to a great place. So with that, my action items for you are this: share with us communication methods you have resonated with from other games you play. Obviously we cannot do everything, but being able to identify what is working for you can better narrow our focus in giving you the comms you desire. Happy to read any additional feedback and relay what is needed to the correct teams.

Joy_Division · May 18

Thank You @SilverBride for bringing that to this thread, where it is relevant.

The impetus in me writing this post was about Update 46. I did not write this post during, say the Vengeance Test, because for that specific event, I did think the communication was there, I did have a clear picture of what ZOS was looking for in he Vengeance test, and thus I was able to modify my expectations. So, I didn't really worry about things I am concerned about (AOE damage caps, general balance) because I was told those were not yet on ESO's radar. Result and point: I did have fun for Vengeance.

I'd like the same for Update 46.

The situation is completely different for update 46 and the Season Pass which I have to pay for (unlike Vengeance). Vengeance isn't even a system now, yet it got more communication that this biggest combat update ZOS is making in a decade. As I indicated in the OP, I think sub-classing can work, but it's got to be done delicately. I have three major concerns that have gone so far unanswered.

It is clear to me those who opt for a single class will be left in the proverbial dust. What's ZOS going to do about this?
It seems apparent that the "meta" will crystalize around a few skill lines that offer a ton (a big factor is that some of the better passives in the game were specifically designed around a class which had a lot of meh passives elsewhere). What will ZOS do to ensure we have a good diversity of viable end-game builds?
IF ZOS stays true to their balance philosophy over the past decade, they will address issue #2 by swinging a giant nerf bat at these class lines, which will further screw over people just staying with one class. How are they going to resist the temptation to do this?

I don't need an essay from ZOS.

ZOS wrote:

We have teams that reading your feedback and implementing what they can during the PTS cycle. Doing all of that is a tight turn around and then getting those all prepped for patch notes is a lot. It's why we try to provide what we can in the dev commentary. Having said all of that, we understand that you want more conversations. It is a process we are working through (and have started with the PvP Q&As) to make sure we can hit an appropriate balance, but we are talking about this and working on ways to support it. So we are looking at what other teams are doing and seeing how they can work for us and ultimately work for you.

I don't doubt ZOS is reading our feedback and testing things. It's obvious from the one week of combat changes as it addressed the biggest PVE DPS concern. But we've been given nothing else aside from the impression that yes, ZOS does seem to think that combining the old Fatecarver which other class passive that increase DOTs was too strong.

I also don;t doubt that

we are talking about this and working on ways to support it

.

But all of this is internal. What has ZOS learned from the PTS? Are they ok we the amount of powercreeep? Did their testing reveal a wide gap between pure classes and multi-classes? What are some of the ways they are thinking to support it? Even if all I knew what they were thinking, that would at least let me know they are aware of outstanding issues, which is the first step to both solving them and assuring me as a customer that at least they are working on solutions.

I also do not agree that PvP concerns have been addressed adequately in the linked post given by @ZOS_Kevin . This is not relevant to the OP or update 46, so I will spoiler it off for those folks whose concerns are Update 46 and not Cyrodill.

That was mostly a Vengeance oriented post, which I already said ZOS was good at communicating. There has not been a single issue that has been more controversial, more talked about and more frustrating than the excessive heal stacking. Yet ZOS has been silent on this matter for years. I remember taking a 18 month break from ESO back in 2021 precisely because of this issue and things have only gotten worse.

As much as ZOS told me they were going to try and limit the number of times that Rush of Agony set pulled people through walls, the fact that they seemed totally ok with players getting pulled through walls rather than the obvious remedy: remove what is already a broken set that is so powerful that it is literally used by every "ball group" on PC/NA. Related to that isue, I want to know why ZOS seems to go out of their way to empower these "ball groups," who are already far too strong and too oppressive, as we have seen in their decision to remove the Azureblight set from PvP (which was a counter to "ball groups") while keeping Rush of Agony (which is an enabler of "ball groups")

tomofhyrule · May 18

My big fear about the communication we're gonna get for this is that they're going to give us one of their "deep dive"s for Subclassing that ends up being a huge marketing thing and ends up addressing zero of the players' actual concerns with it.

I think everyone will agree that the points raised above are the main issues they have with Subclassing:

Joy_Division wrote: »

It is clear to me those who opt for a single class will be left in the proverbial dust. What's ZOS going to do about this?

It seems apparent that the "meta" will crystalize around a few skill lines that offer a ton (a big factor is that some of the better passives in the game were specifically designed around a class which had a lot of meh passives elsewhere). What will ZOS do to ensure we have a good diversity of viable end-game builds?

IF ZOS stays true to their balance philosophy over the past decade, they will address issue #2 by swinging a giant nerf bat at these class lines, which will further screw over people just staying with one class. How are they going to resist the temptation to do this?

And yet, I can totally imagine that when they post an article about Subclassing after release, it ignores all of those major questions players have, and instead ends up being something that just talks about how wonderful it is to play a zookeeper (ignoring the fact that that ends up unplayable in PvP due to pet/corpse limits) or an elemental mage, and essentially implies that players who prefer playing the pure Class are wrong, in a way. And then in U47 or U48, we'll see NBs get hit with a massive nerfhammer (that really only affects PvE but somehow buffs PvP) among other nerfs that make it even harder to "play the way you want" if the way you want to play is a pure Class.

And again, there are things that are being done and are not being talked about at all. We got a whole paragraph explaining why the animation changes were going through. They were buggy and were addressed in the Known Issues of the patch notes every week, but there wasn't even a feedback thread for the animations. And then at the end, they were pulled because it wasn't working out this patch.
Contrast this to the UI changes: no reason on why it was happening, a feedback thread where nearly everyone is saying they hate it, and obviously unfinished assets. And this is going through.

Funny story along those lines: I have a friend on the Stream Team and I was griping again about the UI changes the other day and they said "oh, I hadn't heard anything about it." This is a person who essentially acts as advertising for the game; someone on ESO's Stream Team - who has a private Discord server with the devs and community managers - and the UI changes never came up at all.
Reading between the lines, this essentially tells me that the devs aren't really discussing any issues that arise on the PTS forum - ZOS is basically only listening to what goes through their content creator Discord (and according to my other Stream Team friends, they're not even listening to that).

I miss the days when giving feedback on the PTS forum didn't feel like talking to a brick wall. We can see that the population who still goes onto PTS to give feedback is considerably smaller now that we're constantly being treated as "whiny forum idiots who don't understand this game at all."

moderatelyfatman · May 19

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

I no longer play everyday or use the PTS much

I've been living on the PTS the past month. Subclassing doesn't break PvP, the opportunity cost of giving up your utility tree is much higher than in PvE. A small handful of busted skills and sets break PvP, same as always. Nobody will care about subclassing when all they remember after logging is how much they hate Rushing Agony and double spec bows.

It may not break 1v1 or small groups but what about ball groups? Making an already broken situation worse will drive away even more players.

My ultimate concern, though, is lack of variety. For a lot of PvPers having different classes is a lot like having different sports cars in the garage: some days you want to take a porsche for a spin, other days a ferrari etc. My concern is that subclassing will kill that off with everyone using the same 3 skill lines to out perform every other class.

xylena_lazarow · May 19

moderatelyfatman wrote: »

It may not break 1v1 or small groups but what about ball groups?

My concern is that subclassing will kill that off with everyone using the same 3 skill lines

Can't break what's already broken, just more of the same Rushing Agony and immortal defense stacking.

Ball groups aside, build diversity in open world should be good. Pressure and burst both work, there's no one build to rule them all (though the new chase mythic looks like another Oakensoul or Malacath one ring to rule them all). I helped some gankers test, the best one still left a short window to respond, which seemed surprisingly balanced.

I haven't seen subclassing do anything more toxic than existing toxic strats like Rushing Agony. The worst thing they changed or added is the double spectral bow, which has nothing to do with subclassing.

cuddles_with_wroble · May 19

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

moderatelyfatman wrote: »

It may not break 1v1 or small groups but what about ball groups?

My concern is that subclassing will kill that off with everyone using the same 3 skill lines

Can't break what's already broken, just more of the same Rushing Agony and immortal defense stacking.

Ball groups aside, build diversity in open world should be good. Pressure and burst both work, there's no one build to rule them all (though the new chase mythic looks like another Oakensoul or Malacath one ring to rule them all). I helped some gankers test, the best one still left a short window to respond, which seemed surprisingly balanced.

I haven't seen subclassing do anything more toxic than existing toxic strats like Rushing Agony. The worst thing they changed or added is the double spectral bow, which has nothing to do with subclassing.

In my experience on the pts, damage is up by around 40 - 50% on most builds with 2 offensive skill lines.

There is more access to unblockable and undodgable cc across the board, which leads to more 1 shot combos strings.

The skill lines are not even close to balanced, the difference between you playing base classes or a non meta setup and trying to fight a meta build is gonna feel like dueling with no cp in.

supabicboi · May 19

all that talk from zos. its just a prolonged version of, they didnt rly do anything. this is funnier than your kinda funny podcast, maybe in the podcast, your hosts can go thru the forum. wait for another 4 months after subclassing launch to see small implementations.

zos needs to be planning for a version 2 of subclassing right now already. if there is an update to subclass, it better not be a tiny patch. there are clearly multiple problems already, even a blind person can see that. please dont wait to collect data, stall for 4 months, and come back with an insurmountable patch.

shipping out an incomplete update, smh.

I hope zos keeps their eye on population overall slowly dwindling once that new feature is no longer new, and everyone is waiting for them to pump out a version 2 of subclassing balances, but in the end receive a patch that solves 2 tiny problems after waiting for 4 months of their, wait and see strat.

xylena_lazarow · May 19

cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »

In my experience on the pts, damage is up by around 40 - 50% on most builds with 2 offensive skill lines.

There is more access to unblockable and undodgable cc across the board, which leads to more 1 shot combos strings.

The skill lines are not even close to balanced, the difference between you playing base classes or a non meta setup and trying to fight a meta build is gonna feel like dueling with no cp in.

Two of the top PTS duelers were winning on a pure Templar (Blood for Blood not Jabs which sadly still sucks), and a pure MageBlade with Soulceaver set. The opportunity cost of dropping your utility tree for a 2nd offensive tree is much higher than people are thinking, the resulting resource economy can be very hard to design properly.

The highest damage gank combo used melee and Crystal Weapon, which briefly reveals the ganker (too risky for melee), however at 6 seconds I can see this making for some really obnoxious ranged builds, even if they don't strictly one or two shot. The hardest gank to counter was a melee gank based on Flame Blossom, a burst proc, not subclassing.

I'm not sure where you're getting the 50% damage increase. Individual defense is up also. My open world pressure build is still doing the same 4-5k dps to other tanky open world builds that it was on live, and it's still enough to kill most opponents. Comp groups already have everything they could ever want on live, so they comparatively don't gain much.

The blame lies on poorly designed proc sets and one poorly designed NB tree, not subclassing itself. The meta burstplar variants aren't easy to pilot. A lot of players are in for a rude awakening when they pick up the new "op" subclass build and can't figure out how to land Shalks+Bow together against a live target, and end up melting to dots from a Storm Calling build because they're wasting too much mag purging and aren't paying attention to where their circles are.

cuddles_with_wroble · May 19

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »

In my experience on the pts, damage is up by around 40 - 50% on most builds with 2 offensive skill lines.

There is more access to unblockable and undodgable cc across the board, which leads to more 1 shot combos strings.

The skill lines are not even close to balanced, the difference between you playing base classes or a non meta setup and trying to fight a meta build is gonna feel like dueling with no cp in.

Two of the top PTS duelers were winning on a pure Templar (Blood for Blood not Jabs which sadly still sucks), and a pure MageBlade with Soulceaver set. The opportunity cost of dropping your utility tree for a 2nd offensive tree is much higher than people are thinking, the resulting resource economy can be very hard to design properly.

The highest damage gank combo used melee and Crystal Weapon, which briefly reveals the ganker (too risky for melee), however at 6 seconds I can see this making for some really obnoxious ranged builds, even if they don't strictly one or two shot. The hardest gank to counter was a melee gank based on Flame Blossom, a burst proc, not subclassing.

I'm not sure where you're getting the 50% damage increase. Individual defense is up also. My open world pressure build is still doing the same 4-5k dps to other tanky open world builds that it was on live, and it's still enough to kill most opponents. Comp groups already have everything they could ever want on live, so they comparatively don't gain much.

The blame lies on poorly designed proc sets and one poorly designed NB tree, not subclassing itself. The meta burstplar variants aren't easy to pilot. A lot of players are in for a rude awakening when they pick up the new "op" subclass build and can't figure out how to land Shalks+Bow together against a live target, and end up melting to dots from a Storm Calling build because they're wasting too much mag purging and aren't paying attention to where their circles are.

“Dropping your utility tree” but on Templar you drop dawns wrath and lose basically nothing and on sorc you drop the summoning and lose basically nothing so where is said opportunity cost?

Granted I didn’t really test that much pressure builds and most of my testing was Crit stacking and the addition of extra Crit damage passives was increasing my damage by quite a bit, but I’d assume damage on pressure builds is much higher with cro passives tho I’m not sure how much. (4 -5k dps is what you do normally on live so idk)

I don’t agree the nb skill tree is an issue tbh, I think it’s the gold standard. It gives you everything you could ever want and it’s a perfectly synergistic kit in and of itself with no need for outside help, however if you give it outside help it just enhances both skill lines.

Mayrael · May 20

React wrote: »

Rungar wrote: »

the silver lining here is that zos doesn't have to balance classes anymore, just skill lines and specific skills which are outliers which is a better process. It also gives players adaptability if you don't like certain changes or just want to try something new.

while change can be hard, sometimes its for the best and i think this is one of those cases. If they truely want new blood, they will have to make more substantial changes than this.

This system is drastically more complex to balance, because of the increased number of interactions between skills and passives. Suggesting that they're more likely to do a good job balancing this system when they couldn't or wouldn't balance the current system has no merit whatsoever.

Describe what balance means to you, because I think we have different view on that topic when it goes to PvP.

ItsNotLiving · May 20

Mayrael wrote: »

React wrote: »

Rungar wrote: »

the silver lining here is that zos doesn't have to balance classes anymore, just skill lines and specific skills which are outliers which is a better process. It also gives players adaptability if you don't like certain changes or just want to try something new.

while change can be hard, sometimes its for the best and i think this is one of those cases. If they truely want new blood, they will have to make more substantial changes than this.

This system is drastically more complex to balance, because of the increased number of interactions between skills and passives. Suggesting that they're more likely to do a good job balancing this system when they couldn't or wouldn't balance the current system has no merit whatsoever.

Describe what balance means to you, because I think we have different view on that topic when it goes to PvP.

Can’t speak on him but I simply want each class to feel unique and engaging to play and feel strong in certain areas while not as strong in other areas.

xylena_lazarow · May 21

cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »

I don’t agree the nb skill tree is an issue tbh, I think it’s the gold standard

In that case we would have to drastically buff the other 6 primary damage trees. We're seeing spectral bows hit literally twice as hard as charged whips or crystal frags, it's insane. Surprise Attack blows away every other melee spammable (again), Incap and Killers Blade are good at what they do, then the passives start to get nuts again. In particular they give absurd amounts of crit chance compared to any other source of crit chance in the game, or compared to how much any other class passive contributes to a single stat like that. It's like if they suddenly added 600 weapon damage to Ardent Flame.

ZhuJiuyin · May 21

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »

I don’t agree the nb skill tree is an issue tbh, I think it’s the gold standard

In that case we would have to drastically buff the other 6 primary damage trees. We're seeing spectral bows hit literally twice as hard as charged whips or crystal frags, it's insane. Surprise Attack blows away every other melee spammable (again), Incap and Killers Blade are good at what they do, then the passives start to get nuts again. In particular they give absurd amounts of crit chance compared to any other source of crit chance in the game, or compared to how much any other class passive contributes to a single stat like that. It's like if they suddenly added 600 weapon damage to Ardent Flame.

In addition, it should be added that when ZOS deliberately weakened the Elnofi and Plunderer sets in order to prevent players from obtaining the ultimate point too quickly, it miraculously let go of such a conspicuous elephant as Soul Harvest, which is really incomprehensible. With Soul Harvest and Templar Restoring Spirit, players can continuously cast powerful area-of-effect Ultimate Abilities such as Languid Eye for 15 seconds, which is absolutely insane.

Urzigurumash · May 21

ItsNotLiving wrote: »

Mayrael wrote: »

React wrote: »

Rungar wrote: »

the silver lining here is that zos doesn't have to balance classes anymore, just skill lines and specific skills which are outliers which is a better process. It also gives players adaptability if you don't like certain changes or just want to try something new.

while change can be hard, sometimes its for the best and i think this is one of those cases. If they truely want new blood, they will have to make more substantial changes than this.

This system is drastically more complex to balance, because of the increased number of interactions between skills and passives. Suggesting that they're more likely to do a good job balancing this system when they couldn't or wouldn't balance the current system has no merit whatsoever.

Describe what balance means to you, because I think we have different view on that topic when it goes to PvP.

Can’t speak on him but I simply want each class to feel unique and engaging to play and feel strong in certain areas while not as strong in other areas.

Hybridization almost cut the number of effective classes in half in PvP.

Does this reduce it further or expand it?

silentxthreat · May 21

Ive always been against long ptr cycles with zos because it seems like they dont take feedback and always go radio silent.

I could see sub class being fun if you rework some worthless lines otherwise we will just see the same 4 lines being used for everything.

I could see it being fun if we use the vengeance style open world pvp otherwise this will be a hot mess and ball groups will be worse then they have been

ItsNotLiving · May 21

Urzigurumash wrote: »

ItsNotLiving wrote: »

Mayrael wrote: »

React wrote: »

Rungar wrote: »

the silver lining here is that zos doesn't have to balance classes anymore, just skill lines and specific skills which are outliers which is a better process. It also gives players adaptability if you don't like certain changes or just want to try something new.

while change can be hard, sometimes its for the best and i think this is one of those cases. If they truely want new blood, they will have to make more substantial changes than this.

This system is drastically more complex to balance, because of the increased number of interactions between skills and passives. Suggesting that they're more likely to do a good job balancing this system when they couldn't or wouldn't balance the current system has no merit whatsoever.

Describe what balance means to you, because I think we have different view on that topic when it goes to PvP.

Can’t speak on him but I simply want each class to feel unique and engaging to play and feel strong in certain areas while not as strong in other areas.

Hybridization almost cut the number of effective classes in half in PvP.

Does this reduce it further or expand it?

If you don’t want to be at a massive disadvantage it brings it down to two optimized builds, a damage build and healer build. I don’t know what the meta skill setup will be but class diversity is gone.

Mayrael · May 21

ItsNotLiving wrote: »

Mayrael wrote: »

React wrote: »

Rungar wrote: »

the silver lining here is that zos doesn't have to balance classes anymore, just skill lines and specific skills which are outliers which is a better process. It also gives players adaptability if you don't like certain changes or just want to try something new.

while change can be hard, sometimes its for the best and i think this is one of those cases. If they truely want new blood, they will have to make more substantial changes than this.

This system is drastically more complex to balance, because of the increased number of interactions between skills and passives. Suggesting that they're more likely to do a good job balancing this system when they couldn't or wouldn't balance the current system has no merit whatsoever.

Describe what balance means to you, because I think we have different view on that topic when it goes to PvP.

Can’t speak on him but I simply want each class to feel unique and engaging to play and feel strong in certain areas while not as strong in other areas.

You're not describing balance. True balance is about ensuring each class can achieve similar outcomes, and subclassing supports that goal. What you're suggesting feels more like preserving a unique flavor for each class, and I have a solid idea of how to make that work while keeping subclassing as it is.

To give pure classes more distinct flavor, we could introduce synergy between their core skill lines. For example: "Crystal Frags deal 10% more damage on a target recently (e.g. 4s) damaged by a Storm Calling."

This kind of synergy would be exclusive to base classes, since only they can combine two skill lines, while still leaving room to incorporate a third subclass skill line if desired. Does that make sense?

cptscotty · May 21

Does ZOS even have a dedicated in-house testing department anymore for stuff like this?

JustLovely · May 21

I totally understand where the OP is coming from. But aren't we really at a watch what they do, not listen to what they say part of this relationship?